Zco lpvo???

That was much better articulated.
I respect your logic, just not your complete conclusion.

Let me give you a quick anecdote to counter your example.
I was on a team where one of our guys was overwatch alone [weird situation], we lost comms, then he had to make entry into a house with just a MK12 [all alone] in a pinch. Stuff goes wrong. Murphy's law and all that.
I'm sure he would have preferred a LPVO then instead of that stupid Leupold that we all hated.
I say all that [and agree] that there isn't any one optic to rule them all, but some can stretch into other roles more fluidly than others.

I agree with you that guys on the internet nitpick far too hard. I bet most of them couldn't discern the differences they demand in a blind test.
But none the less, there are undoubtedly features which would make a given optic more useful across a broader spectrum of roles.

Which Leupold are you referring to? I haven't kept up with every post in this thread. If you're referring to the standard mk12 mk4 optic....then your example is not counter to mine at all. In fact, it's exactly what I'm referring to.

An overwatch's primary role is to protect you from immediate threats, not engage further enemies nor make entry. And he may occasionally need to perform an entry. But when he needs to jump into an entry, an LPVO is not the ideal optic (even though it's the correct optic for his primary role)....it just works in a pinch. And when he may need to engage at a further distance, it still works fine as well. A Leupold Mk4 is the *wrong* choice for this role. I'm not saying he personally made a bad choice as he may not have had a choice at all. But someone, be it your overwatch or your leadership/supply....made the wrong choice. And sometimes those wrong choices weren't really known at the time and we have learned from them since. But if a person tomorrow is picking a standard precision optic as an overwatch for an entry team......it's the wrong choice unless they are never going to need to get down there with you.

And the inverse is true......when your role is an assaulter, you're going to be running something like an Eotech with a magnifier mounted, or stowed in a pack/pouch. If something happens that you need to perform a duty similar to an overwatch, your RDS + Magnifier will work just fine, but won't be the ideal choice. And even then, without the magnifier mostly works in a pinch, but the magnifier helps.


Obviously depending on service/agency/dept/unit policy/rules, people don't always get to choose their load out. But generally speaking, most currently have access to at least a choice between RDS, LPVO, and standard precision optics. Or a combination of LPVO/standard optic with an offset or 12 o'clock RDS.



All of this still drives home the point, no optic is going to be able to do every job at the level required for a primary duty.


If it worked that way, literally everyone would either be carrying an LPVO or an RDS/Holo + Magnifier........as if either of those did the other's primary role adequately, there would be no reason for the other.
 
Last edited:
Sometimes your dickhead commander doesn't give you a choice despite what was briefed :mad:

But most of what you said I am inclined to agree with.


Anyways...8 weeks ago ZCO commented on IG the 2-10 was about 10 weeks out. So in scope development math, Labor Day gonna be 🔥

Yea, I should have put a disclaimer that "you did piss poor planning" is a general statement. Many times its someone else that made the bad decision.....unfortunately.
 
Which Leupold are you referring to? I haven't kept up with every post in this thread. If you're referring to the standard mk12 mk4 optic....then your example is not counter to mine at all. In fact, it's exactly what I'm referring to.

An overwatch's primary role is to protect you from immediate threats, not engage further enemies nor make entry. And he may occasionally need to perform an entry. But when he needs to jump into an entry, an LPVO is not the ideal optic (even though it's the correct optic for his primary role)....it just works in a pinch. And when he may need to engage at a further distance, it still works fine as well. A Leupold Mk4 is the *wrong* choice for this role. I'm not saying he personally made a bad choice as he may not have had a choice at all. But someone, be it your overwatch or your leadership/supply....made the wrong choice. And sometimes those wrong choices weren't really known at the time and we have learned from them since. But if a person tomorrow is picking a standard precision optic as an overwatch for an entry team......it's the wrong choice unless they are never going to need to get down there with you.

And the inverse is true......when your role is an assaulter, you're going to be running something like an Eotech with a magnifier mounted, or stowed in a pack/pouch. If something happens that you need to perform a duty similar to an overwatch, your RDS + Magnifier will work just fine, but won't be the ideal choice. And even then, without the magnifier mostly works in a pinch, but the magnifier helps.


Obviously depending on service/agency/dept/unit policy/rules, people don't always get to choose their load out. But generally speaking, most currently have access to at least a choice between RDS, LPVO, and standard precision optics. Or a combination of LPVO/standard optic with an offset or 12 o'clock RDS.



All of this still drives home the point, no optic is going to be able to do every job at the level required for a primary duty.


If it worked that way, literally everyone would either be carrying an LPVO or an RDS/Holo + Magnifier........as if either of those did the other's primary role adequately, there would be no reason for the other.
I agree with almost everything you said. And yes, it was the older MK4. That's all we had for MK12 optics during that time.

To correct one thing, it was an observation team. Dude had the "right" optic for the job. But a potential requisite for being on a small specialized team is [necessarily speaking] knowing that you will find yourself in a situation that you weren't there to get involved in.
I 100% agree that no optic is a do all.
LPVO's just attempt to bridge that gap [for better or for worse].
For CQB: RD>LPVO>MPVO>Precision Optic
For longer distance observation and precise engagements: Precision Optic/MPVO>LPVO>RD
The concept of the LPVO in my opinion is the better all around optic for the guys that don't know what they're going to get into.

Cheers
 
  • Like
Reactions: VargmatII
I agree with almost everything you said. And yes, it was the older MK4. That's all we had for MK12 optics during that time.

To correct one thing, it was an observation team. Dude had the "right" optic for the job. But a potential requisite for being on a small specialized team is [necessarily speaking] knowing that you will find yourself in a situation that you weren't there to get involved in.
I 100% agree that no optic is a do all.
LPVO's just attempt to bridge that gap [for better or for worse].
For CQB: RD>LPVO>MPVO>Precision Optic
For longer distance observation and precise engagements: Precision Optic/MPVO>LPVO>RD
The concept of the LPVO in my opinion is the better all around optic for the guys that don't know what they're going to get into.

Cheers

Thats why something like the ZCO with a red dot is a decent compromise. Added weight will suck but most of us aren't high speed dudes kicking in doors so for an all around use it works.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bakwa
…And using fairly ridiculous arguments that only exist on the internet.



I.E. you're not going to be in a position where you're mainly in a cqb role, and your magnifier isn't going to be fine for longer engagements. Or you're not going to be a position where you are mainly in a patrol situation or longer engagements where the LPVO shines.....and it's not good enough to work the times when you have to do a bit of cqb here and there.

If you're somehow in a position where you need to top performing optic in both cqb or patrol scenarios.....you either did some piss poor planning or you've landed in a lot more trouble than a mythical perfect optic will ever get you out of.

What types of patrols are you talking about? Are you including raids on compounds/buildings? Or cordon and searches? Most everything is a patrol. You do know many raids involve insertion on foot over rural terrain, right? Or even presence patrols through dense neighborhoods that abut farmland with wide open engagement zones, right?

What’s your background to hypothesis about these “CQB” or “patrol” requirements that only “exist on the internet”?

I agree there’s no one optic for everything. But many of your claims about use cases are not founded in reality.
 
I should go let all the guys I know running LPVOs with offset or 12 o'clock dots that are active SOF and SF and still deploying, that they're totally doing it wrong. I should probably also tell the dozen or so same guys that when they were actually hands on with the ZC210, and with it mounted up on rifles while running around in kit with it for photos, that when we discussed the weight and they said it wasn't an issue given the performance, well... they must be mistaken, lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bakwa and PappyM3
I should probably also tell the dozen or so same guys that when they were actually hands on with the ZC210, and with it mounted up on rifles while running around in kit with it for photos, that when we discussed the weight and they said it wasn't an issue given the performance, well... they must be mistaken, lol.
If it’s the only option that meets your(or their) set of performance requirements, it’s what you run. There’s a lot of heavy crap that we just accept because it’s what’s needed. But if there’s something else that also meets requirements but is lighter, you go with that. Example, DD RIS II vs Geissele Mk16. Or the M240B vs M240L.

This ZCO is still a porker, even if it’s the only option for some people’s needs, and can rightfully be called such. It’s not a baseless claim. And saving weight when possible isn’t some internet fantasy consideration.

That’s all I’m saying. Well, that and it’s silly to think there aren’t real world scenarios when one might have to engage both close and medium range targets on the same patrol.
 
Last edited:
From ZCO’s reposted story, DMR reticle looksie:

View attachment 8363979
It seems the DMR reticle has made some changes, I hope its the one in the IG photo and not the one below.
DMR.jpg

IMG_2396.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: PappyM3 and Bakwa
Thats why something like the ZCO with a red dot is a decent compromise. Added weight will suck but most of us aren't high speed dudes kicking in doors so for an all around use it works.
Why wouldn't you get something like the Mark 5 3.6-18 if you are going to run a red dot?
If you are happy with a 27oz scope and going to use a red dot for close work, 2x vs 3x (or 3.6x) on the low end is much of a muchness.
 
Why wouldn't you get something like the Mark 5 3.6-18 if you are going to run a red dot?
If you are happy with a 27oz scope and going to use a red dot for close work, 2x vs 3x (or 3.6x) on the low end is much of a muchness.
I believe it is that the overall dimensions of the 3.6-18x44 (and 4-16x42 ATACR) compared to the Leupold/ZCO 2-10x30 that make the 2-10 optics superior in a general purpose role. The added bulk (not weight) of the 3.6-18/4-16 simply makes it not as “handy”. The 2-10s are both shorter and slimmer than their higher powered brethren.

I personally see these two 2-10s as an LPVO+. In other words, if you’re dead set on using a dot with your LPVO, these are a worthwhile upgrade to the standard 1-6/8 LPVO when combined with a dot.

The 2-10x<36mm class neither replace a dedicated 1-x LPVO nor does it replace a 3-18 class optic. It does something in the middle and shines with a dot mounted to its mount.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bakwa
Why wouldn't you get something like the Mark 5 3.6-18 if you are going to run a red dot?
If you are happy with a 27oz scope and going to use a red dot for close work, 2x vs 3x (or 3.6x) on the low end is much of a muchness.
Because you don't want to have to fiddle with the side focus very often to get a clear to DOF and you can get away with with more parallax forgiveness with the smaller objective. Basically, it's about speed in an unknown circumstance for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bakwa and PappyM3
Are we any closer to release date on these? I bought probably one of the last discontinued 36mm Spuhr Noveske mounts for this sucker. I hope I like it.
 
Are we any closer to release date on these? I bought probably one of the last discontinued 36mm Spuhr Noveske mounts for this sucker. I hope I like it.

I made a post in the ZCO updates page:

They said give 'em 9 or 10 weeks....12 weeks ago.

Must still be a ways out because CST isn't trying to shill the fuck out of em yet.
 
I made a post in the ZCO updates page:

They said give 'em 9 or 10 weeks....12 weeks ago.

Must still be a ways out because CST isn't trying to shill the fuck out of em yet.
Care to share what “shill” means in central IL? Because you’re either using the wrong word or your local lingo is “special.”
 
Care to share what “shill” means in central IL? Because you’re either using the wrong word or your local lingo is “special.”

First, (and I know you suffer from being from Ohio) it can be a noun or verb, but depending on where you look it can be defined as something as innocuous as a "salesman or promoter", others might call it more of a "hype-man...or pitchman on behalf of another"....if you choose the Merriam Webster def.

Per the basis of Cambridge def. "Someone who helps persuade another to buy something".

Per Britannica: "one whos talk about something in a prideful way because they are compensated to do so"


....so take your pick. Despite what you THINK, it's probably the closest synonym to "overzealous seller". Maybe a "huckster"...."peddler's" tend to travel...
 
  • Haha
Reactions: LRRPF52
First, (and I know you suffer from being from Ohio) it can be a noun or verb, but depending on where you look it can be defined as something as innocuous as a "salesman or promoter", others might call it more of a "hype-man...or pitchman on behalf of another"....if you choose the Merriam Webster def.

Per the basis of Cambridge def. "Someone who helps persuade another to buy something".

Per Britannica: "one whos talk about something in a prideful way because they are compensated to do so"


....so take your pick. Despite what you THINK, it's probably the closest synonym to "overzealous seller". Maybe a "huckster"...."peddler's" tend to travel...

There's nothing wrong with Ohio. Just because we kiss our sisters better than you don't be all jealous.
 
There's nothing wrong with Ohio. Just because we kiss our sisters better than you don't be all jealous.

Ohio's identity is confusing...everything/everyone looks "midwest", but it's like everyone just has a little bit of East Coast pent up energy/angst (or maybe some FL man crazy?). Some of your crime and driving is definitely kicked up a notch. Dayton drivers especially.

But hey, you might top us as the nation's leader of "where everyone used to be from"....should be us but we're to fucking poor to move.
:ROFLMAO:


So anyways....what do you guys think....ZCO 2-10 content gonna be showing about fall, and post-SHOT 2025 probably for most of us?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: LRRPF52
Ohio's identity is confusing...everything/everyone looks "midwest", but it's like everyone just has a little bit of East Coast pent up energy/angst (or maybe some FL man crazy?). Some of your crime and driving is definitely kicked up a notch. Dayton drivers especially.

But hey, you might top us as the nation's leader of "where everyone used to be from"....should be us but we're to fucking poor to move. :ROFLMAO:

Was just in Florida, different level of crazy there.

However I did see a guy using a pole to scrub his ass in Cleveland so we are catching up.
 
First, (and I know you suffer from being from Ohio) it can be a noun or verb, but depending on where you look it can be defined as something as innocuous as a "salesman or promoter", others might call it more of a "hype-man...or pitchman on behalf of another"....if you choose the Merriam Webster def.

Per the basis of Cambridge def. "Someone who helps persuade another to buy something".

Per Britannica: "one whos talk about something in a prideful way because they are compensated to do so"


....so take your pick. Despite what you THINK, it's probably the closest synonym to "overzealous seller". Maybe a "huckster"...."peddler's" tend to travel...



Hey I know you had an unfavorable experience with another member of CST, but I reached out to see if I can help with a resolution per our previous PM. - Richard

Also, the typical shill in this industry is an influencer, YouTuber or reviewer that gives a favorable opinion on a product or service that was given to them for free or highly discounted without full disclosure. When I speak to potential customers I provide information to help them find the best product that will work for them. Even things we do not sell.

We are a part of this community and have been for about 20 years, hopefully a few more haha
 
Hey I know you had an unfavorable experience with another member of CST, but I reached out to see if I can help with a resolution per our previous PM. - Richard

And against my good judgement, I took the time to give you a chance, pretty much gave you a roadmap on how not to approach it per your colleague's failure....and you did exactly THAT. Bravo! I'm still in awe.

But hey, some cats like how you go about it....I know some others think like me and don't.
If i had product to sell, I'd probably want someone turnin' and burnin' at every drop of the hat too.
 
Last edited:
And against my good judgement, I took the time to give you a chance, pretty much gave you a roadmap on how not to approach it per your colleague's failure....and you did exactly THAT. Bravo! I'm still in awe.

But hey, some cats like how you go about it....I know some others think like me and don't.
If i had product to sell, I'd probably want someone turnin' and burnin' at every drop of the hat too.


I don’t remember actually having a conversation with you after I asked if we can chat about it on the phone. -Richard
 
ZCO was aiming for and has been telling people up until about a month ago that we were looking like early to mid June for official release; however, there were a couple design changes made to improve performance during that wait, and like all products under development, that has pushed the timeline out a few more weeks as ZCO aims to put out the best product possible. There is a batch in production and being built as we speak, then they will ship samples to the US for final testing, and once approved it will be officially released here in the US.
 
My 36mm Spuhr Noveske mount is just waiting for this thing to come in so I can see what this thing is all about.

I've got a virgin Ridgeline upper that's been collecting dust waiting on this optic...and have since furnished yet another lower to put underneath said upper while waiting on this optic.

Were S&B's pricing not so fucking stupid, I'd have just given up and gotten a 5-20US a month ago.
 
Been a while….and it’s been quiet
ZCO isn’t flashing it on social media anymore…

Where they at on this?
We are just waiting around. They still show it coming soon on the website. I expect at this point it'll be a SHOT release... even though it was shown at the last SHOT.
 
Are there any options for lightweight cantilever mounts for an AR in 36mm?
Just get the Spuhrs...or whatever that is a solid mount. The optic is fairly hefty, not sure I would want a lightweight mount. The thing about the Spuhrs is the amount of coverage they offer to protect the optic.

Maybe its just me, but if I wanted a lightweight setup, I would likely start with a different optic.
 
Just get the Spuhrs...or whatever that is a solid mount. The optic is fairly hefty, not sure I would want a lightweight mount. The thing about the Spuhrs is the amount of coverage they offer to protect the optic.

Maybe its just me, but if I wanted a lightweight setup, I would likely start with a different optic.

Sadly, they only do the 1.5" Cantilever in their QD

See a lot of people using them on ARs are in the Badger MAX (though non-cantilever). I have my fingers crossed there will be a Badger C1 when all this ZCO lpvo fuckery winds down.
 
Sadly, they only do the 1.5" Cantilever in their QD

See a lot of people using them on ARs are in the Badger MAX (though non-cantilever). I have my fingers crossed there will be a Badger C1 when all this ZCO lpvo fuckery winds down.
Just out of curiosity why are you dead set on QD? It's not like I ever have backup irons with my LPVOs. I want to torque that sucker down and leave it.
I have the 1.25 high 36 mm noveske spuhr mount.
 
  • Like
Reactions: simonp and FatBoy
Yeah. I still don't understand.

:rolleyes:

I don't use/like QD...

Per my post:
Sadly, they only do the 1.5" Cantilever in their QD

See a lot of people using them on ARs are in the Badger MAX (though non-cantilever). I have my fingers crossed there will be a Badger C1 when all this ZCO lpvo fuckery winds down.

The "sadly" would denote I don't like/want QD; and the mention of wanting a C1 (a non-QD) should reinforce that.

Thus your rant/chastising of QD is misdirected.

Reading...It's fundamental