1-8x recommendations

[TheComedian]

Any thoughts on the following? ACTAR 1-8, Kahles K18i and Trijicon VCOG 1-8?

Putting this on a PWS .223. Will be offset with a reddot.

Looking for reliability and clarity as I plan on running this setup HARD with classes and competitions monthly next year. Mainly 400 yards and in, would like to be able to get 600 yards as necessary. Not going to be a safe queen. I have ZCO's on my long range guns, so that is what I'm used to. Don't expect that level of quality, but in the ballpark for something that I won't mind taking a little bit of a beating

Thanks for any feedback/input.

Merry Christmas!!

 

[FuhQ]

Of those listed, the ATACR will probably be the toughest, but the Kahles will definitely have the best glass.

 

[TonyTheTiger]

Just a little thread drift because I'm curious. What does it mean to run an optic hard?

Also, very little time behind the optics listed, but Kahles by a mile gets my vote for whatever that's worth.

 

[danatkins]

Atacr or vcog spotless be tougher

 

[koshkin]

One is FFP with DMR optimized reticle and very bright illumination.
The second one is SFP with best in class eyepiece and nicely visible reitcle (SFP strength), but you better be on 8x for distance, wind holds and lead holds (SFP limitation)
The third one is a scope shaped brick.

If distance beyond MPBR is important, get the ATACR.
If staying mostly within the MPBR, Kahles is compelling.
If you want to do some weight training, get the VCOG.

Personally, I am sticking with Razor Gen3 and PA PLxC. I have a couple of each and I am happy with how they have held up and performed.

ILya

 

[Hoody2shoes]

Atacr

 

[vikings1]

Theres some videos on youtube by Mid tier snobs where they tested and compared a bunch of lpvos including the ones you mentioned.

 

[TheComedian]

Just a little thread drift because I'm curious. What does it mean to run an optic hard?

Also, very little time behind the optics listed, but Kahles by a mile gets my vote for whatever that's worth.

Mostly talking about the gun itself, but I don't want to have to worry about the optic from being tossed in cans, getting in the dirt/mud etc.

 

[Travis224]

Atacr is quite amazing. I have 3, they are daylight bright and act as a red dot on lower power. It is better than my gen3 1-10 despite the lower top end magnification

 

[dms416]

Just a little thread drift because I'm curious. What does it mean to run an optic hard?

Also, very little time behind the optics listed, but Kahles by a mile gets my vote for whatever that's worth.

Same
Kahles +1

 

[TonyTheTiger]

Mostly talking about the gun itself, but I don't want to have to worry about the optic from being tossed in cans, getting in the dirt/mud etc.

FWIW, I've seen some wild near torture test things happen to cheap optics, a lot, and barring a hard impact on a lense, optics are a lot tougher than people realize.
I once RO'd a guy running full bore with a loose slung rifle, his Strike Eagle (IIRC) snags a tree and arrests his forward momentum and yanks him backwards onto his ass. I know multiple people that have perfect shotgun rib imprints on scopes, knurling and everything, and they're fine. I've seen a few people trip and go down scope first. Seen a bullet graze a scope once and make a decent dent. I had a scope with the tube forward of the objective sliced open from dumping. I actually ran over my FFP Strike Eagle in soft dirt with a 1/2 ton truck. Seen a few cantilever mounts bent hard.
In all of those cases the scopes survived and functioned fine, sometimes needing a re zero, sometimes not. Moral of the story is that even cheap scopes that make it out of the factory without defects are pretty tough in even unusually abusive shooting scenarios. If you have a house fire or drive over it with a bulldozer it won't matter if it says Atibal or Nightforce on the side.

 

[dms416]

So let's be real,

Picking an optic is based on your shooting style/preferences.
-LPVO's generally thrive on one end or the other. Specimens like the ATACR and Razor HD 3 opt for FFP and tree reticles at the expense of the bottom end "blooming mass" and sub-optimal low/mid magnification range performance
-Optics like the Kahles, Razor HD 2, and other 2nd FP do reasonably well at both ends at the sacrifice of speedy use of the reticle holds outside of the top end magnification.
- Target size, weapon accuracy, aiming solution options (turrets, bdc's, reticle), conditions (namely wind) will determine how for you can go...manage expectations accordingly. 600y in the hills on a IPSC is a different story than here on the plains doing 600y on 6" plates.


Of the 3x mentioned, here's my down and dirty:
NF's LPVO's kinda suck compared to other entrants at the low end...eye box, eye relief, reticle/sight picture IMHO are not up to its peers of the same price. If you run a mRDS offset or rarely use 1x, it's less of an issue.
Kahles reticles are fucking weird. They all have some goofy addition or omission that leaves me puzzled. None are "bad" but all could be better. Glass is excellent but reticle and illumination control could be better.
Sigh...VCOG...Trijicon isn't in the same league as building variable powered optics. They manage some interesting concepts but optically speaking, they aren't in the same league. Wrapping shit in a thick shell doesn't magically make things better...crappy internals going to be crappy so all this "bombproof" rhetoric is misguided. If you need tritium iron sights, a nostalgic fixed power prism, a non-Chinesium open-emitter mRDS, or a sweet 1-4x for a 10-22 then Trijicon it up, baby.

Honestly, 400y and in:
Kahles k16i g4b or Razor HD 2 1-6
(and you'd be surprised what could be done with an old S&B 1.1-4x20)

 

[FuhQ]

While we're throwing out opinions... Here's one that will probably make some laugh and roll their eyes, but it's my own opinion, and I'm not forcing anyone else to accept it. It just is what it is.

I have a different outlook on LPVO's... Because I'm not trying to shoot more than 500 yards with one. So, alpha-tier glass is not a requirement for me. So, my opinions on LPVO's and some target scopes make folks laugh, but I'm more worried about durability, reliability, repeatability, and function over supreme glass in the SHTF type scenarios. I have alpha-tier scopes, several... But they're on my hunting rifles, where I take care of them and don't abuse them or knock them around. Target scopes...As long as I can see the damn target, I can hit it. So supreme glass isn't a must. That's why I have quite a few cheaper budget scopes (like Arken & Vortex) on those range-only target toys.

So, here's my recommendation on an LPVO for target shooting and SHTF...

This isn't a high-end optic by any means, but the glass is more than acceptable for 500 yard shooting, and it has a 34mm tube, with lots of elevation and windage adjustment (for an LPVO), and it seems to be built like a tank (weighs almost 20oz)... I really like the reticle (ACSS Griffin M10S MIL), and holdovers are quick and easy once getting your 100 yard zero set.

Are there a few things I'd change about it, even if the price went up a bit...Sure. I'd love to see it get an exposed elevation turret (MIL), and FFP reticle. If the price was still under $750, I'd be all about it. Yes, the glass is that impressive in the one I have. Is it Chinesium? Unfortunately... But it's a damn decent scope for the money.

https://www.primaryarms.com/primary-arms-slx-1-10x-28mm-sfp-rifle-scope-illuminated-acss-griffin-m10s-reticle?_ga=2.157621881.2130212105.1671924877-342777018.1670909705

 

[dms416]

...As long as I can see the damn target, I can hit it. So supreme glass isn't a must.

An excellent point.
That said, not all 4x, 6x, 8x are created equal and not indicative as to what you're going to be able to see compared to others.
I've found you can "cheat" an old, higher-end 4x like the old S&B's as far as the mid-tier 6x's and the lower tier 8x's on all but the smallest of targets (which has to give respect to the tool/rifle in question and the OP)
Similar as to comparing established 8x optics to the hot, new Vortex 10x and there not being much if anything gained there either.

So...I guess I'm at the other end of the line where I'd rather, older but quality tech over new, cheap at higher magnification.

 

[pmclaine]

Bought a USO 1-8x when that ratio was a miracle discovery.

It feels as if it was built by Soviet engineers.

I love it on my LMT MWS.

There is much more modern refined stuff but I love that old beast.

 

[JDB55]

One is FFP with DMR optimized reticle and very bright illumination.
The second one is SFP with best in class eyepiece and nicely visible reitcle (SFP strength), but you better be on 8x for distance, wind holds and lead holds (SFP limitation)
The third one is a scope shaped brick.

If distance beyond MPBR is important, get the ATACR.
If staying mostly within the MPBR, Kahles is compelling.
If you want to do some weight training, get the VCOG.

Personally, I am sticking with Razor Gen3 and PA PLxC. I have a couple of each and I am happy with how they have held up and performed.

ILya

+1 for the primary arms PLxC 1-8