Beating a Dead Horse - LPVO 1-8 /1-10

[Jeremiah Johnson]

Working on outfitting a new rifle with an LPVO. Will be an Sig MCX Spear Lt in 5.56.

I am wanting to do an LPVO. I have several rifles with red dots, so this is not that rifle.

Looking for great 1x performance and daylight bright. 1-8or10.

Options I am currently looking at

Vortex 1-10
NX8
Atacr
Vudu
Kahles
Credo

So Kahles is the most money. I can get Atacr for less than the Vortex. Followed by Vudu, NX8 and Credo. Is it worth paying 10-15% more money for a Vortex over an Atacr? Is the Atacr that much better than NX8 with the same DMX reticle?

This is will be a do it all self defense rifle and also for classes. I know there are compromises but what would you chose and why?

 

[Clayman]

I have a vortex 1-10 and an atacr. I prefer the atacr personally. Both are very bright. I prefer the glass and reticle on the NF.

I'd really like to get some time behind the new March optics. They have a compact 1-10 and a 1.5-15x42.

See if you can see some in person imo. What I like might not be what you like.

 

[xxflyingturtlexx]

If atacr is an option; it is the answer.

Do not read too much into it. It is the best ffp lpvo right now. Vortex comes close with unbearable 1x and useless 10x

 

[Happiness Is A Warm Gun]

Make sure to take a look at the March shorty 1-10 dual optic with the tree reticle. That's what I have after going through a lot of the same research and trial and error. I owned the Vortex 1-10, still have the kahles 1-6, but didn't try out the atacr. The dual reticle and small size and weight appealed to me, and i finally bit once the tree reticle and capped turrent model was available.

If the March didn't exist, I would have tried out the atacr 1-8 next. The March shorty is my current favorite do all optic. Here is a video going over it, but it is not the capped or tree reticle version.

 

[TonyTheTiger]

These threads always remind me of just how subjective optics opinions are. For instance, in my opinion the NF LPVO's are among the worst out there above the $600 price point.

 

[Vynz]

I have the Vortex Razor 1-10x. I like it enough not buy something else. But I would have liked it to be 18oz and have parallax adjustment like the March. But even March couldn’t keep the 18oz weight with the gen2 (20oz) designed for normal mounts.

 

[simonp]

For my eyes out of the options listed by OP I like the Khales glass the most but they dont offer a FFP 1-8, their 2-10 would be my choice except its SFP. I know not an issue for everyone but it is for me so there it is.

Id like to look through a NF NX and ATACR side by side to get a good idea of what if any differences there are between the two apart from the ATACR being more rugged.

March seems to get a lot of love on the hide and for its price it should be amazing! but have yet to see one in the flesh unfortunately.

 

[1911hombre]

For my eyes out of the options listed by OP I like the Khales glass the most but they dont offer a FFP 1-8, their 2-10 would be my choice except its SFP. I know not an issue for everyone but it is for me so there it is.

Id like to look through a NF NX and ATACR side by side to get a good idea of what if any differences there are between the two apart from the ATACR being more rugged.

March seems to get a lot of love on the hide and for its price it should be amazing! but have yet to see one in the flesh unfortunately.

I've had two NX8's and now an ATACR with the DMX reticle and there's no comparison between the two. Also had a Razor Gen III 1-10 and sent it down the road. Not impressed. Razor Gen II 1-6 is actually a far better scope IMO. All the other brands listed are for people who shoot while wearing knee pants and skate shoes.

 

[simonp]

I've had two NX8's and now an ATACR with the DMX reticle and there's no comparison between the two. Also had a Razor Gen III 1-10 and sent it down the road. Not impressed. Razor Gen II 1-6 is actually a far better scope IMO. All the other brands listed are for people who shoot while wearing knee pants and skate shoes.

I didnt know whether to like or laugh emoji at your response based on that last line

 

[Jeremiah Johnson]

Haha this is why I’m asking. I used to have a 1-6 Razor and old NX8. Probably should have kept the 1-6 Razor but sold it for the NX8. Ended up selling the NX8 bc I hated the reticle. Then had Vudu, but sold it bc it wasn’t daylight bright.

Atacr and Vortex 1-10 are so polarizing. You have people saying it’s the best then another guy says it sucks.

 

[Desert_Racer]

I have both the atacr and the 1-10 razor gen 3.

I think the 1-10 razor has a better fov and a flatter image when you’ve adjuster the diopter, but I don’t like the reticle as much as the atacr. It is still a good reticle, however.

The atacr has a better reticle, and I like that only the circle and center dot is illuminated, versus the whole thing on the razor. You see more of the scope tube on the atacr than the razor.

I think it’s a wash if you’re paying full price for either. The ATACR is probably the more durable/reliable option. But a used 1-10 razor for $1700 is really hard to beat.

 

[FatBoy]

Ended up selling the NX8 bc I hated the reticle.

I think this may be the most important aspect in the current crop of scopes. I get he daylight bright, etc., but in the end most of us can deal with weight, work with or piggyback something to tailor to our needs, except the reticle.

 

[JS8588]

I think this may be the most important aspect in the current crop of scopes. I get he daylight bright, etc., but in the end most of us can deal with weight, work with or piggyback something to tailor to our needs, except the reticle.

I've got to be one of the very few on this forum, or one of the few to admit it, anyway, but I won't buy a scope with anything much more complex than a German #4 or Duplex reticle. Why? I'm a civie and I'm never going to shoot enough to memorize how a Christmas tree reticle works. Give me something I can zero. 556 has a roughly 300 yard mpbr. I'm not going to shoot farther than that unless it's for giggles at the range.

 

[Desert_Racer]

And you call yourself the “Ballistic Hipster?”

 

[JS8588]

And you call yourself the “Ballistic Hipster?”

Old joke from another forum. I read a lot more than I shoot (dayjob keeps me 50+ hours a week, I have a 2 year old, and I'm mid divorce).

 

[Ape_Factory]

Why not the PA PLxC 1-8? Compact, light, truly awesome at 1X, daylight bright, etc...amazing glass, seems pretty stout too.

 

[mrtoyz]

 

[Jeremiah Johnson]

I have watched that. His reaction to the Atacr was different than others. I was 100% Atacr before I watched that.

 

[mrtoyz]

Be careful with March, there are now 2Gen’s. Know which you are looking at.
Above video is worth your time.
Couple opinions:
Kahles is 2nd focal plane (issue for some)
I would absolutely look at the Vudu 1-10 with your own eyes. With your own eyes because what you see isn’t what others may. Additionally, I’ve noticed variations one to another. Only problem I have with it is illumination brightness. Glass is good, tree reticle is serviceable and used prices are great.
LPVO’s I currently use are S&B dual CC, Vudu 1-10’s and NX8’s (because of size and dot brightness). Will be buying more Vudu’s.

 

[mrtoyz]

Been there done that with ATACR and Vortex G3. I know I may be the only one, but I decided I liked the Vudu more than either. Look for yourself.

 

[Jeremiah Johnson]

I owned a 1-8 Vudu until recently. Just wasn’t Red dot bright. I did like it other than that though.

 

[PappyM3]

I have the Vortex Razor 1-10x. I like it enough not buy something else. But I would have liked it to be 18oz and have parallax adjustment like the March. But even March couldn’t keep the 18oz weight with the gen2 (20oz) designed for normal mounts.

March could have kept weight down a little more on the Gen 2, but when they bumped it up to 34mm they intentionally left the internal diameter of the tube the same to make the tube thicker and more robust. It’s a plus for me, since it’s still not heavy.

Why not the PA PLxC 1-8? Compact, light, truly awesome at 1X, daylight bright, etc...amazing glass, seems pretty stout too.

That chevron though… Dimitri is chevron crazed.

There are good reasons why Trijicon stopped using them after the ACOG.

 

[ELCO82]

Absolutely love my vudu 1-10. It's plenty bright enough for me. It hasn't been an issue, although I'm not shooting in Arizona desert

 

[Happiness Is A Warm Gun]

Another possibility is to wait and see the release of the Delta 1-10 lpvo that is coming out soon. I might pick one up myself depending on the price. It will be a ffp 1-10, but will have a parallax adjustment like the March.

 

[PappyM3]

Another possibility is to wait and see the release of the Delta 1-10 lpvo that is coming out soon. I might pick one up myself depending on the price. It will be a ffp 1-10, but will have a parallax adjustment like the March.

I’m very curious about this one. I’m not too keen on the reticle, but it seems “good enough”. And the larger objective coupled with the parallax/focus adjustment seem like a great combo for my 16” 6.5 CM.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Vudu 1-10 all day.

 

[Charmingmander]

Everything above 1-6 has too many compromises in optical design imho. Tight eyeboxes above 6x, illumination problems, glass wigging out at top end for whatever reason, weight used to be a major issue in the 1-8s.

Also lol on the post about the PLXc being daylight bright. It's barely daylight red in the sun.

Only one I haven't looked through is the March for the 1-10s. The rest are all LOW produced in the 1200+ price point (aside from March and Kahles/Swaro) until you get to the $3kish price with the ATACRs and S&B. In my experience all the LOW produced stuff is samey same with little difference in IQ. I haven't looked through the new JOL 1-10s yet but I can't imagine they will be as good as the LOW produced stuff.


After screwing around with so many LPVOs from all the major OEMs from Chinese to upper end Japanese, I just can't stop looking at them as extreme compromises. No one seems to be able to nail every single aspect of them. There's always some dumb flaw that ruins the usage experience. I'm no optical expert, I've just looked through or owned so many of them now. I'm sure someone like Koshkin has a better handle on the market.

 

[Vynz]

Everything above 1-6 has too many compromises in optical design imho. Tight eyeboxes above 6x, illumination problems, glass wigging out at top end for whatever reason, weight used to be a major issue in the 1-8s.

Also lol on the post about the PLXc being daylight bright. It's barely daylight red in the sun.

Only one I haven't looked through is the March for the 1-10s. The rest are all LOW produced in the 1200+ price point (aside from March and Kahles/Swaro) until you get to the $3kish price with the ATACRs and S&B. In my experience all the LOW produced stuff is samey same with little difference in IQ. I haven't looked through the new JOL 1-10s yet but I can't imagine they will be as good as the LOW produced stuff.


After screwing around with so many LPVOs from all the major OEMs from Chinese to upper end Japanese, I just can't stop looking at them as extreme compromises. No one seems to be able to nail every single aspect of them. There's always some dumb flaw that ruins the usage experience. I'm no optical expert, I've just looked through or owned so many of them now. I'm sure someone like Koshkin has a better handle on the market.

I think a large amount of these compromises are from chasing the magnification ratio numbers as a means to draw customers. The same manufacturer mentality goes for 4K 46” LED TVs everyone is watching from over 6ft away. No one can resolve 90 dots per inch at 6ft away. But it’s harder to market color range, refresh rate, luminosity as they require seeing the actual TV.

The issue is customers can read magnification ratios and pretend they are doing a meaningful product comparison. Image quality, eyebox, field of view, etc are more subjective and really require having a product sample in a store at a minimum.

 

[Charmingmander]

I think a large amount of these compromises are from chasing the magnification ratio numbers as a means to draw customers. The same manufacturer mentality goes for 4K 46” LED TVs everyone is watching from over 6ft away. No one can resolve 90 dots per inch at 6ft away. But it’s harder to market color range, refresh rate, luminosity as they require seeing the actual TV.

The issue is customers can read magnification ratios and pretend they are doing a meaningful product comparison. Image quality, eyebox, field of view, etc are more subjective and really require having a product sample in a store at a minimum.

It's very true. A good example was the GLx 1-6 that PA put out. People said it was great but I know myself and a couple of the smaller YT reviewers didn't like it. The glass was fucky as hell on that optic for me. I thought the SIG 1-10 that's Chinese actually looked great for the price when I looked through one but I've seen others say they think it's a haze filled POS.

It's all subjective but I'm at the point now where I really think for a fighting rifle a proven MPVO plus dot or ACOG/proven prism with a forward mounted piggyback dot are better options. But again, that's just me. I may end up buying a Kahles 1-6/8 and putting it on an AUG and loving it. That's what really sucks about optics. Until you look through them or shoot a few groups with one you don't really know how good or shit it is.

 

[tucaz]

I've got to be one of the very few on this forum, or one of the few to admit it, anyway, but I won't buy a scope with anything much more complex than a German #4 or Duplex reticle. Why? I'm a civie and I'm never going to shoot enough to memorize how a Christmas tree reticle works. Give me something I can zero. 556 has a roughly 300 yard mpbr. I'm not going to shoot farther than that unless it's for giggles at the range.

right there with ya. i have tr24 duplex on my sig spear LT and a leupy mk6 1-6x looking to land on another rifle soon. works for my civi-ass that doesnt gun game. open desert shooting is my sport. plenty of small rocks to pick on.

 

[PappyM3]

It's very true. A good example was the GLx 1-6 that PA put out. People said it was great but I know myself and a couple of the smaller YT reviewers didn't like it. The glass was fucky as hell on that optic for me. I thought the SIG 1-10 that's Chinese actually looked great for the price when I looked through one but I've seen others say they think it's a haze filled POS.

It's all subjective but I'm at the point now where I really think for a fighting rifle a proven MPVO plus dot or ACOG/proven prism with a forward mounted piggyback dot are better options. But again, that's just me. I may end up buying a Kahles 1-6/8 and putting it on an AUG and loving it. That's what really sucks about optics. Until you look through them or shoot a few groups with one you don't really know how good or shit it is.

I can quite honestly say an MPVO is a lot of excess for most fighting rifles. Looking back on my firefights, there are very few where it would have been beneficial, and most of the time it would have been unnecessary weight and bulk. I think they’re just trending now. I can definitely see them on SDM-Rs or other precision gas guns though.

The ACOG/offset dot is definitely a capable setup, but why not then just go with an Elcan?

I’ve come to the conclusion that 1-6 SFP or FFP, or 1-8 FFP (some of them) are the sweet spot for fighting rifles. But that’s just my opinion.

I have yet to see a 1-10 that wasn’t too compromised. I’m coming to think that 1-10s need a 28-30mm objective so they’re not too dark at 10x, but then would need adjustable focus, and also need a good reticle for 1x. I haven’t played with the March DFP though.

All personal preference in this trade space though. Those are just my opinions.

 

[Charmingmander]

I can quite honestly say an MPVO is a lot of excess for most fighting rifles. Looking back on my firefights, there are very few where it would have been beneficial, and most of the time it would have been unnecessary weight and bulk. I think they’re just trending now. I can definitely see them on SDM-Rs or other precision gas guns though.

The ACOG/offset dot is definitely a capable setup, but why not then just go with an Elcan?

I’ve come to the conclusion that 1-6 SFP or FFP, or 1-8 FFP (some of them) are the sweet spot for fighting rifles. But that’s just my opinion.

I have yet to see a 1-10 that wasn’t too compromised. I’m coming to think that 1-10s need a 28-30mm objective so they’re not too dark at 10x, but then would need adjustable focus, and also need a good reticle for 1x. I haven’t played with the March DFP though.

All personal preference in this trade space though. Those are just my opinions.

Elcans are a whole nother can of worms and also are shit for NODs (so are LPVOs), hence having say an LED ACOG with the FORWARD dot position so it doesn't hit your tubes. NVGs throw the equation off a lot if you plan on having a jack-of-all-trades rifle and also plan on having/using NODs.

Problem with increasing objective diameter is that you can't just make it bigger without making the optic body longer because of the physics going on to make the image. We also have the issue that despite companies putting out some pretty rugged scopes these days, they still have failures in the turrets or reticles canting or lenses loosening or a myriad of other random issues that pop up even in Razors (granted I can't think of a SINGLE issue I've ever read about with the 1-6 Razor, but it's reticle selection is also shitty).

It's a wash. I'm at the point with optics that I am with cars/trucks (I work in automotive); they're all garbage for different reasons. At least when it comes to having a versatile or do all carbine. Optics for precision guns don't have this problem.

 

[Jeremiah Johnson]

Appreciate all the posts and experiences I am leaning Atacr with an RMR.

Elcan is not something I have thought about in a long time. Anyone ever shoot the 1/3/9?

 

[TonyTheTiger]

It's a wash. I'm at the point with optics that I am with cars/trucks (I work in automotive); they're all garbage for different reasons.

Ain't that the truth. I've put a lot of work miles on the big three truck brands over the years and now I just shake my head whenever someone fanbois for any of them.

 

[Jeremiah Johnson]

I can quite honestly say an MPVO is a lot of excess for most fighting rifles. Looking back on my firefights, there are very few where it would have been beneficial, and most of the time it would have been unnecessary weight and bulk. I think they’re just trending now. I can definitely see them on SDM-Rs or other precision gas guns though.

The ACOG/offset dot is definitely a capable setup, but why not then just go with an Elcan?

I’ve come to the conclusion that 1-6 SFP or FFP, or 1-8 FFP (some of them) are the sweet spot for fighting rifles. But that’s just my opinion.

I have yet to see a 1-10 that wasn’t too compromised. I’m coming to think that 1-10s need a 28-30mm objective so they’re not too dark at 10x, but then would need adjustable focus, and also need a good reticle for 1x. I haven’t played with the March DFP though.

All personal preference in this trade space though. Those are just my opinions.

Vcog is 1-8x28. I have never seen one of those in the wild. I wonder how it looks at 8x

 

[Desert_Racer]

Vcog is 1-8x28. I have never seen one of those in the wild. I wonder how it looks at 8x

They look good. My friend brought his to work yesterday for me to take a peek through. I like it but the illumination is the absolute worst I’ve ever seen. And it’s heavy.

 

[TonyTheTiger]

Vcog is 1-8x28. I have never seen one of those in the wild. I wonder how it looks at 8x

Looked through one once. And that's the nicest thing I can say about it.

 

[mrtoyz]

Appreciate all the posts and experiences I am leaning Atacr with an RMR.

Elcan is not something I have thought about in a long time. Anyone ever shoot the 1/3/9?

Not sure if you’d said your shot an ATACR or not, but I’d definitely do that before you buy one. Preferably with some optics to compare it with.

 

[Jeremiah Johnson]

I’ve owned and shot an NX8, Vudu and Razor 1-6. But unfortunately there is no where near me with an Atacr.

If I had the opportunity to shoot them all, I would definitely do that instead of asking a bunch of strangers online their opinions. Haha

 

[Zolar]

Get the Atacr and be done with it.

 

[kriller134]

I have a g3 1-10 and I’m not very happy with it. 10x has a lot to be desired. It’s dark and not very clear.

 

[Ape_Factory]

There are good reasons why Trijicon stopped using them after the ACOG.

Expound please! Just curious as sometimes I don't know what I don't know. I like the chevron on the 1-8, didn't like it as much on an MVPO.

 

[mrtoyz]

I’ve owned and shot an NX8, Vudu and Razor 1-6. But unfortunately there is no where near me with an Atacr.

If I had the opportunity to shoot them all, I would definitely do that instead of asking a bunch of strangers online their opinions. Haha

Definitely more desirable than listening to a much of couch commandos. Lol! However you did ask, and opinions are like assholes!
Why not, give the ATACR a try. Buy em and try ‘em.
If I run across a deal on the Gen2 March that’ll be my next one.

 

[GUNNER10]

Everything above 1-6 has too many compromises in optical design imho. Tight eyeboxes above 6x, illumination problems, glass wigging out at top end for whatever reason, weight used to be a major issue in the 1-8s.

Also lol on the post about the PLXc being daylight bright. It's barely daylight red in the sun.

Only one I haven't looked through is the March for the 1-10s. The rest are all LOW produced in the 1200+ price point (aside from March and Kahles/Swaro) until you get to the $3kish price with the ATACRs and S&B. In my experience all the LOW produced stuff is samey same with little difference in IQ. I haven't looked through the new JOL 1-10s yet but I can't imagine they will be as good as the LOW produced stuff.


After screwing around with so many LPVOs from all the major OEMs from Chinese to upper end Japanese, I just can't stop looking at them as extreme compromises. No one seems to be able to nail every single aspect of them. There's always some dumb flaw that ruins the usage experience. I'm no optical expert, I've just looked through or owned so many of them now. I'm sure someone like Koshkin has a better handle on the market.

This is really where I am at with LPVO's.

I think LPVO's made sense when they were in the 1-4/6 magnification range. They offered an advantage over the traditional 4X optic by offering a good 1X and better eye box at the cost of being a little heavier.

I have an accupower 1-8. its a bit heavy, recticle is a little thick, but the eyebox is good and its has good brightness. I am not 100% sure what rifle its going to live on as dropping an almost 2lb optic and mount combo onto a rifle tends to change the dynamics of that platform significantly.

I think if I was going to set up a carbine with an LPVO, i would really go with the lightest combo out there and would not get caught up in magnification, and would give serious consideration to a RDS detachable magnifier combo as you can shed a good portion of that weight when you are not using it.

 

[PappyM3]

Expound please! Just curious as sometimes I don't know what I don't know. I like the chevron on the 1-8, didn't like it as much on an MVPO.

If it works for you, that’s great.

Basically it boils down to this:

- The “infinitely small” aiming point can also be infinitely ambiguous in practice. Unless you take the time to make sure you’re using the exact point. It’s easy to align quickly in windage, but not as much with elevation.

- In the 200-300 yard/meter range, especially with some wind, it can really start to obscure targets. Or be an ambiguous aiming point off the side of the chevron slope.

The chevron came about to be an easily identified reticle when using the bindon aiming concept with 4x in one eye. But that’s been proven to be horribly ineffective past bad breath distances unless you take the time to let your brain identify the magnified target instead of your non-optic eye image. But if doing that, it defeats the point of BAC and you no longer need a large aiming point.

The parallax when using the target image with your left eye and just reticle image with your right when there is a disparity in magnification gets off target fast. And without needing to use the bindon aiming concept anymore with the proliferation of red dots and LPVOs, the need for such a large and prominent aiming point on the reticle is also not needed. You can go back to using more precise aiming points that don’t occlude as much of the target. Crosshairs (4 or 3) bring one’s eye to the precise aiming point much faster than a chevron, for most anyway. I realize some will always prefer the chevron.

If you notice, all the newer military optics stopped using the chevron. The USMC TA31 RCO ditched the chevron. 6x machine gun ACOGs started to ditch it too. VCOG, Sig LPVOs, all gone.

 

[Cynical]

I might get sniped for saying it, but the Athlon Cronus BTR Gen 2 is to me the best LPVO right now. It seems to have a more true 1x than any other. It is subjective but the Athlon is heads and shoulder better than Vortex’s razor or strike eagle, and Kahles’s 18i (last Gen at least). I am very biased toward a true 1x for both eyes open shooting though.

 

[Makinchips208]

I might get sniped for saying it, but the Athlon Cronus BTR Gen 2 is to me the best LPVO right now. It seems to have a more true 1x than any other. It is subjective but the Athlon is heads and shoulder better than Vortex’s razor or strike eagle, and Kahles’s 18i (last Gen at least). I am very biased toward a true 1x for both eyes open shooting though.

If that’s what matters then most of the time you can adjust the diopter to get that dialed in how you like.
Yeah it may be slightly out of focus at max power though on some.

 

[PappyM3]

I might get sniped for saying it, but the Athlon Cronus BTR Gen 2 is to me the best LPVO right now. It seems to have a more true 1x than any other. It is subjective but the Athlon is heads and shoulder better than Vortex’s razor or strike eagle, and Kahles’s 18i (last Gen at least). I am very biased toward a true 1x for both eyes open shooting though.

Seems like a slightly narrow field of view. How thick does the ocular end of the scope body seem?

 

[AMGtuned]

I’ve owned and shot an NX8, Vudu and Razor 1-6. But unfortunately there is no where near me with an Atacr.

If I had the opportunity to shoot them all, I would definitely do that instead of asking a bunch of strangers online their opinions. Haha

www.opticsthoughts.com

Or just ask the man, lord @koshkin , right here.

 

[Docsherm]

Vortex Gen III 1-10 is the best out there durable and Brightest recital. If you know what you are doing the extra 2X on the 1-8x scopes can really help.

By this, I mean that the Eye Box and Eye relief are the same as the Razor from 1-6X. Beyond 6X you simply have to shift your head a bit to get a proper fix from 6-10X.

I like it so much that I have two of them.