Eotech Vudu X 2-12

[NHR]

EOTECH Launches the Vudu X Series Rifle Scopes - Soldier Systems Daily

Plymouth, MI (January 2024) – EOTECH, the world leader in Holographic Weapon Sights, is proud to announce the introduction of the Vudu X line of premium rifle scopes. The X Series rifle scopes are designed to meet the demands of the outdoor enthusiast. Whether it’s 3-gun, hunting, or...

soldiersystems.net

No details on the Eotech site yet.

Don't like the description of the reticles.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Another manufacturer stuck on stupid thinking most consumers still want MOA BDC bullshit. If they had put the reticles from the 1-10 in that 2-12 it would be money. I'm not even mad it has capped turrets, just put a decent mil tree LPVO type reticle in the thing for typical DMR use.

 

[dms416]

Another manufacturer stuck on stupid thinking most consumers still want MOA BDC bullshit. If they had put the reticles from the 1-10 in that 2-12 it would be money. I'm not even mad it has capped turrets, just put a decent mil tree LPVO type reticle in the thing for typical DMR use.

While we got close to stamping it out in the practical/tactical circles, but the "I think in inches" and "1/4 MOA is more 'precise' than 1cm" have only been emboldened by the trendy "everyman" guntuber and the fallacy that "everyone's opinion matters" climate.

that THIS will finally be the "year of the MPVO"...and that at least some are worth a fuck

 

[fdkay]

There is a market for moa and bdc.
They are playing to that market with an entry level optic.
That's why the majority of SFP scopes are MOA and very few mil options are offered in SFP

 

[PappyM3]

For a 2-12 I just want a simple reticle with crosshairs that can be picked up at 2x, some form of ranging, mrad elevation hashes, and some wind hold dots, and no silly chevron.

Basically a much simpler and less cluttered Tremor 3 that is easier to see at low mag.

The Athlon Helos BTR 2-12 reticle is actually pretty damned good. Just wish it had wind dots instead of mrad dots for windage. I get that the values will be different depending on cartridge, but it’s easy to figure out if each dot is 5mph, 4, 6, 5.5 etc. for the cartridge you’re shooting.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

There is a market for moa and bdc.
They are playing to that market with an entry level optic.
That's why the majority of SFP scopes are MOA and very few mil options are offered in SFP

There’s only a market for MOA because fudd retards think “I think in inches and don’t understand how angles work”. MRAD is superior in every way. MOA should just be put the rest.

 

[PappyM3]

There’s only a market for MOA because fudd retards think “I think in inches and don’t understand how angles work”. MRAD is superior in every way. MOA should just be put the rest.

I’ll never not think in MOA when discussing/thinking about precision/accuracy. It is much easier to use with inches of precision at different yard distances.

Yes, MRAD can be used with either metric or imperial, but it is better suited for metric. One of the reasons it is the SI unit of measure for anglular measurements. With metric, you can do centimeter precision at a certain meter range. But if you still want to think in imperial with MRAD, you need to think in fractions of a yard precision at a certain yard range. That’s just not tenable, even though MRAD can technically work with imperial since it’s just an angular measurement.

 

[thehun]

It is 2024 ... at least offer an MRAD variant ...

 

[dms416]

I’ll never not think in MOA when discussing/thinking about precision/accuracy. It is much easier to use with inches of precision at different yard distances.

Which really has fuck all to do with an efficient optic.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

As soon as you’re not at an exact 100 yard range increment it’s a moot point and you’re running a calculation anyway. Nevermind the fact that MOA isn’t exactly an inch per hundred yards and just happens to end up somewhat close.

As far as using it to measure accuracy you’re measuring it in inches and then converting it to MOA. You can do the same damn thing with mils.

MOA is dumb as fuck.

 

[PappyM3]

Which really has fuck all to do with an efficient optic.

He said “MRAD is superior in every way. MOA should just be put the rest.”

I provided a counter argument to that claim.

 

[thehun]

As soon as you’re not at an exact 100 yard range increment it’s a moot point and you’re running a calculation anyway. Nevermind the fact that MOA isn’t exactly an inch per hundred yards and just happens to end up somewhat close.

As far as using it to measure accuracy you’re measuring it in inches and then converting it to MOA. You can do the same damn thing with mils.

MOA is dumb as fuck.

MRAD provides a much simpler firing solution ... if MOA was superior ... it would be adopted by the masses with in professional, tactical shooters ... MOA does have some benefit in F-Class ... super long range shooting ... I'll give it that ... but in all other scenarios ... give me a MRAD optic all day ... all night ... twice on Sunday ...

 

[PappyM3]

As soon as you’re not at an exact 100 yard range increment it’s a moot point and you’re running a calculation anyway. Nevermind the fact that MOA isn’t exactly an inch per hundred yards and just happens to end up somewhat close.

As far as using it to measure accuracy you’re measuring it in inches and then converting it to MOA. You can do the same damn thing with mils.

MOA is dumb as fuck.

It’s close enough to 1-1 inch to MOA. So at 1k yards it’s 10.47” for an MOA instead of 10”. Not a big deal to me.

As for being between 100 yard increments, I don’t need to calculate precision in that granular of detail between those 100 yard increments for most any use case. Target is at 735 yards, I don’t need to know that the gun might shoot 5.77 inches because it’s a 3/4 MOA gun/cartridge setup. I can safely assume it is capable of sub-7” at that range. And anything outside of that is likely wind or incorrect ranging (velocity variation depending on ammo) on my part. Sure, in those rare instances where that granular of detail is needed between 100 yard increments, then sure I’ll bust out some math. But the vast majority of my shooting doesn’t require that. Including training for deployments, Service Rifle, PRS, hunting, etc..


Back on topic, I do think MRAD is better for optics. It’s a whole lot easier to think of adjustments in base 10. My point is that MRAD isn’t better for everything. MOA still has its uses.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

And back to the whole point of you could do the same damn thing with mils. Yeah Elmer down at the gun shop isn’t going to know WTF you’re talking about when you say you shoot .2 mil groups at 700 yards. Fuck Elmer anyway.

 

[fdkay]

EOTECH is in the business of making money.
The tactical crowd that actually buys scopes to use them as designed are a tiny fraction of scope buyers.
They are trying to sell scopes to folks that want the tacticool aspect.

 

[dms416]

EOTECH is in the business of making money.
The tactical crowd that actually buys scopes to use them as designed are a tiny fraction of scope buyers.
They are trying to sell scopes to folks that want the tacticool aspect.

I think you are correct. I didn’t know this was a new “budget” line.
From the mfg that brought you to optics in Zero Dark Thirty

I’ve always wanted to know if the numbers/ratio holds up in ballers/users buying alpha tier vs. the fudds and poors buying quantity.

 

[st1650]

Looks like chinesium….
And if it is, I’ll keep my Athlon 2-12 Helos Gen 2 in mrad which is actually a very decent optic for what it is

 

[thehun]

Looks like chinesium….
And if it is, I’ll keep my Athlon 2-12 Helos Gen 2 in mrad which is actually a very decent optic for what it is

Actually it is a great optic ... they did well there.

 

[BruceLeroy]

Reaction when I found the video= Oh swee....WTF

 

[PappyM3]

Reaction when I found the video= Oh swee....WTF

“First reticle is a duplex, which everybody loves”

 

[antecedent]

“First reticle is a duplex, which everybody loves”

Yeap. Have been looking for something mid-power-ish, but apparently a scope that: is lightweight, is somewhere between 2-12 and 3-18, and has a reticle that doesn’t suck is too much to ask for… I mean, they exist, sort of, but seem to be at the very high end of the market or at the lower end (nothing against the Athalon, as I haven’t tried it).

 

[PappyM3]

Yeap. Have been looking for something mid-power-ish, but apparently a scope that: is lightweight, is somewhere between 2-12 and 3-18, and has a reticle that doesn’t suck is too much to ask for… I mean, they exist, sort of, but seem to be at the very high end of the market or at the lower end (nothing against the Athalon, as I haven’t tried it).

I have the Athlon, and for the mil discount price, I think it’s worth it. I like the MRAD reticle (usable across the whole range), decent eye box, everything feels sturdy and tight, and the image is actually fairly bright and well defined even at higher mag. I’d prefer to replace it with a similar optic from a manufacturer I trust more, but it will do for now until a replacement comes around that actually checks all the feature boxes I want.

 

[fdkay]

I have the Athlon, and for the mil discount price, I think it’s worth it. I like the MRAD reticle (usable across the whole range), decent eye box, everything feels sturdy and tight, and the image is actually fairly bright and well defined even at higher mag. I’d prefer to replace it with a similar optic from a manufacturer I trust more, but it will do for now until a replacement comes around that actually checks all the feature boxes I want.

The swampfox 2-12 has a more precision friendly reticle and is likely from the same oem. Many of the reviews online are very positive, much like the Athlon reviews. I believe @C_Does did a review of the swampfox.
He was very impressed with the Athlon as well

Here it is:

 

[Whistlepigs]

As soon as you’re not at an exact 100 yard range increment it’s a moot point and you’re running a calculation anyway. Nevermind the fact that MOA isn’t exactly an inch per hundred yards and just happens to end up somewhat close.

As far as using it to measure accuracy you’re measuring it in inches and then converting it to MOA. You can do the same damn thing with mils.

MOA is dumb as fuck.

So what exactly make mills so much better than moa?

I could care less which one I use unless I am spotting for someone, do wish we had just one, but I could care less which one, the do the same thing.

 

[PappyM3]

So what exactly make mills so much better than moa?

I could care less which one I use unless I am spotting for someone, do wish we had just one, but I could care less which one, the do the same thing.

The numbers are easier to work with. They’re lower and tenths in decimals is easier to use.

Would you rather tell someone to dial (or have to count on tree reticle) 33 and 1/4 MOA… or 9.7 mil.

Couple it with many ballistic calculators tell you drops in tenths for MOA even though your turrets will be in 1/4 or 1/2. So you’ll likely need to adjust it to the nearest .25.

1/4 MOA is technically finer than 0.1 mil, but the difference is extremely minimal. At 100 yards:
1/4 MOA = 0.26”
0.1 mil = 0.36”
For me, a tenth of an inch isn’t worth it over the simplicity of working with lower numbers and tenths.

Then there are further benefits if you’re comfortable with centimeters and meters.

 

[st1650]

Speed drop factor and Gun MPH method is reasons alone why MRAD is superior.

 

[beetroot]

Yeap. Have been looking for something mid-power-ish, but apparently a scope that: is lightweight, is somewhere between 2-12 and 3-18, and has a reticle that doesn’t suck is too much to ask for… I mean, they exist, sort of, but seem to be at the very high end of the market or at the lower end (nothing against the Athalon, as I haven’t tried it).

What is your definition of light weight and reticle that does suck?

 

[beetroot]

Speed drop factor and Gun MPH method is reasons alone why MRAD is superior.

Gun MPH number was the reason I finally ditched MOA completely.

That and the smaller number thing.

MOA tree reticles suck ass, with MIL your always known it'll be a whole Mil has mark regardless of reticle (with finer ones in between obviouslt).
If it's MOA the main hashes could be 1, 2 or 4 MOA depending on the scope.

The smaller numbers make drop/dope charts a lot tidier and quicker to read also.

 

[VandelayIndustries]

I think Elon musk will get a rocket to Pluto before a company gets a mpvo right, another swing and miss.

 

[Whistlepigs]

The numbers are easier to work with. They’re lower and tenths in decimals is easier to use.

Would you rather tell someone to dial (or have to count on tree reticle) 33 and 1/4 MOA… or 9.7 mil.

Couple it with many ballistic calculators tell you drops in tenths for MOA even though your turrets will be in 1/4 or 1/2. So you’ll likely need to adjust it to the nearest .25.

1/4 MOA is technically finer than 0.1 mil, but the difference is extremely minimal. At 100 yards:
1/4 MOA = 0.26”
0.1 mil = 0.36”
For me, a tenth of an inch isn’t worth it over the simplicity of working with lower numbers and tenths.

Then there are further benefits if you’re comfortable with centimeters and meters.

I completely understand the difference between the 2....but saying it is easier to say 9.7 or 33.25........This is where I disagree and say it makes no difference.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

I completely understand the difference between the 2....but saying it is easier to say 9.7 or 33.25........This is where I disagree and say it makes no difference.

You’re very much in the minority on that thought process.

A simple exercise to prove yourself wrong is to make a dope chart for your rifle in 100 yard increments for both and see what your hit ratios are doing quick and dirty estimations for distances between those. It’s so much easier for your brain to process lower numbers in the tenths it’s not even funny.

 

[Whistlepigs]

You’re very much in the minority on that thought process.

A simple exercise to prove yourself wrong is to make a dope chart for your rifle in 100 yard increments for both and see what your hit ratios are doing quick and dirty estimations for distances between those. It’s so much easier for your brain to process lower numbers in the tenths it’s not even funny.

Maybe I am in the minority, I deal with angles daily for the last 30 years.

I really think it is just a matter of what you are use to though. Same thing with wind calls. Find where 5moa work with your gun at 5mph and you you can do same thing.

Reticles.....make moa reticles with large marks at 5moa and 4 small ticks in between.....

It is all the same thing.

Saying all that, I will repeat myself and say I wish there was just one and it might as well be mrad at this point in time.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

I learned on mil/moa and moa/moa optics quite a while ago when “CM” scopes were weird European sorcery and was basically limited to S&B and a couple others. When I got my first mil scope it was so much simpler to use even though everything I knew was MOA. You’ll never convince me it doesn’t matter which you use or that they are equal because I know better.

 

[beetroot]

I think Elon musk will get a rocket to Pluto before a company gets a mpvo right, another swing and miss.

I disagree, they didn't even swing for this one. Just regurgitated another fudd optic.

 

[Maverick3009]

that THIS will finally be the "year of the MPVO"...and that at least some are worth a fuck

Steve Fisher (Sentinel Concepts) made a post on his instagram a few weeks ago that he was approached by a optic manufacturer early last year and asked what he wanted in a gas gun optic. He says that he told them "FFP, 2-12, 34mm (but they made it 30mm), good reticle, good turrets, good illumination and parallax dial. 33.5oz (w/ mount) and 12in long. Says it'll be announced at Shot Show but he wouldn't state who was offering it yet.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

He missed the most important feature... great quality control. Won't be surprised if it's another chinese or phillipino POS.

 

[Maverick3009]

He missed the most important feature... great quality control. Won't be surprised if it's another chinese or phillipino POS.

I would think/hope if he's talking about it or advertising it then it's someone who's already got that covered but we'll see in a couple weeks here. By the looks of the pictures he posted I see parts that make me think Bushnell or Kahles, can't tell definitively though.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

I would think/hope if he's talking about it or advertising it then it's someone who's already got that covered but we'll see in a couple weeks here. By the looks of the pictures he posted I see parts that make me think Bushnell or Kahles, can't tell definitively though.

2-12x24… an excellent 2mm exit pupil on the top end LOL. Another swing and a miss.

I swear scopes must be designed by people who have never used one before.

 

[PappyM3]

2-12x24… an excellent 2mm exit pupil on the top end LOL. Another swing and a miss.

I swear scopes must be designed by people who have never used one before.

Man. WTF? It has parallax adjustment and doesn’t have a 1x, so I see zero reason for limiting the objective lens like that.

Also, it does not have a 1x, yet is marked as an LPVO. I do not think that means what they think it means. Maybe he’s getting the April fools joke started early this year.

 

[thehun]

Steve Fisher (Sentinel Concepts) made a post on his instagram a few weeks ago that he was approached by a optic manufacturer early last year and asked what he wanted in a gas gun optic. He says that he told them "FFP, 2-12, 34mm (but they made it 30mm), good reticle, good turrets, good illumination and parallax dial. 33.5oz (w/ mount) and 12in long. Says it'll be announced at Shot Show but he wouldn't state who was offering it yet.

33 oz 2-12 ... might as well setup up and get a better optic with that weight requirement ... this is something Leupold needs to re-examine and re-release their 3.5-10 Mk4 optics to the public with an updated reticle ... it was light and very usable ...

 

[PappyM3]

33 oz 2-12 ... might as well setup up and get a better optic with that weight requirement ... this is something Leupold needs to re-examine and re-release their 3.5-10 Mk4 optics to the public with an updated reticle ... it was light and very usable ...

Likely a 26oz 2-12. It says the 33 is with the mount.

 

[thehun]

2-12x24… an excellent 2mm exit pupil on the top end LOL. Another swing and a miss.

I swear scopes must be designed by people who have never used one before.

Just by the turret design language and anodizing ... it appears to be Chinese made ...

 

[beetroot]

24mm objective is dumb as hell.

Must be a new Leupold model.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Man. WTF? It has parallax adjustment and doesn’t have a 1x, so I see zero reason for limiting the objective lens like that.

Also, it does not have a 1x, yet is marked as an LPVO. I do not think that means what they think it means. Maybe he’s getting the April fools joke started early this year.

Yep absolutely retarded, and dude bragged on his IG about it instead of just sending it right back and asking what the fuck is this abortion...

Just by the turret design language and anodizing ... it appears to be Chinese made ...

Might as well just buy the Athlon at that point. Aside from being chinesium at least they got the rest of the design right.

 

[beetroot]

33 oz 2-12 ... might as well setup up and get a better optic with that weight requirement ... this is something Leupold needs to re-examine and re-release their 3.5-10 Mk4 optics to the public with an updated reticle ... it was light and very usable ...

I could be down for a lightweight FFP 3.5-10. Sure 2-12 would be nice but not if it has to weigh 28oz and sacrifice the optics (FOV, contrast, depth of field etc).

 

[thehun]

Likely a 26oz 2-12. It says the 33 is with the mount.

At that weight spec ... I'd rather just get a Razor LHT 3-15x42 MRAD ... 19 oz naked ... with LW mount its below 26 oz with excellent optics ...heck you could afford to install piggy back red dot and probably still beat 33 oz and have 1-15x capability ...

 

[redneckbmxer24]

The reticle in the 3-15 LHT is ass for holds unless you're somewhere that wind doesn't exist.

A Swaro Z3 is even lighter, has bomb ass glass and can be had with a very simple yet effective mil based tree reticle with wind brackets. I've got two of the things and they rock. If nobody can do better than a 2-12x24 "LPVO" or a Eotech made for tactical bubbas I'll probably be going that route again.

 

[koshkin]

2-12x24 is an unusual configuration. I have a 3-12x24 scope on one of my airguns and it works very well overall, but that one is a somewhat specialized "no eye relief" design for guns with no recoil.

By not going down to 1x, the design can be a bit simpler and a smaller objective helps with depth of field. It is definitely detrimental in low light. I am a little mystified that they called LPVO. LPVO sorta means it is 1x or close to it on the low end. 2x is not close to it.

Hopefully, I'll see it at SHOT.

With MPVOs, there is a slow emergence of a couple of different options. One on side, there are the scopes with 40-44mm objectives: March 1.5-15x42, Blackhound 2-12x44, Athlon 2-12x42. On the other side is the Mark 5 2-10x30 that I liked a lot more than I thought I would.

If you are on a budget, Athlon kicks ass. There are a couple of things I will try to get them to change, but they are minor.

March is quite good, but expensive. There are compromises to the 10x erector, but on balance it works very well.

Leupold needs a better reticle to take off, I think.

ILya

 

[dms416]

Steve Fisher (Sentinel Concepts) made a post on his instagram a few weeks ago that he was approached by a optic manufacturer early last year and asked what he wanted in a gas gun optic. He says that he told them "FFP, 2-12, 34mm (but they made it 30mm), good reticle, good turrets, good illumination and parallax dial. 33.5oz (w/ mount) and 12in long. Says it'll be announced at Shot Show but he wouldn't state who was offering it yet.

I appreciate Steve's no-BS take on the industry he's been in for longer than I've been alive, and I've learned much from him in regards to shooting/teaching over the years. That said, some of his selection choices are a bit...odd. Dude's got safes full of stuff and having KAC, SOLGS, Nighthawk, and Chambers at his call, so if he wants to slum it up with some Chi/Fil shit on a fudd rifle and a Taurus pistola cause he can...more power to him. If his (*any piece of kit), he's going to get taken care of... The rest of us need to consider that.


A 12x top end 24mm objective WITH parallax...yeah, fuck that noise.

After failing with Ultra Shorts and ATACR's and experimenting with a 3-15x50 Theta Marksman on a small-frame gasser, I'm circling back to a 10-12x cap and am getting more comfortable all the time with 8-10x and NO parallax adustment.

 

[st1650]

For Small frame AR
Give me a modernized Leupold VXR patrol with better glass, 16oz-18oz and a 4x erector ratio. Fiber optic illum, a non retarded reticle, capped windage, exposed locking elevation MK5 style turret.