LPVO + Dot question

[ut755ln]

I have almost universally run Eotech holographic sites, sometimes with magnifiers. I am pretty good to go with this unit to 300 yards but the limitations of the system become pretty apparent as you extend in range. I have been looking at and messing with various LPVO optics. The ones that I have hands on experience with are the Vortex Razor 1x6, the Primary Arms PLC 1x8, The Nightforce NXS 1x8, and the Eotech VUDU 1x10.

The purpose of the LPVO is for better ID of the target and to extend my competency range. I shoot pigs and predators and the day optic will be paired with a clip on thermal device (MH25). So here comes the question, would I be better off with something like a 2x10 for better eye box and just attaching a red dot to the top of the scope or canted?

I so far have not really been happy with any of the above scopes in terms of a do it all solution. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

 

[FRESHPRINCE556]

I've got to say that the more I run a scope with a piggy back red dot the more I dig the setup . The caveat being that the scope has to have low enough turrets to see the piggy back red dot without using a riser, in order to be able to get a chin weld on the stock . I was just shooting a few days ago with an atacr 4-16 with piggy back 509t from 300yds to 10yds in, and scope with piggy back set up worked really well for me. I just don't think there
is a really good 2-10 mpvo option out there for the price right now that allows the use of a piggy back sight vs a lpvo with a piggy back . My vote for you based on the current options for your use case with a clip on would be an lpvo with piggyback until a better mpvo option comes out.

 

[Birddog6424]

I run this rig on my wolf/lion hunting rifle. This is an old photo, I've had this set up for 4 or 5 years. Still have the rifle which is a 6.5 Creedmoor gas gun, currently running an illuminated 3-18 XTRIII with this offset red dot.

Works great, zero issues. The scope is perfect for my needs and the dot is there for close proximity heavy timber.

Edited to fix photos

 

[Malum Prohibitum]

I run this rig on my wolf/lion hunting rifle. This is an old photo, I've had this set up for 4 or 5 years. Still have the rifle which is a 6.5 Creedmoor gas gun, currently running an illuminated 3-18 XTRIII with this offset red dot.

Works great, zero issues. The scope is perfect for my needs and the dot is there for close proximity heavy timber.

No photo shows up

 

[Birddog6424]

No photo shows up

Fixed it

This dot and mount allows for a simple 45 degree cant. I still have a cheek weld, and the size of the turrets and objective lens are irrelevant. It works on everything.

 

[roostercogburn98]

Step up to a 2 or 2.5 base mag scope. Maybe like a 2.5-10.

 

[FatBoy]

IMO, if you’re not going to use the LPVO at 1x, get an MPVO and red dot piggyback . Even at 4x a scope is fairly easy to shoot both eyes open. Caveat is make sure the reticle fits your need.

 

[ZA206]

NX8 2.5-20X with an offset red dot is a pretty wicked “do all” combo. This one I built has a Proof CF 16” barrel and is a freaking laser. If I could only have one rifle, this one might be it (and I’ve got 3 other AR rifles with NX8 1-8x, Razor G3 1-10x and and Trijicon TR24)… so speaking from experience.

 

[theLBC]

some feedback here if eyebox is the priority.

Rifle Scopes - LVPO with the best eye box?

I’m working on a new AR build, and would like to top it with a quality LVPO, something that’s extremely quick and easy to get behind. LVPO’s are something I’m fairly inexperienced with, and I trust the opinions of the hide more so than most other places. I’ve heard nothing but good things...

www.snipershide.com

 

[FRESHPRINCE556]

NX8 2.5-20X with an offset red dot is a pretty wicked “do all” combo. This one I built has a Proof CF 16” barrel and is a freaking laser. If I could only have one rifle, this one might be it (and I’ve got 3 other AR rifles with NX8 1-8x, Razor G3 1-10x and and Trijicon TR24)… so speaking from experience.

View attachment 8387477


View attachment 8387478

How do you like the larue rmr offset mount compared to a standard 45 degree off set mount ? Looks like the larue offset mount you have is more of a 70 degree angle.

 

[Malum Prohibitum]

NX8 2.5-20X with an offset red dot is a pretty wicked “do all” combo. This one I built has a Proof CF 16” barrel and is a freaking laser. If I could only have one rifle, this one might be it (and I’ve got 3 other AR rifles with NX8 1-8x, Razor G3 1-10x and and Trijicon TR24)… so speaking from experience.

View attachment 8387477


View attachment 8387478

How does the carbon fiber barrel act when you put a lot of rounds through it, and it gets hot?

 

[ut755ln]

NX8 2.5-20X with an offset red dot is a pretty wicked “do all” combo. This one I built has a Proof CF 16” barrel and is a freaking laser. If I could only have one rifle, this one might be it (and I’ve got 3 other AR rifles with NX8 1-8x, Razor G3 1-10x and and Trijicon TR24)… so speaking from experience.

View attachment 8387477


View attachment 8387478

How do you like the riflespeed adjustable gas block?

 

[Bcamos]

IMO, if you’re not going to use the LPVO at 1x, get an MPVO and red dot piggyback . Even at 4x a scope is fairly easy to shoot both eyes open. Caveat is make sure the reticle fits your need.

As someone with a 1-4 with piggyback dot, I agree. The dot saves me when transitioning from a far target and a close target, but if my LPVO is set to 1x, then the dot doesn't even exist to me.

 

[ZA206]

How do you like the larue rmr offset mount compared to a standard 45 degree off set mount ? Looks like the larue offset mount you have is more of a 70 degree angle.

I like it so far, but I don’t have experience with standard 45 deg mounts. I can keep my chin on the stock with the LaRue and get the dot up fast. The rifles profile didn’t really get any wider with it on there. Very compact setup.

 

[ZA206]

How does the carbon fiber barrel act when you put a lot of rounds through it, and it gets hot?

The carbon fiber sheds heat fast, which can create more mirage faster than a standard barrel, so that can be an issue when shooting a lot through the scope. On the flip side, it does cool much faster, so the mirage goes away faster. I haven’t noticed the barrel losing accuracy due to heat.

 

[ZA206]

How do you like the riflespeed adjustable gas block?

It’s awesome, but you gotta be careful with your choice of rails, it won’t fit under a lot of the skinny rails. I’ve got it on another precision AR, they are excellent. I wish they made one for .875” journals…

 

[Malum Prohibitum]

How do you like the larue rmr offset mount compared to a standard 45 degree off set mount ? Looks like the larue offset mount you have is more of a 70 degree angle.

I like it so far, but I don’t have experience with standard 45 deg mounts. I can keep my chin on the stock with the LaRue and get the dot up fast. The rifles profile didn’t really get any wider with it on there. Very compact setup.

Looks like a neat setup.

I haven't tried it, but it looks like you would not need to move the rifle as much to use it.

 

[Glassaholic]

I have almost universally run Eotech holographic sites, sometimes with magnifiers. I am pretty good to go with this unit to 300 yards but the limitations of the system become pretty apparent as you extend in range. I have been looking at and messing with various LPVO optics. The ones that I have hands on experience with are the Vortex Razor 1x6, the Primary Arms PLC 1x8, The Nightforce NXS 1x8, and the Eotech VUDU 1x10.

The purpose of the LPVO is for better ID of the target and to extend my competency range. I shoot pigs and predators and the day optic will be paired with a clip on thermal device (MH25). So here comes the question, would I be better off with something like a 2x10 for better eye box and just attaching a red dot to the top of the scope or canted?

I so far have not really been happy with any of the above scopes in terms of a do it all solution. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

You are not alone. Lot's of shooters opting for MPVO and mid-range scope with offset/piggyback RDS. Most LPVO's have fixed parallax (usually around 100-150y) which doesn't make for the best experience out past 500. So if you're looking at a DMR style gasser which capabilities out to 1000 or beyond then the MPVO with RDS makes a lot of sense. While the LPVO is optimized for 1x use, the MPVO is optimized for higher magnification as well as distance (those with adjustable side focus), that along with the typically larger objective provides for potentially better eyebox and lowlight experience. The downside of the combo is more weight, but a well balanced MPVO shouldn't throw you off too much.

This year my main DMR rifle has the March 1.5-15x42 with offset Leupold DPP, my SPR is using an Athlon Helos 2-12x42 with piggyback Holosun EPS so I'm curious how I'll like these combos as the year progresses.

The new ZCO 2-10x30 intrigues me, I think this might be a stellar MPVO option with offset RDS for those who are not that happy with the 1-10 LPVO performance at distance. Leupold also has a Mark 5 2-10x30 but the ZCO has considerably wider FOV (published) and I'll go out on a very sturdy limb and say the ZCO will likely perform better optically than the Leupy, but we'll have to wait and see. To be a "compelling" MPVO it has got to have a reticle that performs just as good at the bottom magnification as well as the top and this is where a lot of mfr's (like Leupold) have struggled. To date, the best MPVO's with reticles that work high and low, IMO, are the Athlon with AHMR2, March with DF-TR2B (dual focal plane) and now the new ZCO with HTR. Steiner has their new H6Xi 2-12x42 coming with a mil reticle but I fear this may follow the same path as many other attempts at an MPVO and fail in the reticle department, hopefully not but we'll have to wait and see.

@Burdy has a lot of experience and competes regularly so has some great user experience with multiple configurations.

 

[ut755ln]

You are not alone. Lot's of shooters opting for MPVO and mid-range scope with offset/piggyback RDS. Most LPVO's have fixed parallax (usually around 100-150y) which doesn't make for the best experience out past 500. So if you're looking at a DMR style gasser which capabilities out to 1000 or beyond then the MPVO with RDS makes a lot of sense. While the LPVO is optimized for 1x use, the MPVO is optimized for higher magnification as well as distance (those with adjustable side focus), that along with the typically larger objective provides for potentially better eyebox and lowlight experience. The downside of the combo is more weight, but a well balanced MPVO shouldn't throw you off too much.

This year my main DMR rifle has the March 1.5-15x42 with offset Leupold DPP, my SPR is using an Athlon Helos 2-12x42 with piggyback Holosun EPS so I'm curious how I'll like these combos as the year progresses.

The new ZCO 2-10x30 intrigues me, I think this might be a stellar MPVO option with offset RDS for those who are not that happy with the 1-10 LPVO performance at distance. Leupold also has a Mark 5 2-10x30 but the ZCO has considerably wider FOV (published) and I'll go out on a very sturdy limb and say the ZCO will likely perform better optically than the Leupy, but we'll have to wait and see. To be a "compelling" MPVO it has got to have a reticle that performs just as good at the bottom magnification as well as the top and this is where a lot of mfr's (like Leupold) have struggled. To date, the best MPVO's with reticles that work high and low, IMO, are the Athlon with AHMR2, March with DF-TR2B (dual focal plane) and now the new ZCO with HTR. Steiner has their new H6Xi 2-12x42 coming with a mil reticle but I fear this may follow the same path as many other attempts at an MPVO and fail in the reticle department, hopefully not but we'll have to wait and see.

@Burdy has a lot of experience and competes regularly so has some great user experience with multiple configurations.

Thank you for responding.

I had really high hopes for the Leupold and was completely underwhelmed by the reticle choices. I got to try the Primary Arms GLX and it is okay for the money but the glass and light transmission wasn't that great. I do like the Nightforce 4-16 ATACR but it is a little bit bigger scope then I wanted. After talking to you in DMs and a couple of others, I am on the waiting list for the ZCO 2-10. While I wait for its release, I have a 1-8 ATACR with a top mount red dot that is doing okay but to your point, the lack of a parallax adjustment is what is throwing me. It is great 450 yards and in for me and then I start having different issues. One is focus at longer ranges, the other is the reticle obscuring targets sometimes.

 

[Malum Prohibitum]

Steiner has their new H6Xi 2-12x42 coming with a mil reticle but I fear this may follow the same path as many other attempts at an MPVO and fail in the reticle department, hopefully not but we'll have to wait and see.

I didn't even know about this scope until your post - I am excited to check it out.

 

[Burdy]

You are not alone. Lot's of shooters opting for MPVO and mid-range scope with offset/piggyback RDS. Most LPVO's have fixed parallax (usually around 100-150y) which doesn't make for the best experience out past 500. So if you're looking at a DMR style gasser which capabilities out to 1000 or beyond then the MPVO with RDS makes a lot of sense. While the LPVO is optimized for 1x use, the MPVO is optimized for higher magnification as well as distance (those with adjustable side focus), that along with the typically larger objective provides for potentially better eyebox and lowlight experience. The downside of the combo is more weight, but a well balanced MPVO shouldn't throw you off too much.

This year my main DMR rifle has the March 1.5-15x42 with offset Leupold DPP, my SPR is using an Athlon Helos 2-12x42 with piggyback Holosun EPS so I'm curious how I'll like these combos as the year progresses.

The new ZCO 2-10x30 intrigues me, I think this might be a stellar MPVO option with offset RDS for those who are not that happy with the 1-10 LPVO performance at distance. Leupold also has a Mark 5 2-10x30 but the ZCO has considerably wider FOV (published) and I'll go out on a very sturdy limb and say the ZCO will likely perform better optically than the Leupy, but we'll have to wait and see. To be a "compelling" MPVO it has got to have a reticle that performs just as good at the bottom magnification as well as the top and this is where a lot of mfr's (like Leupold) have struggled. To date, the best MPVO's with reticles that work high and low, IMO, are the Athlon with AHMR2, March with DF-TR2B (dual focal plane) and now the new ZCO with HTR. Steiner has their new H6Xi 2-12x42 coming with a mil reticle but I fear this may follow the same path as many other attempts at an MPVO and fail in the reticle department, hopefully not but we'll have to wait and see.

@Burdy has a lot of experience and competes regularly so has some great user experience with multiple configurations.

We all know the struggle with finding the right MPVO. At this point, I've given up until someone slaps me in the head with the perfect optic. I'm a bit different than others as I don't want parallax on my "work/battle/shtf" rifle. I don't like to fiddle with it under stress.

I sent my Dual CC short dot in to S&B and had the parallax moved to 300 METERS which leaves me basically with this, which is the beauty of a 24mm objective.

Yards vs Inches of parallax error:
100 0.091
200 0.184
300 0.040
400 0.104
500 0.248
600 0.392
700 0.536
800 0.680
900 0.824
1000 0.968
The worst it can get is double these numbers, regardless of eye/reticle placement.

8x mag is plenty for dynamic work at any of those distances so for me the MPVO w/ PA adjustment would likely be more suited toward a more precision based platform like a short action AR-10 or similar or a bolt gun that performs dual hunt/comp duty.

As always, use case is nearly everything and how you prefer to execute that use case is the rest.

Edit: I should also mention that the Dual CC also solves the problem of target obscurity at high magnification.

 

[Glassaholic]

We all know the struggle with finding the right MPVO. At this point, I've given up until someone slaps me in the head with the perfect optic. I'm a bit different than others as I don't want parallax on my "work/battle/shtf" rifle. I don't like to fiddle with it under stress.

I sent my Dual CC short dot in to S&B and had the parallax moved to 300 METERS which leaves me basically with this, which is the beauty of a 24mm objective.

Yards vs Inches of parallax error:
100 0.091
200 0.184
300 0.040
400 0.104
500 0.248
600 0.392
700 0.536
800 0.680
900 0.824
1000 0.968
The worst it can get is double these numbers, regardless of eye/reticle placement.

8x mag is plenty for dynamic work at any of those distances so for me the MPVO w/ PA adjustment would likely be more suited toward a more precision based platform like a short action AR-10 or similar or a bolt gun that performs dual hunt/comp duty.

As always, use case is nearly everything and how you prefer to execute that use case is the rest.

Edit: I should also mention that the Dual CC also solves the problem of target obscurity at high magnification.

As always a learning opportunity with you. Your comments make me wonder if Vortex would do something similar with their RG3 1-10, if so that could make me rethink that scope.

 

[FatBoy]

We all know the struggle with finding the right MPVO. At this point, I've given up until someone slaps me in the head with the perfect optic. I'm a bit different than others as I don't want parallax on my "work/battle/shtf" rifle. I don't like to fiddle with it under stress.

This is why I moved away from my Leupold 3-10 M3 and to the compact Nightforce scopes. Target and reticle is in focus from like 25 yards to infinity and parallax is easily solved for longer shots if needed with scope shadow. For fast shooting I don’t want to fuck with parallax or a compromised sight picture and these work for me.

Only downside is the SFP and holdovers at 10x only.

 

[Burdy]

As always a learning opportunity with you. Your comments make me wonder if Vortex would do something similar with their RG3 1-10, if so that could make me rethink that scope.

Hmm, not sure. Something tells me no because it might have to go back to Japan? But would be good to know. S&B turned mine around in like 7 days from the day I shipped it out and charged me $118. As for the RG3, this is where it currently stands. Again, your worst case scenario is 2x these numbers.

Range (yards)​	Error (mm)​	Error (mil)​	Error (inches)​	Error (moa)​
100​	4.000​	0.044​	0.157​	0.150​
200​	4.000​	0.022​	0.157​	0.075​
300​	12.000​	0.044​	0.472​	0.150​
400​	20.000​	0.055​	0.787​	0.188​
500​	28.000​	0.061​	1.102​	0.211​
600​	36.000​	0.066​	1.417​	0.226​
700​	44.000​	0.069​	1.732​	0.236​
800​	52.000​	0.071​	2.047​	0.244​
900​	60.000​	0.073​	2.362​	0.251​
1000​	68.000​	0.074​	2.677​	0.256​

The full chart for a 300 yard setting on the RG3 is below:

Range (yards)​	Error (mm)​	Error (mil)​	Error (inches)​	Error (moa)​
100​	8.000​	0.087​	0.315​	0.301​
200​	4.000​	0.022​	0.157​	0.075​
300​	0.000​	0.000​	0.000​	0.000​
400​	4.000​	0.011​	0.157​	0.038​
500​	8.000​	0.017​	0.315​	0.060​
600​	12.000​	0.022​	0.472​	0.075​
700​	16.000​	0.025​	0.630​	0.086​
800​	20.000​	0.027​	0.787​	0.094​
900​	24.000​	0.029​	0.945​	0.100​
1000​	28.000​	0.031​	1.102​	0.105​

 

[Glassaholic]

Hmm, not sure. Something tells me no because it might have to go back to Japan? But would be good to know. S&B turned mine around in like 7 days from the day I shipped it out and charged me $118. As for the RG3, this is where it currently stands. Again, your worst case scenario is 2x these numbers.

​

Range (yards)​	Error (mm)​	Error (mil)​	Error (inches)​	Error (moa)​
100​	4.000​	0.044​	0.157​	0.150​
200​	4.000​	0.022​	0.157​	0.075​
300​	12.000​	0.044​	0.472​	0.150​
400​	20.000​	0.055​	0.787​	0.188​
500​	28.000​	0.061​	1.102​	0.211​
600​	36.000​	0.066​	1.417​	0.226​
700​	44.000​	0.069​	1.732​	0.236​
800​	52.000​	0.071​	2.047​	0.244​
900​	60.000​	0.073​	2.362​	0.251​
1000​	68.000​	0.074​	2.677​	0.256​

The full chart for a 300 yard setting on the RG3 is below:

​

Range (yards)​	Error (mm)​	Error (mil)​	Error (inches)​	Error (moa)​
100​	8.000​	0.087​	0.315​	0.301​
200​	4.000​	0.022​	0.157​	0.075​
300​	0.000​	0.000​	0.000​	0.000​
400​	4.000​	0.011​	0.157​	0.038​
500​	8.000​	0.017​	0.315​	0.060​
600​	12.000​	0.022​	0.472​	0.075​
700​	16.000​	0.025​	0.630​	0.086​
800​	20.000​	0.027​	0.787​	0.094​
900​	24.000​	0.029​	0.945​	0.100​
1000​	28.000​	0.031​	1.102​	0.105​

Thanks for that. I will inquire with Vortex. Good to know about parallax error but I’m also hoping a 300y fixed will help with image focus beyond 500, I just felt the RG3 was lacking in IQ at distance.

 

[NC_Libertarian]

We all know the struggle with finding the right MPVO. At this point, I've given up until someone slaps me in the head with the perfect optic. I'm a bit different than others as I don't want parallax on my "work/battle/shtf" rifle. I don't like to fiddle with it under stress.

I sent my Dual CC short dot in to S&B and had the parallax moved to 300 METERS which leaves me basically with this, which is the beauty of a 24mm objective.

Yards vs Inches of parallax error:
100 0.091
200 0.184
300 0.040
400 0.104
500 0.248
600 0.392
700 0.536
800 0.680
900 0.824
1000 0.968
The worst it can get is double these numbers, regardless of eye/reticle placement.

8x mag is plenty for dynamic work at any of those distances so for me the MPVO w/ PA adjustment would likely be more suited toward a more precision based platform like a short action AR-10 or similar or a bolt gun that performs dual hunt/comp duty.

As always, use case is nearly everything and how you prefer to execute that use case is the rest.

Edit: I should also mention that the Dual CC also solves the problem of target obscurity at high magnification.

Reading this brings up a question that maybe you can clarify for me:

I get not desiring a scope that requires fiddling with parallax under stress. But what is the difference between having an adjustable parallax and set/forget at 300yds to a fixed parallax at 300yds?


BTW: I much prefer adjustable parallax because my eyes almost never like fixed at longer distances, like 300-400 and up. Mayb e if I had parallax settings more like what you suggested here, I wouldn't have as much dislike for them.

 

[Burdy]

Reading this brings up a question that maybe you can clarify for me:

I get not desiring a scope that requires fiddling with parallax under stress. But what is the difference between having an adjustable parallax and set/forget at 300yds to a fixed parallax at 300yds?


BTW: I much prefer adjustable parallax because my eyes almost never like fixed at longer distances, like 300-400 and up. Mayb e if I had parallax settings more like what you suggested here, I wouldn't have as much dislike for them.

The real difference is that the parallax adjustable scope is likely to have a larger objective than 24mm (like my lpvo) and therefore would/could be a bit more sensitive to it's depth of field. So you may set parallax at 300, but your image of the target at 500 or 700 might not be crisp unless you made a parallax adjustment. Also the potential parallax error is larger with increasing objective size.

 

[LRRPF52]

This is probably the best discussion on LPVOs and Red Dots I’ve heard so far:



Cliff Notes: For close range, RDS is superior.

For distance-shooting, no need for a 1x variable power optic

For long guns with larger dedicated variable power optics, the MRDS mounted makes sense.

45 offset dots get caught on everything, vehicles, barricades, helicopters, any snag hazards.

 

[FatBoy]

This is probably the best discussion on LPVOs and Red Dots I’ve heard so far:



Cliff Notes: For close range, RDS is superior.

For distance-shooting, no need for a 1x variable power optic

For long guns with larger dedicated variable power optics, the MRDS mounted makes sense.

45 offset dots get caught on everything, vehicles, barricades, helicopters, any snag hazards.

I watched this the other day, and though I respect the fuck out of these guys, I think it really depends on the game. we shoot (Outlaw 3 gun on natural terrain/bays) little poppers at 100-150 yards, 2-3” swingers out to 100 and steel out to 600. Red dots CAN get it done, but I have yet to see a guy do it faster than an LPVO/piggy back combo. (I am admittedly not shooting at the level or frequency of these guys but we do have sponsored shooters)

They also specifically discussed offset dots. I agree that the blind spot the LPVO tube creates sucks, and it’s one of the reasons I went to a top mount dot you get none of that, albeit with the cost of a 4.25” HOB, which isn’t ideal.


I love these little sofit clips, but they tend to drift a little around topics, mixing in competition and real work shit. You saw this big time on the live last week. Our competition isn’t like real world shit, and the LPVO seems to be an advantage in our situation . No doubt any of yes guys would smoke my ass, but I suspect it would mostly be time they saved with the pistol and superior stage planning .

Edit. I do agree LPVO, MPVO are equal with the piggyback.

 

[Burdy]

I've been preaching piggy-backed dots on this forum for years.

I don't believe the combo can be beat for a fighting rifle in which you do not know the scenario.

 

[Glassaholic]

I've been preaching piggy-backed dots on this forum for years.

I don't believe the combo can be beat for a fighting rifle in which you do not know the scenario.

Yes you have, I think it was some of your early posts which got me to even consider piggyback... Preach it brother!

 

[ut755ln]

This is probably the best discussion on LPVOs and Red Dots I’ve heard so far:



Cliff Notes: For close range, RDS is superior.

For distance-shooting, no need for a 1x variable power optic

For long guns with larger dedicated variable power optics, the MRDS mounted makes sense.

45 offset dots get caught on everything, vehicles, barricades, helicopters, any snag hazards.

Thanks for linking the video. I personally like the holographic more then the dots for close because you don't have to be perfectly lined up behind the optic for them to work.