Your logic has no place on The Hide. Get out of here!!!!
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Speed of LPVO vs Red Dot
- Thread starter tspinaker
- Start date
I can't tell you if it's faster or not for you, but it's what I use on my gasser over a 1x. PA 1-6 with ACSS for 7.62x39/300. Was out with buddy zeroing his thermal last night shooting until total darkness he had a 1x red dot and fell in love with the PA as we started shooting offhand from 50, 100, 150 and 200. I think both are great options, but for us these are also hog/yote guns which will get pulled out of the truck in a quick second so having some more mag can be helpful when a dog is crossing a field further out. He'll probably stick with red dot, but he wasn't shy about putting a couple of mags through my 1-6! Going to test out the rest of the reticle subtensions next time to see how well they mate up with my Wolf 123g HP....should be pretty darn close to perfect as far as stated velo/weight for reticle design.
Last edited:
The pro 3 gunners don't seem to be slowed down enough with their LPVO's to be concerned, right???
Bad guy surprises me at home - I'm far far from being able to give advise but if "I think" I can't get my AR up to the shoulder fast enough then I'm dispensing lead from the hip at 4 to 5 per second. That being said I live on a property that borders the FS on 3 sides. This might be a horrible idea in an apartment complex, etc....
Otherwise I shoot my AR enough at longer distances that using a plain RD would be a silly idea. Love 8x for this.
At a friends range, from the hip, we shoot 22 rifles and 22 pistols, but also the combat pistols, going as fast as we can, all on steel. This is a highly instinctual affair but after a while it's not hard hitting chest sized targets, or slightly smaller ones, 10-15 yards away. The guy that owns this range is pretty interesting to watch doing this because he's been practicing for half his adult life, he's relatively fast, and accurate enough with his 9mm carbine to clean a plate rack at 12 yards away when he's dialed in.
My local club started having a 3 gun match last year. I know for me personally I shot higher scores as soon as I tried my Burris XTR2 1-8 FFP vs the RD I previously used. I found that I could see where I missed or hit easier using magnification and well there's hash's for holdovers and holdoffs.
Bad guy surprises me at home - I'm far far from being able to give advise but if "I think" I can't get my AR up to the shoulder fast enough then I'm dispensing lead from the hip at 4 to 5 per second. That being said I live on a property that borders the FS on 3 sides. This might be a horrible idea in an apartment complex, etc....
Otherwise I shoot my AR enough at longer distances that using a plain RD would be a silly idea. Love 8x for this.
At a friends range, from the hip, we shoot 22 rifles and 22 pistols, but also the combat pistols, going as fast as we can, all on steel. This is a highly instinctual affair but after a while it's not hard hitting chest sized targets, or slightly smaller ones, 10-15 yards away. The guy that owns this range is pretty interesting to watch doing this because he's been practicing for half his adult life, he's relatively fast, and accurate enough with his 9mm carbine to clean a plate rack at 12 yards away when he's dialed in.
My local club started having a 3 gun match last year. I know for me personally I shot higher scores as soon as I tried my Burris XTR2 1-8 FFP vs the RD I previously used. I found that I could see where I missed or hit easier using magnification and well there's hash's for holdovers and holdoffs.
Before you pat yourself on the back too much Mr. Rocket Scientist, consider:
Illumination level for indoors at night and outside in daylight are different. Not everyone calibrates their brightness based on their crystal ball.
If you shoot during the day it's probably at a daylight setting. If you use the daylight setting at night it's probably too bright and people turn it down.
Either way you can wash it out and yeah, I think people make that mistake constantly. I'm glad you don't but that doesn't mean nobody else does.
As an LEO in Illinois I know most of my practical usage of my patrol rifle (16” barrel if that matters to anyone) will be inside 100 yards. I do prefer a red dot or holographic for these ranges as the majority of shooting will be well inside 50 yards and in close quarters environments. I won’t change to a LVPO due to the (in general and especially in the price range of good red dots) lesser FOV and need of eye relief. I have been called out to extremely rural places to assist agencies and we end up searching farm houses and outbuildings which are generally full of weird angles and compressed positions created by heavy equipment and tools. Red dots just shine in close quarters.
I am not saying a quality LVPO isn’t “just as good” in the vast majority of situations (I train with one still). As someone stated earlier, the magnification is wonderful if you need to take an extended precision shot and will be faster on STATIC targets. The reality is those are few and far between and if you have time to dial up magnification you can take that time to catch breath and take a clean shot with the red dot.
Now there is a reason why SOCOM is buying ATAC-Rs and NX8s. They are more likely to engage and be engaged by combatants at every possible range and the usefulness of a good ranging/bdc reticle cannot be understated. But we are partying in the USA and if you just want something for a duty/patrol/home defense rifle, i still recommend a good red dot, especially for those on limited budgets with limited training time as they are going to be faster for those people.
But to actually answer the OPs question. LVPOs do not lose much speed to red dots in CQB (inside 100yds) on static/slow targets in controlled environments. If you put the time in with a LVPO you probably won’t even notice the difference in split times in the above stated conditions. LVPOs will be faster at ranges farther than 100 due to magnification and reticles making life easy from good shooting positions.
Anyways, YMMV.
I am not saying a quality LVPO isn’t “just as good” in the vast majority of situations (I train with one still). As someone stated earlier, the magnification is wonderful if you need to take an extended precision shot and will be faster on STATIC targets. The reality is those are few and far between and if you have time to dial up magnification you can take that time to catch breath and take a clean shot with the red dot.
Now there is a reason why SOCOM is buying ATAC-Rs and NX8s. They are more likely to engage and be engaged by combatants at every possible range and the usefulness of a good ranging/bdc reticle cannot be understated. But we are partying in the USA and if you just want something for a duty/patrol/home defense rifle, i still recommend a good red dot, especially for those on limited budgets with limited training time as they are going to be faster for those people.
But to actually answer the OPs question. LVPOs do not lose much speed to red dots in CQB (inside 100yds) on static/slow targets in controlled environments. If you put the time in with a LVPO you probably won’t even notice the difference in split times in the above stated conditions. LVPOs will be faster at ranges farther than 100 due to magnification and reticles making life easy from good shooting positions.
Anyways, YMMV.
Training is not combat. In training the two will be very similar in speed. In real life it may play out differently.
I was the first guy at my agency to switch to a LPVO. I used all the arguments here to justify the switch. In training they were just as fast...
Then we did an entry.
Multiple subjects moving... me moving... furniture to navigate... beds to check under... children crying... small dog under foot...
Sure, all of that had been trained for, but there is a difference.
I was humbled. I had pushed for the LPVO and used all the arguments in this thread. I had outshined all my buddies in training. It simply didn’t play out in real life the same. The tiny extra effort required for a LPVO combined with the chaos, adrenaline, speed, and other human factors simply made finding and using the sight cumbersome.
TODAY, I’m out of LE work and recommend LPVO to almost everyone. If CQB isn’t in your future then they are THE way to go. Just don’t believe the guys telling you there’s no difference. There is.
I was the first guy at my agency to switch to a LPVO. I used all the arguments here to justify the switch. In training they were just as fast...
Then we did an entry.
Multiple subjects moving... me moving... furniture to navigate... beds to check under... children crying... small dog under foot...
Sure, all of that had been trained for, but there is a difference.
I was humbled. I had pushed for the LPVO and used all the arguments in this thread. I had outshined all my buddies in training. It simply didn’t play out in real life the same. The tiny extra effort required for a LPVO combined with the chaos, adrenaline, speed, and other human factors simply made finding and using the sight cumbersome.
TODAY, I’m out of LE work and recommend LPVO to almost everyone. If CQB isn’t in your future then they are THE way to go. Just don’t believe the guys telling you there’s no difference. There is.
Who are you, again?! I can't remember why I'm supposed to show you deference or have fucks to give for thy sagely wisdom? ?
Swing and a miss...
“Illumination level for indoors at night and outside in daylight are different.” No shit.
Illumination level indoors at night with your target illuminated with your weapon light is close enough to daylight illumination.
Of course on daylight setting it’s going to be too bright in a dark room. Who the hell is going to be shooting in a dark room without illuminating his target?
Keep digging...
^The type of comment a very insecure person would make.
Never asked for deference. You’re talking about this stuff like you’ve only read about it which sounds all and good until you go try it and then you see you’re wrong unless you’re surrounded by confirmation bias. Not a single reputable low light trainer agrees with you. To say point your WML at a wall and light it up to prove your point just shows you haven’t had a second of decent low light training in your life. Every rookie wannabe tactician knows you don’t do that with a handheld or WML. And every non-bubba knows you identify (white light) your target before shooting. ??
I’m w Gasgun here, keep digging.
^The type of comment a very insecure person would make.
Never asked for deference. You’re talking about this stuff like you’ve only read about it which sounds all and good until you go try it and then you see you’re wrong unless you’re surrounded by confirmation bias. Not a single reputable low light trainer agrees with you. To say point your WML at a wall and light it up to prove your point just shows you haven’t had a second of decent low light training in your life. Every rookie wannabe tactician knows you don’t do that with a handheld or WML. And every non-bubba knows you identify (white light) your target before shooting. ??
I’m w Gasgun here, keep digging.
Your responses are predicated on the prior knowledge of where the target is, so that you can light him up at will.
What do you geniuses think is going to happen if you have to light the room up to look for the "bump in the night"?
Unless you're at or near max brightness on your RDS it's going to get washed out from the light. If you think I'm saying stand a muzzles distance from the wall and light it up to see how your RDS does then you were dropped on your head while in diapers.
You went to a class, good for you. I've been to classes, and I've looked for assholes in the dark for real.
I'm not seeking to confirm my suspicions because it's a fact. You go to some class taught by some retired fudd, run around in your living room, and figure that gives you some kind of experience. It doesn't.
I don't give a shit whether you like my answers, hate em, agree or not. I'm done arguing with a keyboard commando.
Glad you’re done w a keyboard commando. You using the mirror again?
my responses aren’t predicated on anything other than red dot use with white light in a CQB context. If you know how to use a white light you don’t blind yourself ... you made a statement about point it at the wall and the red dot will wash out.. how else am i to take it other than thinking YOU were dropped on your head... well after diapers probably... likely self inflicted is my guess... and only morons leave their red dot on the same setting permanently and don’t change it w the situation. Setting 9 on a T2 (for example just picking one) works in a variety of lighting conditions.
I make a living dealing w bad guys and it involves a lot of CQB type stuff. I’ve taken classes, developed and taught classes and used lethal force in the dark here and OCONUS. You’re flat wrong or you suck at communicating.
Are Pat Rogers (RIP), Steve Fisher, John Chapman etc fudds to you? Cause they ALL say you’re way off base. Standard SOPs for non-NOD use is overwhelming white light and primarily red dots in CQB... hint... that’s what red dots were designed for... varying lighting conditions and fast reaction times at close ranges.
Name a reputable trainer or organization (name, mil/LE/CQB training company) that says what you said, that Red dots are for outside in daylight and to be discouraged for inside use.
Not really. Looks like the OP's intended use has nothing to do with the purse fight going on here.
Ran 2 different steel challenges with a 1-4 lpvo and one with red dot. I was a combined 20 seconds slower with the lpvo over 6 stages on each. Most of the targets were within 30 yards and were shot static, no movement.
Based on my experience, for pure speed i feel the red dot is hard to beat. Maybe if there were farther and it didnt take a second or two to focus id lean the other way.
Based on my experience, for pure speed i feel the red dot is hard to beat. Maybe if there were farther and it didnt take a second or two to focus id lean the other way.
Nothing lol about it. Especially from a nice static position like low ready. A good LPVO should come up exactly like a red dot. On a target that doesn't require real aiming like say 12" paper at 6yds first shot times should be exactly the same.
first shot times are not the problem, its transitioning and not over swinging with magnified optic. Basically shooting both eyes open on both its easy to get on target to where you are already looking. But swinging a floating dot vs 1x illum reticle is slower in my test.
You should try your test with a Razor II 1-6x. 1x is like a red dot. No focusing as you mentioned.
I got to play with one for a while on the range and liked it. If my viper wasnt a gift, it would be either a razor or accupower.
Its been awhile since I looked through a PST 1-4x but I do specifically remember it not being a fast 1x scope.
This is the tier where LPVO's start behaving like dots and most of the associated pros/cons become non-issues.
Wow must be me, my equipment, or lack of skill. I know this thread is full of PRO LPVO shooters but damn.... nobody to my knowledge has ever won any steel challenge ever using an LPVO in PCCO or RFRO. Same with my results. 3 gun where there are varying target distances from 10-500 yards, yes that makes sense.
I would be willing to bet thats because nobody wants any magnification in SC and all the long gun SC shooters I know obsess over every fraction of an ounce, so an LPVO makes no sense in that application.
No one here is saying an LPVO is faster than a dot, just that a good one with practice can be right there. If Steel Challenge is the goal the extra expense in both optic cost and practice investment is a drawback, not to mention the weight and useless magnification.
Last edited:
A very divisive topic!
I usually try not to over complicate things. But then again I am not a competitive shooter where fractions of seconds or 10ths of ounces make or break a situation.
For me, I prefer RD for when I know a majority of my shooting will be within maybe 100 yards. I can easy maintain center mass moa at 100y with a RD. But certainly can get much better accuracy out of a lpvo at 100y. To me RD lend themselves well for HD purposes in this use case.
Its not that a lpvo isnt useful within 100y. I have a couple of lpvo optics my fav being a trijicon 1-4. It basically operates just like a RD on 1x power (even if it is 1.000365272883x). Easy to use with both eyes open etc.
But the RD being smaller and lighter just seem to make sense to me in the HD situation. Of course witha RD you run a extremely low risk (if its quality) of it failing when you most need it. This however is very unlikely.
The lpvo is most useful for me when I know there is a possibility of needing to reach out past 100y. I can be very effective with the 1-4 out to 500y. The 500y mark again being center mass level of moa.
They both have their use cases imo. Both are and can be effective in certain applications. To me the RD is better suited for up close and personal but the lpvo isnt far behind if its behind even at all.
This is why you set up multiple rifles based on the use case.
I tend to put lpvo on >16in AR platform rifles which usually have rifle length gas systems etc. And use RDs on my AR pistols and 16in AR HD / CQB setups.
If you made me just take one. No brainer, the lpvo. For me its nearly as effective as a RD but has the magnification if its needed. Better to have and not need that to need and not have.
I usually try not to over complicate things. But then again I am not a competitive shooter where fractions of seconds or 10ths of ounces make or break a situation.
For me, I prefer RD for when I know a majority of my shooting will be within maybe 100 yards. I can easy maintain center mass moa at 100y with a RD. But certainly can get much better accuracy out of a lpvo at 100y. To me RD lend themselves well for HD purposes in this use case.
Its not that a lpvo isnt useful within 100y. I have a couple of lpvo optics my fav being a trijicon 1-4. It basically operates just like a RD on 1x power (even if it is 1.000365272883x). Easy to use with both eyes open etc.
But the RD being smaller and lighter just seem to make sense to me in the HD situation. Of course witha RD you run a extremely low risk (if its quality) of it failing when you most need it. This however is very unlikely.
The lpvo is most useful for me when I know there is a possibility of needing to reach out past 100y. I can be very effective with the 1-4 out to 500y. The 500y mark again being center mass level of moa.
They both have their use cases imo. Both are and can be effective in certain applications. To me the RD is better suited for up close and personal but the lpvo isnt far behind if its behind even at all.
This is why you set up multiple rifles based on the use case.
I tend to put lpvo on >16in AR platform rifles which usually have rifle length gas systems etc. And use RDs on my AR pistols and 16in AR HD / CQB setups.
If you made me just take one. No brainer, the lpvo. For me its nearly as effective as a RD but has the magnification if its needed. Better to have and not need that to need and not have.
Last edited:
I have both and while up close the RDS has the slightest advantage it is overshadowed for me by the ability to identify targets farther out.
I’m not clearing structures for a living however.
I’m not clearing structures for a living however.
on static ranges or in competition I agree for the most part. I love the 1-6 Razor HD II.
But dynamically it’s not at all the same as a red dot. 80% close. Sure. But the long tube v situational awareness thing is real. Evolution9 above explained it well.
I'll defer to your experience as it relates to mil/leo work as thats above my pay grade. Is it possible we're having two different arguments here? I'm only talking about on the clock shooting at known objects. I think you guys are talking more about things going tits up in a hurry from an unknown direction.
Good distinction. Yes I’m focusing more on mil/LE/defensive work as that’s my arena. Specifically REplying to LawnMM and white light/CQB stuff.
Competition and hunting and general purpose would have different perimeters and I’d be more in favor of LPVO in those settings. As a general truck gun for non defensive purposes it would be a great option.
Thx for clarifying.
@BridgerWSS are you saying that LPVO for self defense is a bad idea?
Doesn’t this depend on many more factors than CQB?
Doesn’t this depend on many more factors than CQB?
I’m suggesting we plan mentally and equipment wise for the most likely scenarios. Shooting someone in self/family defense is already ridiculously rare, particularly with a long gun. When do you shoot in self defense past 25 yards? Virtually never. So if that’s the case then a LPVO diminishes you by 5%, or maybe 30% in the super stressful event a shooting is. I’d take the better odds in what’s most likely to happen rather than limit myself just to plan for that 2% when shooting someone is super rare anyway.
Yes self defense shootings can and do occur in more than CQB environments but that’s freakishly rare. So by default, self defense lethal force encounters are almost always directly CQB related.
So I wouldn’t say you’re stupid if you have a LPVO with a good eyebox (like the Razor HD Gen II 1-6 has a far more forgiving eye box than the Nightforce 1-8) but it’s my opinion that you’re trying to do the “jack of all trades, master of none,” thing w optics.
The best compromise I’ve found is an Razor HD II, or a swing away magnifier like Aimpoint or Eotech’s 4 and 6 power. The swing away magnifier with the Unity tall mount probably works best (As the magnifier isn’t flopped to one side obstructing view) as long as you train to know your offset without thinking about it which applies anyway.
Hope that sums up my thoughts clearly. If not I’d be happy to clarify.
Perhaps “self defense” is too narrow of a definition. For people who live in rural areas, “defense” could mean checking on why the chickens are squawking or popping a coyote in your goat pasture. The chance I would end up shooting someone in my house is much more remote than the above. Certainly shooting people at distance who are not shooting at you or some other very narrow circumstances is not going to be considered defense. I also think most any situation where you have to shoot a person will probably be close.
Interesting discussion.
Glad you brought up the rural area and defense from critters point. I was going to add that in but thought it might clutter the discussion. Apparently not ?
I shot a dog at 50ish yards back in May I think it was. It was threatening my kids, chickens and rabbits on my property so I dropped it w a red dot and WML. Didn’t need a magnifier but 100 yards out it would have been nice to have a LPVO probably.
I agree COMPLETELY w what you said. Particularly rural areas if you only have one home/ranch gun then def go LPVO as yup, coyotes, wolves, even occasional rabid dog might need to be dropped at 50-200 yards to protect your cattle, chickens or kids.
Bravo, you sir are spot on. I try to demonstrate this all the time. If you know where the targets are, and what the drill is, the speed difference is negligible. If the scenario is unknown and the targets unknown, the red dot wins out. And to go ahead and throw more fuel to the fire, if the targets and scenario are uknown, EOTech's beat out the red dots. (maybe the vortex holographic would as well) They just do. More window to acquire the reticle means the shot can be taken sooner, and the reduced parallax at CQB distances vs the red dot end up mattering especially when squeezing off from the extreme corners of your window. Its exactly why you see the EOTechs still winning out the door kicking RFQs.
Well heck. If you have that many options (must suck lol), try out the LPVO for sure! They’re very useful.
I have a 1-8x on one 16” carbine, 1-6x on another 10.5” and red dot on my duty rifle (10.5”) w swing down magnifier.
I think you’ll find the LPVO on your 10.5” a quick favorite (outside of gunfights at 8 yards) ?
Both Eotech and Aimpoint DO have a hair of parallax particularly when coupled w the magnifiers. But it’s negligible.
You bring up a good point about squeezing off shots from the reticle at the extreme edge of the optic window... one reason I prefer larger bodied Aimpoints M4s/PRO, over the ever popular T1/2. They provide a greater margin for error w cheek weld etc. Eotechs rock but for me I’m not interested in changing batteries every five minutes ?. But both are solid options.
I don't forsee holographics getting red dot battery life any time soon unfortunately, so that is definitely one of the trade offs.
What most don't realize(or maybe just don't think about) in measuring parallax is that if a AP T2 measures at 4 MOA of parallax at 10 yards from glass edge to edge ,and an EOTech measures at 4 MOA from edge to edge, the EOTEch is exhibiting far less parallax off center because the edge to edge measurement is roughly 30% larger but the total deviation is the same. If you take an EOTech and pretty much any chosen red dot and mount them both up, inline on your rail with either one in front of the other and adjust the reticles to the same POA, the difference in close range parallax becomes pretty obvious with a simple movement of the head while looking through both optics. Now, 4 MOA vs say 6 MOA of parallax at 10 yards is roughly 0.4" vs 0.6" inches but there are times when speed is fine, but accuracy is final. I like LPVO's, red dots, Acogs and EOTechs and given a particular use case, I could make an argument for why each one would be the best in that particular scenario.
Similar threads
