Rifle Scopes What is the future of 1-4x optics?

[dms416]

I'm very happy to see advancement in the 1-whatever magnification short/mid-range scopes. But with everyone going "bigger" and "badder" for their 1-6x or 1-8x lineup, is there anybody in the game that's stepping back and looking at just making the 1-4x technology, smaller, lighter, better?

I mean the CQBSS is great and all, but I certainly don't require one on something like an M4 or similar carbine, and the weight and price penalty of a 1.1-4x Short Dot hardly seems worth it. I can't imagine I'm alone when I say I want Short Dot capability in a 4x32 ACOG-size package...and I don't mean an Elcan either (been there, tried that).

Is this a consideration in the industry regarding these optics...or am I on my own here?

 

[hrfunk]

You might want to take a look at the Hi-Lux CMR.

 

[Rob01]

Have you looked at the Vortex PST 1-4x24? About 16 ounces for the turret version and 14.4 ounces for the capped version.

Vortex Optics - Viper PST 1-4x24 TMCQ (MOA)<br />Tactical

Vortex Optics - Viper PST 1-4x24 TMCQ (MOA)<br />Capped

 

[Red_SC]

I recently bought another Burris Tac30 PST from Sportoptics. Hard to beat the priceerformance ratio. 1-6 or 1-8 would be nice, but I've never missed a target in 3gun that I would have hit with more magnification.

 

[CharlesHJr]

I'm very happy to see advancement in the 1-whatever magnification short/mid-range scopes. But with everyone going "bigger" and "badder" for their 1-6x or 1-8x lineup, is there anybody in the game that's stepping back and looking at just making the 1-4x technology, smaller, lighter, better?

I mean the CQBSS is great and all, but I certainly don't require one on something like an M4 or similar carbine, and the weight and price penalty of a 1.1-4x Short Dot hardly seems worth it. I can't imagine I'm alone when I say I want Short Dot capability in a 4x32 ACOG-size package...and I don't mean an Elcan either (been there, tried that).

Is this a consideration in the industry regarding these optics...or am I on my own here?

I'm waiting on the new US Optics SR-4C, 1-4 to appear on their website.

Charles

 

[DirtyDave]

I'm waiting on the new US Optics SR-4C, 1-4 to appear on their website.

Charles

^^^ This
They had it at SHOT Show. Nice little 1-4x with a Daylight visible Red-Dot (just like their 1-8x). Looks cleaner than their old bulky 1-4x.
It was pretty bad ass to check it out at the show. On 1x with the Dot turned on it looks like an Aimpoint or Eotech, but Clearer.
The one they had at the show just had a MIL reticle. I'm okay with that, I like MILs. Wondering what other reticles they will offer?

 

[Downzero]

There will always be newer, latest, and greatest with everything. I love my truck but in 8 years since it was made, the new ones have more power, LED lights, brighter headlights, newer interior features, etc. Am I about to dump it and go buy a new one for that? Hell no.

1-4x is perfectly fine for a carbine with targets appropriately sized for one. I will continue to use my 1-4x and only be changing if some substantial new thing makes me rethink the utility of my $500 scope and mount that seem to work just fine.

YMMV.

 

[CharlesHJr]

^^^ This
They had it at SHOT Show. Nice little 1-4x with a Daylight visible Red-Dot (just like their 1-8x). Looks cleaner than their old bulky 1-4x.
It was pretty bad ass to check it out at the show. On 1x with the Dot turned on it looks like an Aimpoint or Eotech, but Clearer.
The one they had at the show just had a MIL reticle. I'm okay with that, I like MILs. Wondering what other reticles they will offer?

Based on my order form, it's only available in mils.
Charles

 

[dms416]

There will always be newer, latest, and greatest with everything. I love my truck but in 8 years since it was made, the new ones have more power, LED lights, brighter headlights, newer interior features, etc. Am I about to dump it and go buy a new one for that? Hell no.

1-4x is perfectly fine for a carbine with targets appropriately sized for one. I will continue to use my 1-4x and only be changing if some substantial new thing makes me rethink the utility of my $500 scope and mount that seem to work just fine.

YMMV.

Cool story; glad you like your truck.


Moving back to the spirit of the thread. While I'm not in the market at this point, I wasn't aware of the USO SR-4C.

Is it reasonable to believe that some of the industry leaders might do something similar when they're done trying to cram more magnification into straight 30mm and 34mm tubes?

 

[George Az]

I recently bought another Burris Tac30 PST from Sportoptics. Hard to beat the priceerformance ratio. 1-6 or 1-8 would be nice, but I've never missed a target in 3gun that I would have hit with more magnification.

I have a Burris as well. I think it is awsome for what it is, at 4x it is a very capable sight. I rarely use the lit reticle, but I guess in lowlight or foggy conditions it would be good. It apears to be often overlooked, but I like it.

 

[Red_SC]

I have a Burris as well. I think it is awsome for what it is, at 4x it is a very capable sight. I rarely use the lit reticle, but I guess in lowlight or foggy conditions it would be good. It apears to be often overlooked, but I like it.

Me either. One of my reasons for going with the Tac30 was the daylight-visible illumination, but I run it dark now. In lowlight it's really too bright, even on the lowest settings.

 

[MarkCO]

I really think that the Burris MTAC and Tac30 are the best bang for the buck in the sub $600 class. Used to say sub $900, but there are a lot of new optics in the $600 to $1000 range now that are better.

The question becomes, how much are you willing to pay per ounce of weight lost. With the current 1-4s. if you thin the glass or tubes or cheapen the knobs, you sacrifice reliability. So you have to use more expensive materials, processes or assemblies to take out weight. For maybe $400 in careful product selection, you can cut 2 pounds off a standard AR. Want even lighter, lose the heavy mounts for the optic.

While I think there is some look towards continual improvement (like Downzero tried to explain, but you dumped on him) there is going to be cost benefit analysis done by the manufacturer's and consumers. Tip too fast and you lose marketshare, don't keep up, same result.

10 years ago, very few guys ran a 1x at the bottom. Acogs, fixed with irons or variable with irons were what the common guy ran. The average three gunner who shoots 2 or 3 matches a year could be running the exact same JP he bought 10 years ago, but on his 3rd or 4th optic by now. Technology, courses, demands change and some manufacturer's are doing a good job providing the customer what they ask for while others are still trying to tell the customers what to buy.

 

[dms416]

I really think that the Burris MTAC and Tac30 are the best bang for the buck in the sub $600 class. Used to say sub $900, but there are a lot of new optics in the $600 to $1000 range now that are better.

The question becomes, how much are you willing to pay per ounce of weight lost. With the current 1-4s. if you thin the glass or tubes or cheapen the knobs, you sacrifice reliability. So you have to use more expensive materials, processes or assemblies to take out weight. For maybe $400 in careful product selection, you can cut 2 pounds off a standard AR. Want even lighter, lose the heavy mounts for the optic.

While I think there is some look towards continual improvement (like Downzero tried to explain, but you dumped on him) there is going to be cost benefit analysis done by the manufacturer's and consumers. Tip too fast and you lose marketshare, don't keep up, same result.

10 years ago, very few guys ran a 1x at the bottom. Acogs, fixed with irons or variable with irons were what the common guy ran. The average three gunner who shoots 2 or 3 matches a year could be running the exact same JP he bought 10 years ago, but on his 3rd or 4th optic by now. Technology, courses, demands change and some manufacturer's are doing a good job providing the customer what they ask for while others are still trying to tell the customers what to buy.

Yes, technology changes rapidly. I have to believe that when these companies attempt to break new ground and push limits, I have little doubt that lessons are learned that can be applied to other areas. While it's not a total parallel, look AI features that were only found on the costliest models are now a fixture in their entire 2014 weapon's suite. True, innovation costs money, but one would be mad to assume that the resources that go into these optics are anywhere close to what the price tag says.

 

[MarkCO]

True, innovation costs money, but one would be mad to assume that the resources that go into these optics are anywhere close to what the price tag says.

But, if you add $10 of innovation, to an established line, the ROI stands to be less than even the initial outlay. So that $10 might result in a $80 to $100 price increase in retail...they have to figure out if it is worth the $ risk to try and boost sales, or if they will in fact lose sales. "NEW & IMPROVED" usually means a product sucks worse, but they raised the price to try and increase profit margin. I am not applying that to scope manufacturers specifically.

There are also patent issues that some of these companies look at pretty seriously, others kind of ignore. Those lawyers, and product protections cost the consumer in the end. Just like in the insurance, CC and banking industries, other peoples willingness to copy/steal technology costs the consumer. I kind of followed around a very talkative, Asian "Buyer" at SHOT for a little over an hour. It was very clear what he was doing...gathering technical information and photos so he (or his client) could go knock-off products.

 

[Shortcut]

Keep an eye on the USO 1-4x22!! That scope is viscious and beats the hell out of just about any 1-4x competitor. I saw it at the SHOT and it totally kicked ass.

 

[jbailey]

Keep an eye on the USO 1-4x22!! That scope is viscious and beats the hell out of just about any 1-4x competitor. I saw it at the SHOT and it totally kicked ass.

I heard good things about the new 1-4 from USO... did anyone do a review of it?

 

[Cobracutter]

I heard good things about the new 1-4 from USO... did anyone do a review of it?

Any idea on the weight and price?

 

[CharlesHJr]

Any idea on the weight and price?

Weight is said to be less than 20oz - price is $1,999.
Charles

 

[Wes@USO]

Any idea on the weight and price?

Weight is 1.24 lbs and price is $1,995.00

 

[223Rem]

I'm very happy to see advancement in the 1-whatever magnification short/mid-range scopes. But with everyone going "bigger" and "badder" for their 1-6x or 1-8x lineup, is there anybody in the game that's stepping back and looking at just making the 1-4x technology, smaller, lighter, better?

Is this a consideration in the industry regarding these optics...or am I on my own here?

When has technology ever taken a step backwards? Fashion yes (retro builds for example), capability due to technology, no. Goes against the whole concept of our species, advancement which technology provides.

We have had the combustion engine for over 100 years, decreased it's size while increasing the horsepower yet we still can not make it run 1/3 efficient even today.

Took us less time to go from our first flight to reaching the moon.

Do not want to say the 1-4x variable has been mastered, but enough companies are doing it right now and looking further.

Now what would spark an interest with me is a 1x and 4x without all the BS in between, similar to the Elcan at the current 1-4x variable price point.