Killed this with an LVPO but I think I’m gonna swap for a 2-10 . One shot62 gr 223
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Its SFP, but the Primary Arms SLx 1-10x28 with the 34mm tube and ACSS Griffin M10S MIL reticle is really nice. Comes in at 10.5” compact length & only 19.1 oz.I've been away from LPVO market for a few years just running a red dot. Has the market given us a scope that is a true 1X with some type of reticle that is clearly visible on a bright, sunny day and useful to range targets, and under 20 oz in weight?
I had one of the Credo scopes. I will agree on the glass...it sucked.Its SFP, but the Primary Arms SLx 1-10x28 with the 34mm tube and ACSS Griffin M10S MIL reticle is really nice. Comes in at 10.5” compact length & only 19.1 oz.
![]()
Primary Arms SLx 1-10x28 SFP Rifle Scope - Illuminated ACSS Griffin M10S Reticle
This Primary Arms rifle scope is part of the SLx optics line.www.primaryarms.com
This is probably gonna ruffle some feathers, but my buddy at the range had a Credo 1-10 and the glass in it was nowhere near worth the price. I would say the glass in my SLx 1-10x28 is on par, maybe even a little brighter, than the Credo. Everyone’s eyes are different, but 3 different people have looked through both of them, and concluded the same…Including the dude who owned the Credo.
Optics tech is coming along VERY rapidly over the last 10 years. You can get some damn decent scopes for under $1,000 these days. And having features that would have cost you $2,500+ were it built just 10, 15, or 20 years ago.
Not only that, it's dual focal plane. All Power Variable OpticIs that still technically a 1X?![]()
I get it, use the right tool for the job. But you're describing picking from an array of rifles for a specific predetermined purpose. If you have a carbine for multiple uses, or you're going into a blind match, the MPVO + dot covers 0-800 yards.I don't get the MPVO+RD thing.
I've got rifles with dots, dots and magnifiers, LPVO's, MPVO's and HPVO's. Each one has the right optic for what I want to do with the rifle. The LPVO guns take me from 1-500 yards very well, the MPVO guns take me from 100 to 800. That's enough overlap that I rarely need an MPVO for what I'm doing, and when I do need an MPVO or HPVO, I have no plans to blast at contact distance.
I even threw a dot on an MPVO gun for giggles. Kept right on not using it at red dot distances ever and took it off.
Yeah, I guess. Personally, I don't see myself going to any blind matches anytime soon, and being familiar with all the ranges in my area, I'm not worried about any surprises with longer distances or unusally small targets. On top of all that, I often bring 2-3 rifles to any match just in case one looks stronger than another for the challenges presented.I get it, use the right tool for the job. But you're describing picking from an array of rifles for a specific predetermined purpose. If you have a carbine for multiple uses, or you're going into a blind match, the MPVO + dot covers 0-800 yards.
I get it, use the right tool for the job. But you're describing picking from an array of rifles for a specific predetermined purpose. If you have a carbine for multiple uses, or you're going into a blind match, the MPVO + dot covers 0-800 yards.
Sorry for the very late response, but you’ve used the 1-8 exos on an AR? How was it? I’m looking at 1-8 LPVOs and haven’t found much on the exos in particular since I stumbled upon itI’ve used both the x32 an x42 for that but never wanted to run the x24s I had in that capacity on my AR SPR secondary. I even felt the 1-8nxs was lacking due to similar problems.
In the police/police sniper capacity for an Lpvo, you could roll with something as simple as an exos 1-8 (and I have)
Sorry for the very late response, but you’ve used the 1-8 exos on an AR? How was it? I’m looking at 1-8 LPVOs and haven’t found much on the exos in particular since I stumbled upon it
Very interesting. I’ve always been drawn to the S&Bs because of the glass clarity and this one seems to not disappoint. But in terms of price/availability the Kahles scopes have been my best option.This was right around the early Covid stuff and I was getting em for like $1800-1900ish. I'm not sure the brightness was as bright as the PMII's and I'm not so sure the edge to edge clarity was as good as a PMII but for a keep-it-simple option, it was an excellent option for the money when a 1-6 Razor HD was $1300.
Currently, the prices of the EXOS are a bit insulting for no more than what they are. I still have some pics of some demos I did to include in a presentation and I had the EXOS on my gun at the time. It's pretty much the same size as the 1-8CC PMII's. Here's the optic:
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Very interesting. I’ve always been drawn to the S&Bs because of the glass clarity and the very good 1x and this one seems to not disappoint. But in terms of price/availability the Kahles scopes have been my best option.
Maybe once I get the funds saved I’ll see if I can scoop one for about what you paid. Seems they go around the 2000-2300 mark just off of some quick searches but they don’t get sold.
Very interesting. I’ve always been drawn to the S&Bs because of the glass clarity and this one seems to not disappoint. But in terms of price/availability the Kahles scopes have been my best option.
Maybe once I get the funds saved I’ll see if I can scoop one for about what you paid. Seems they go around the 2000-2300 mark just off of some quick searches but they don’t get sold.
S&B has pretty much priced themselves out of play. $5k for an LPVO is insane, and the secondary market is spotty. I love the S&B lpvo's for what they are and still think (pricing structure aside), they offer the best options...especially for what I look for.
Kahles 1-6 and the Razor HD2 1-6 are recommendations for a "regular Joe" looking for an LPVO instead of a red dot/magnifier combo that maybe wants a little more. Sniper-lite shit is a whole other optic and conversation that depends largely on personal preferences
No sniper shit for me. Just want a 1-8 to put on a 16 inch. Think my options are dwindled down to either a Kahles or S&B. Hard part is finding people selling for a good price(in my eyes, no pun intended). Wonder how much S&B would charge to change an exos FD7 reticle to an MDR reticle lol.S&B has pretty much priced themselves out of play. $5k for an LPVO is insane, and the secondary market is spotty. I love the S&B lpvo's for what they are and still think (pricing structure aside), they offer the best options...especially for what I look for.
Kahles 1-6 and the Razor HD2 1-6 are recommendations for a "regular Joe" looking for an LPVO instead of a red dot/magnifier combo that maybe wants a little more. Sniper-lite shit is a whole other optic and conversation that depends largely on personal preferences.
No sniper shit for me. Just want a 1-8 to put on a 16 inch. Think my options are dwindled down to either a Kahles or S&B. Hard part is finding people selling for a good price(in my eyes, no pun intended). Wonder how much S&B would charge to change an exos FD7 reticle to an MDR reticle lol.
Have a dual cc. Love it but IMO you’d need it eliminate all other options before you end up there. It’s a lot of $No sniper shit for me. Just want a 1-8 to put on a 16 inch. Think my options are dwindled down to either a Kahles or S&B. Hard part is finding people selling for a good price(in my eyes, no pun intended). Wonder how much S&B would charge to change an exos FD7 reticle to an MDR reticle lol.
Yeah, the rational adult in me says a S&B outside of a 1.1-4 is a bit steep for what I want. Realistically will probably end up with either a kahles or maybe a NF. Wasn’t a fan of the NX8 1-8 but maybe I’ll give the ATACR a fair shake.Have a dual cc. Love it but IMO you’d need it eliminate all other options before you end up there. It’s a lot of $
Last I contacted S&B bout a PM2 reticle change it was $1000.
You should definitely look at the atacr. I’ve actually really grown to like my NX8’s.Yeah, the rational adult in me says a S&B outside of a 1.1-4 is a bit steep for what I want. Realistically will probably end up with either a kahles or maybe a NF. Wasn’t a fan of the NX8 1-8 but maybe I’ll give the ATACR a fair shake.
I really enjoyed his video. He does a good job of keeping his personal preferences to a minimum and trying to stay objective. Frankly, I don't think there was a single bad optic in the lineup which brings it down to the ol' faithful, which one do I simply LIKE more?
Never heard of SAI. I’ll have to look them upYou should definitely look at the atacr. I’ve actually really grown to like my NX8’s.
Would also recommend looking into the SAI 1-6’s
Never heard of SAI. I’ll have to look them up
For me it’s the ability to shoot close and long range seamlessly with good glass and eye relief, do courses and/or competitions, and home defense.I’d almost rather know a persons way of doing things and personal bias so I can have some context. Because (as you note) it comes down to personal preference. Ultimately that comes down to minor details and nuance
Yeah that makes sense. Supersetca did an interesting video on the nx8 last year and mentioned his close range and vtac splits where pretty much identical between that and his razor 1-6. It's an interesting data point to see that a 'nicer' experience doesn't necessarily translate to increased performanceI’d almost rather know a persons way of doing things and personal bias so I can have some context. Because (as you note) it comes down to personal preference. Ultimately that comes down to minor details and nuance
One also has to remember context and the sterile nature of the flat range. Spend enough time and you can push technically deficient equipment at acceptable (or even exceptional) speeds. Add other variables into the mix like stress and movement and the numbers will change (even with high-end people).Yeah that makes sense. Supersetca did an interesting video on the nx8 last year and mentioned his close range and vtac splits where pretty much identical between that and his razor 1-6. It's an interesting data point to see that a 'nicer' experience doesn't necessarily translate to increased performance
Agree with the last part.One also has to remember context and the sterile nature of the flat range. Spend enough time and you can push technically deficient equipment at acceptable (or even exceptional) speeds. Add other variables into the mix like stress and movement and the numbers will change (even with high-end people).
Admittedly, I have no love for the NF 1-8's. I used the NX8 for a long time and the new reticle design is a big improvement on one of my gripes. While they are high-quality optics, they fail to check a lot of boxes for me or check boxes on things I don't care for. Some dudes love 'em; but they don't suit me for what I would like and the money I can spend.
And to be completely fair to the NX8, I never thought the low end was as bad as many say, it was the top end I hated.
A tale as old as time....
I can save you the time and say (for probably the 50th time across a dozen sites) that at current, you get to pick from the bottom up or top down. Some optics are better suited for 1x and can help you at distance/small targets in a pinch. Others are set up for distance/range and can work at the low/close end in a pinch. Then there's the middle ground (that far to few talk about). I don't care how much money you throw down, nothing is the master of EVERYTHING.
Prioritize what's important. Filter that through personal preference and budget...there you go!
I was really hopeful for the NX8 1-8, but actually found the 1x to be way too sensitive for lateral eye box. I was very disappointed. The 8x was about what I expected for the top end and very usable with a solid cheek weld in a stable position. It was great at 6x. But the 1x was just too finicky at 1x. And being FFP, it was almost binary whether the reticle was visible or not for the eyebox.One also has to remember context and the sterile nature of the flat range. Spend enough time and you can push technically deficient equipment at acceptable (or even exceptional) speeds. Add other variables into the mix like stress and movement and the numbers will change (even with high-end people).
Admittedly, I have no love for the NF 1-8's. I used the NX8 for a long time and the new reticle design is a big improvement on one of my gripes. While they are high-quality optics, they fail to check a lot of boxes for me or check boxes on things I don't care for. Some dudes love 'em; but they don't suit me for what I would like and the money I can spend.
And to be completely fair to the NX8, I never thought the low end was as bad as many say, it was the top end I hated.
A tale as old as time....
I can save you the time and say (for probably the 50th time across a dozen sites) that at current, you get to pick from the bottom up or top down. Some optics are better suited for 1x and can help you at distance/small targets in a pinch. Others are set up for distance/range and can work at the low/close end in a pinch. Then there's the middle ground (that far to few talk about). I don't care how much money you throw down, nothing is the master of EVERYTHING.
Prioritize what's important. Filter that through personal preference and budget...there you go!
In the same boat. Did not like the eye box on the NX8 which killed it for me. but for some reason the ACOGs eye relief doesn’t bother me too much.I was really hopeful for the NX8 1-8, but actually found the 1x to be way too sensitive for lateral eye box. I was very disappointed. The 8x was about what I expected for the top end and very usable with a solid cheek weld in a stable position. It was great at 6x. But the 1x was just too finicky at 1x. And being FFP, it was almost binary whether the reticle was visible or not for the eyebox.
Edit: I’ve been VERY happy with my NX8 4-32.
My splits are the same across the board.
I’ve gotten pretty good with dots and EOtechs, but for what the price of a Dot+magnifier costs it makes sense in my head that an LPVO can do more for just a little moreAgree with the last part.
Disagree with the first part. I've ran atacrs, eotechs, nx8's, aimpoints, and many others through force on force, shoot houses, and numerous other situations. My splits are the same across the board.
Not saying you're experience is wrong. It certainly is an Indian, not the arrow thing. Ymmv
seems like a solid optic. Surprised they only have a 1-6 out. Are they a newer branch? Figured they have a 1-8 or a 2-10 as well since they’re made by TT and ELCAN.I have really enjoyed my two SAIs.
Need to get the one with the mrad reticle, as the others are on two 16ish inch ARs that I use for run and gun and I just use them as variable ACOGS with thier ballistic drop reticle- which has been good out to 500 yards in field conditions.
I think the MRAD reticle would let me use the scope for some of the more esoteric ballistic bullshit I have laying around- i like the SAI scopes that much.
I usually hop skip and jump around with my scopes, but after mounting the SAIs, they have stayed on those rifles for 3 or so years; they may be worth a look....
Thanks mate. I really wanted to show case each one of their strengths and weaknesses to help everyone be able to formulate their own opinions on which is best for them.I really enjoyed his video. He does a good job of keeping his personal preferences to a minimum and trying to stay objective. Frankly, I don't think there was a single bad optic in the lineup which brings it down to the ol' faithful, which one do I simply LIKE more?
I’ve gotten pretty good with dots and EOtechs, but for what the price of a Dot+magnifier costs it makes sense in my head that
seems like a solid optic. Surprised they only have a 1-6 out. Are they a newer branch? Figured they have a 1-8 or a 2-10 as well since they’re made by TT and ELCAN.
Never heard of SAI. I’ll have to look them up
Ill share this here because I Love all y'all. Despite all of the complaints I had with all of the scopes in the lineup I just did. I still shot them all good. You can train around anything. But why give yourself a handicap when you may be able to get something that gives you a leg up in someway shape or form.Agree with the last part.
Disagree with the first part. I've ran atacrs, eotechs, nx8's, aimpoints, and many others through force on force, shoot houses, and numerous other situations. My splits are the same across the board.
Not saying you're experience is wrong. It certainly is an Indian, not the arrow thing. Ymmv
Data collected from 13 years being a team guy and instructor. I'm not sure what you're trying to suggest here.What might those splits be then? And to what standard?
Ill share this here because I Love all y'all. Despite all of the complaints I had with all of the scopes in the lineup I just did. I still shot them all good. You can train around anything. But why give yourself a handicap when you may be able to get something that gives you a leg up in someway shape or form.
“Nuclear” bright isn’t an absolute must have. If it’s just daylight bright but I can still see the illuminated reticle with say, a flashlight on in darker conditions I’m happy. I’m a realist and understand there’s trade offs with everything.The SAI is pretty sweet especially when you can opt in or out of the “x”. If a “nuclear” bright aiming point on 1x is a must, it may not be the right choice.
Data collected from 13 years being a team guy and instructor. I'm not sure what you're trying to suggest here.
Oh I get it. Sorry for taking it that way. I was unlucky enough to learn 'cqb' or whatever the popular phrase is now on an m16 with a 203 and acog. I STRONGLY believe that's why I can be consistent across the board with optics. Once you clear structures with that, literally anything is easy.Yeah guys like us are a dime a dozen…
What I mean is IF we really get into the numbers patters emerge….small as they may be. If we are a true slave to data.
Spent too long in the game to see people who think feelings are data and poor metrics are valid.
Not saying that’s the case or not. Just why I’m a general cynic and curious as to what the numbers were.