Any good Open Red-Dot Sight that dont break the bank?

[jcerillo70 16]

Hey guys,

 

I built my AR today and instead of just getting the folding rear sight, i wanted a open red dot. (Like in Call of Duty)

 

Any suggestions? I see a bunch for $500 But im not even looking to spend half of that...

 

Thanks guys,

Joe Cerillo

[Turboprop21 12]

If you search around you can find a good eotech 512 for around $300 or a little less depending on condition. It's an older model but uses AA batteries I believe. Keep an eye out on here and ar15.com classifieds. You'll find a decent amount

[Ray Ray 3,566]

Good to hear your build is done. Pics when available please. I have an older EOtech on mine and it's perfect. I also just mounted a Burris X-135 red dot on my Cx4 and it's a good buy at 300 bucks with mount. I do suggest though that you put a rear sight on her as well as a red dot.

[EchoMirage 137]

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=71368

[RecessedFilter 222]

One of these:

 

Truglo open red dot sight:

http://www.google.com/products/catalog?q=truglo+red+dot+sight&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=15463703817897675638&ei=THo9Ta3uLILAgQfAhsCHCQ&sa=X&oi=product_catalog_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CE0Q8wIwAg#

 

Truglo 30mm red dot:

http://www.amazon.com/Truglo%C2%AE-Traditional-Red-Sight-Black/dp/B001BY9H0S

 

TruGlo is known for making outstanding products, and I have had both of these (still own one, sold a gun with the other) and have shot many many rounds using them. They're affordable, reliable, and offer multiple options (such as green/red dot, multiple reticles, etc).

[Cylinder Head 22]

I'm sorry, I tuned out the second you said "like in call of duty".

[Krdshrk 3,877]

I'm sorry, I tuned out the second you said "like in call of duty".

Yeah... I'm a gamer and I did that too.

[jcerillo70 16]

I have been looking into the Truglo and in 10/11 reviews, everyone said they will not hold a zero after 100 shots. Makes me wonder if i should save up for something expensive rather than spend $100 on something that may be unreliable when i need it to work

[Krdshrk 3,877]

The general concensus is "Buy once, cry once". Buy one that's more expensive and reliable and it won't give you fits in the future.

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

How about a Burris Fast Fire II? Very small and unobtrusive. Available for a variety of mounts (Picatinny, I assume), from a reputable maker. People tend to think of these as for handguns, but a red dot is a red dot - the idea is to be able to shoot with both eyes open so as not to limit your field of view and peripheral vision, so the smaller the obstruction (sight) the better. These retail for around $200 - $220. That being said, I have an EOTech - but that's just me

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

[Cylinder Head 22]

Yeah... I'm a gamer and I did that too.

 

If I built my rifle "like in call of duty" I'd have the rear irons on backwards too.

 

OP, skimping on optics is just a bad idea all around. I'd recommend an Aimpoint or an Eotech. I'd be a little more cautious on an Eotech as used ones tend to have worn out battery springs which will lead to intermittent failure of the optic to get power.

 

A used Aimpoint M2 is a fantastic optic and completely bomb-proof. If you run it with both eyes open you're golden.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Aimpoint or Eotech make great optics.. they are both expensive.. but they in turn work well..

[Ray Ray 3,566]

2 thumbs down for truglo, unless your mounting it on a 22 rifle.

[RecessedFilter 222]

Surprisingly I have never had any problems with my Truglo sights. I refuse to pay $400 for a red dot sight that I am going to plink with, I'd rather use iron sights and buy another gun for that price.

 

One of my Truglos was on my GSG which I sold included with and, yes, it was a .22 but I never had any issues with that.

 

The other was mounted on my Mini30 and I put about 1500rds through it using the Truglo. It put the rounds where the dot was and it worked great, so I couldn't complain.

 

If it could handle 7.62x39 then I'm sure it could handle .223 no problem.

 

But hell, what do I know? I have owned two of their products and they worked well...

[Ray Ray 3,566]

Surprisingly I have never had any problems with my Truglo sights. I refuse to pay $400 for a red dot sight that I am going to plink with, I'd rather use iron sights and buy another gun for that price.

 

One of my Truglos was on my GSG which I sold included with and, yes, it was a .22 but I never had any issues with that.

 

The other was mounted on my Mini30 and I put about 1500rds through it using the Truglo. It put the rounds where the dot was and it worked great, so I couldn't complain.

 

If it could handle 7.62x39 then I'm sure it could handle .223 no problem.

 

But hell, what do I know? I have owned two of their products and they worked well...

 

I owned one, the 30mm tube with the red/green sight. Green crapped out after a while, then it wouldn't turn on sometimes. Sent it in and got a brand new one (which I sold). Their customer service is great, and if I had a tactical 22, then that's where I would get another one. But for anything serious, I'd go with something a little more pricier.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Surprisingly I have never had any problems with my Truglo sights. I refuse to pay $400 for a red dot sight that I am going to plink with, I'd rather use iron sights and buy another gun for that price.

 

One of my Truglos was on my GSG which I sold included with and, yes, it was a .22 but I never had any issues with that.

 

The other was mounted on my Mini30 and I put about 1500rds through it using the Truglo. It put the rounds where the dot was and it worked great, so I couldn't complain.

 

If it could handle 7.62x39 then I'm sure it could handle .223 no problem.

 

But hell, what do I know? I have owned two of their products and they worked well...

 

it is not surprising at all.. that is the situation that you get when you deal with a product that is hit or miss.. think about it.. there are tons of factors.. mount.. position.. caliber.. bolt gun or semi auto (varying recoil).. I am %100 sure it works fine on some guns.. given the right circumstances.. but completely fails on others..

 

poor optics can be the worst thing you can ever due to a gun.. it will train you poorly.. you will get into habits of compensating.. chasing zero.. wasting ammo..a good reliable setup is irreplaceable..

 

in response to the other bit you stated..

 

I would rather have 4 guns.. equipped with premium optics and accessories that are dead reliable.. as opposed to 10 guns with low quality airsoft grade accessories that may or may not hold up..

[RecessedFilter 222]

Well I think it all depends on what you plan on using your optic with.

 

If I was a private contractor, LE, armed services, etc, of course I'd want the best optics money can buy.

 

If I am just blasting off some rounds every now and then at the range with an optic, and not using the gun for personal protection/HD/SD/anything of that sort, then I don't mind purchasing a low-end optic that gets by "doing the job", but possibly not much more.

 

Plus, I've never been someone who relies on/installs optics on all my guns. Hence, my comment about the give and take....I'd much rather spend the money on two AK's then have one AK with a $400 Eotech. I love iron sights, and prefer them over optics most of the time (depending), but hey, we all have our preferences right?

[Ray Ray 3,566]

I agree with you on that. Not on everything (not using optics at all).

[bbk 188]

Consider CMore as well. Not necessarily cheap, but they have a decent reputation for quality and price.

And of course I'm going to suggest Primary Arms. Great company to deal with, and great prices on their branded optics. I run one on my training .22, and its held zero just fine (also ran it on my 5.56 rifle, and it held zero fine too).

 

IMO, if its just a plinker, don't even concern yourself with optics. Of course its preference, and if you really want optics over irons, of course that's fine. In the end though, you could probably save yourself 100+, and maybe get the same enjoyment. Either way, good luck!

[Cylinder Head 22]

 

I would rather have 4 guns.. equipped with premium optics and accessories that are dead reliable.. as opposed to 10 guns with low quality airsoft grade accessories that may or may not hold up..

 

I subscribe to this 100%. I have a limited amount of weapons, but they're top notch, come from established companies with records of reliability and excellence, and I don't skimp on anything that could be considered a "bottleneck". I know my mags are going to feed right, I know my optics are going to retain their zero and always work, and I know my weapons are going to go "bang" every time.

[Shane45 807]

I have reached a point where the optics are damn near more important. The optic gives such an advantage. But that is for me. In the case of Recessedfilter I guess it just doesnt matter. My guess is that he simply doesnt care if he has to pull the optic off and run irons the rest of the range trip. Or if the optics isnt holding zero, pull it off and buy another. However, I have said it before and I will say it again, beware false economics when it comes to cheap otics. How many times do you replace a $150 optic vs buying one good reliable $450 optic. Hell I could EASILY waste the price of a cheap optic in ammo chasing a wandering zero . In the example given on AK's. for me Id take the single AK with good optic. After all its a fighting gun, why handicap it? Id rather have one really good instead of two so so's.

[vladtepes 1,060]

I'd much rather spend the money on two AK's then have one AK with a $400 Eotech. I love iron sights, and prefer them over optics most of the time (depending), but hey, we all have our preferences right?

 

just to use your own example..

 

two base AKs

 

you now own two of the same gun.. a gun that is likely to outlast your lifetime.. in fact a gun that is likely to outlast your grandchildren.. so concern of failure is likely not the issue.. as in "I have two in case one breaks" since that is not going to likely happen.. do you shoot them both at the range? an AK is an AK? what practical use is having multiples..

 

one base AK with ultimak rail and Aimpoint

 

you now have the same gun as you had above.. but you have a red dot which makes for fast target acquisition.. is extremely reliable.. and gives real time iron sight co-witness.. even if you like to shoot irons.. with the right setup you can easily shoot both...

 

I only have 2 arms.. so at the end of the day I do not understand why I would want multiples of the same gun? I don't buy guns that fail.. so that is a non issue.. I see investing the initial money in several quality pieces as being a move that would totally benefit you as a shooter.. and unless you are arming a small militia I see no positive view point of owning a huge stock pile of average weapons..

 

you are entitled to do what you want.. and I can surely agree to disagree.. yeah it hurts buying an optic that costs as much as the gun I am putting it on.. but I do what works..

[Tactical Monkey 51]

I will chime in here restating the "buy once" mentality. Yes, learning to shoot with irons first should be paramount, but I believe that the right optic can substantially increase the potential of almost any weapon. Also, the best part about buying quality optics (aside from their reliability) is that should you choose to switch over to another quality optic, it's easier to sell an Aimpoint CompM4 then a Barska Red Dot.

 

That being said, I have a used Aimpoint Comp M4 with Larue mount that I'd be willing to part with. PM me if your interested...

[RecessedFilter 222]

All I can say is everyone has different priorities.

 

For just plain target shooting, I don't need to spend the large amount of money on a high-end optic. Why? Because I don't need it to go to hell and back and protect my life with. I shoot great with iron sights, and sometimes I prefer iron sights over optics.

 

And I don't see how an AK is handicapped because it doesn't have optics. Haven't we used iron sights for years until the recent manufacturing of red dots/scopes? The two AK's I have owned, I use iron sights on each and even though the farthest I am able to shoot is at 100yds at my range, I can shoot mag after mag and keep every round in the head or in the chest of a life-size target. If you could decrease that grouping size with an optic, that's great, but for target shooting I love shooting with irons. Plus I don't see how two AK's without optics can be "so-so"? As long as you have two well-made AK's, then they are two great shooting AK's.

 

Now LE, military, PD, etc, that is a whole different story as I stated earlier. Hell yeah I would go out and buy the best of the best, because you need it.

 

But that's that. My Truglo's have never failed me, so I can't talk about/agree with all the bad things people might hear about them. In the future (when I am not a college kid and have a full time job), will I end up possibly getting an Aimpoint or other high-end optic? I'm sure, but for now, my irons and my Truglo do me well for what I need them for.

[Shane45 807]

RF, for the square range static style shooting you do, you are absolutely correct, it makes no diffence for you. So let me explain the other side of the fence so you can understand where we are coming from. A lot of us shoot for the enjoyment of the sport but we also have an expectation that our rifles can be an insurance policy of sorts. So they are expected to be able to be pressed into service if need be. Or even a step down from that, be able to perform in action shooting competitions. So in that venue on our side of the fence, an AK with optic will perform in that role much better. The evidence is in the times and scores in an action match course of fire. In certain stages, I know my time differential could be measured in 10 to 20 seconds advantage due to the optics Im running. If I were fighting for my life, this time/accuracy differential could well equate to me surviving or not. It can be even more complex than this but this example is enough for my point I think. If you really get deep into it its my opinion that the age of irons may well be at its end. I have fighting rifles that simply do not have traditional irons at this point, only an absolutely rudimentary back up aiming solution mouted on the optic its self. I do believe in 2 is 1, is none. But if I have glass and a rds, I really dont feel the need for any irons. ANyway, I hope this illuminates our perspective.

 

Shane

[vladtepes 1,060]

 

 

For just plain target shooting, I don't need to spend the large amount of money on a high-end optic. Why? Because I don't need it to go to hell and back and protect my life with. I shoot great with iron sights, and sometimes I prefer iron sights over optics.

 

And I don't see how an AK is handicapped because it doesn't have optics. Haven't we used iron sights for years until the recent manufacturing of red dots/scopes? The two AK's I have owned, I use iron sights on each and even though the farthest I am able to shoot is at 100yds at my range, I can shoot mag after mag and keep every round in the head or in the chest of a life-size target. If you could decrease that grouping size with an optic, that's great, but for target shooting I love shooting with irons. Plus I don't see how two AK's without optics can be "so-so"? As long as you have two well-made AK's, then they are two great shooting AK's.

 

 

this is NOT an attempt at swaying your opinion.. it is just an attempt to answer the question..

 

the reason a reflex sight is "better" is simple.. with iron sights.. you must line up the front and rear sights... with a reflex sight you just put the dot on the target and squeeze.. that is what makes a reflex sight better than iron sights.. iron sights have a role.. they are great to use when optics fail.. but modern optics really destroy iron sights in regards to speed.. iron sights will always win out on reliability.. because they are not powered like red dots.. but they will NEVER be faster.. if you find irons better than a reflex sight you have IMO not spent enough range time with modern optics or are using an under quality unit..

 

so for me..

an AK with iron sights AND quality optics is more valuable than two AKs with iron sights..

simply because the one with the reflex is more versatile.. and I can't shoot two guns at once.. lol

 

back to what I said that is NOT meant to change your mind.. as others have pointed out.. sitting at a bench blasting.. no real need for anything more than irons.. no NEED for anything really.. it is just what the shooter prefers.. but to say one setup is not better is kind of ignoring the facts.. what is better.. a firearm with two aiming options.. or a firearm with one aiming option..

[Shug 4]

How about the Vortex Strikefire or Sparc? Reviews seem good but I know their not Eotech's or Aimpoints.

[vladtepes 1,060]

How about the Vortex Strikefire or Sparc? Reviews seem good but I know their not Eotech's or Aimpoints.

 

 

with a little google searching.. reviews seem mixed..

 

 

here someone claims it is far too dim..

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:YFMtDx_upFgJ:www.opticstalk.com/vortex-strike-fire-red-dot_topic13166.html+Vortex+Strikefire&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

[Ray Ray 3,566]

Shane and Vlad have made all the points needed. Good posts guys.

[jcerillo70 16]

So any specific idea's for halo-graphic's ??? I'm still lost

 

I also need to pick a rear iron sight to go with my a2 front...as a backup and untill i get the $$$ for a good Halo