RDS vs 1-4x/1-6x Scope for AR15?

[NJdiverTony 27]

Hey guys, need some input. I've had a Primary Arms Red Dot for my AR, for the last year and it has served me well so far. It has never lost zero and has worked flawlessly. I don't have a single complaint about it. I also have a 3x magnifier with a QD mount for it and that works OK for longer shots (100+ Yrds). I'm able to get 2" groups @ 100yrds with XM193 ammo, shooting off a bench with a bipod... So it's work pretty well I think. For some crazy reason, I have been having thoughts over the last couple of months of maybe switching over to a 1-4x scope (or maybe a 1-6x if I can afford it)... My thought is that I can probably shoot more accurately and tighten up the groups using the scope instead of the RDS.

 

So, my questions to you guys that have experience with both is: Is one better than the other? Does the 1-4x give you the same 2-eyes-open target acquisition at 1x as the RDS does? I'm worried about losing CQB effectiveness with the 1-4x (not that I'm getting into any CQB situations... but would like to have a good balance between CQB target acquisition and precision for longer range shooting). A couple of the scopes I've been looking at is the Vortex PST 1-4x, the SWFA 1-4x and also the soon to be released SWFA 1-6x (but this one is pretty pricey at about $999... ouch!)

 

The other thought I've also had is also maybe upgrading from the Primary Arms to an Eotech XPS sight and putting a magnifier behind it. What do you guys think of that solution? Worth it? I don't have much experience with Eotech's... I shot an AR a few years ago that had one, but can't really recall too much detail about the reticle. I do remember that I was able to acquire targets very fast and accurately though.

 

OR, should I just stick with the Primary Arms sight and just put the money towards another gun? LOL! Been thinking about getting an HD shottie... as I only have hunting shotguns.

[scohen2002 0]

I'm not an "expert" but i'll offer my opinion and experience. To answer your simple question i would always opt for more magnifation, so i'd go with a 1-6, but i think you might be happier with a 3-10x or even 4-12x.

 

For my AR-15 i have a regular hunting scope and i love it. I am not under the illusion that i am going to be raiding any buildings or marching into battle for close quarters combat, or even that i would take out my AR-15 to protect my home. I feel i have the very realistic expectation that it for fun recreational shooting at the range, and usally at 100 to 200 yards. So i bought what i felt was the most reasonably balanced scope between quality and price for target purpose, and i have a Leupold "rifleman" 4-12x by 40mm. I have so much fun with that thing at the range i can't imagine going back to iron sights or no magnifcation.

[Nikos 31]

Just in case you need a nudge to purchase a 1-4x, Nikon is having another "mount em up" promo.

http://nikonpromo.com/mount_em_up.php

 

I just purchased one.

[alowerlevel 77]

Having shot a friends AR with a 1-4x on it I can say that on 1x you can shoot it with both eyes open, but its not as forgiving of head placement as a red dot. You have to have your head in the right spot to see through the scope, where on a red dot if your cheek weld isnt perfect or your head isnt in the right spot you can still see through and use the optic. Ive been looking at magnifiers for my PA micro dot but havent really needed it as I can make good shots on a torso sized target @ 200 yards with no problem.

[bbk 188]

I had the Vortex 1-4x PST for a few years, and I really, really *wanted* to like it. The Vortex was not, like many variable power scopes, a true 1x-- more like 1.1-1.3x. Was this a huge deal? No. The deal breaker for me was that it was heavy. I figured I'd sack up and just deal with it, but after a series of progressively challenging training courses-- there is just something miserable about lugging around a 10-12lb rifle. This is relevant because side-by-side, shooting the rifle with the 1-4x was just as fast and maneuverable, with both-eyes open shooting, as with an RDS. But factor in exhaustion, and the fine motor skills deteriorate much faster.

 

As for the cheek weld and getting scope shadow, its something that can be trained past. What I did was put a small piece of red duct tape exactly where my cheek weld should be, and I practiced until I got it down. Once I did that, I theory-crafted and trained irregular positions until I was comfortable.

 

Its preference. I don't think you could go wrong with the 1-4x, just don't underestimate how the littlest of weight gained can throw you off entirely.

[Clintoon Eastwood 2]

I'm on the same boat NjDiverTony I love my vortex sparc with DD high mount for quick target acquisitions and its staying zero so far. But for my purpose and my range is only up to 100 yards, I feel that my RDS is more than good enough.

 

If I do start going to a range with 100 plus yards i was looking into getting a Nikon p223 or a vortex viper. But I feel like its way too easy for a zoom scope at a 100 yards or less. So I love the RDS for that distance, I do feel l Ike it's more of a challenge to get a tight grouping

[DargZ 5]

I have the Burris MTAC on my rifle and I have an aimpoint patrol with a PA magnifier on another. It is a bit more challenging with the aimpoint/magnifier combo. I have the Nikon M308 sitting waiting for my AR10 to be done. The mount for the Nikon is crap compared to the Burris PEPR mount. I'll have to see how the Nikon mount hold up at the range though.

 

I can easily have both eyes open on the MTAC on 1x. Only drawback of the MTAC is the dot is freakin big at 4x. I think the same can be said of the aimpoint dot when magnified. My buddy has the XTR with a nice small center dot which makes aiming at 4x great.

 

For magnification, the scope wins as I can use variable adjustments on it. For quick acquisition, like BBK stated, the scope may be added weight. I've yet to weigh if my scope is lighter than the RDS/magnifier combo but I think the RDS is definitely lighter than just the scope. Shooting off a bench, I would go with the scope as you do not have to worry about the weight.

 

See if you can go with someone who has a scope and take it for a test spin. I originally had the RDS and once I tried the scope, I knew I needed some magnification. In went the magnifier but I felt it was not the same so I finally broke down and got the scope. It's probably me but my vision at distance is not that great which influenced my choice. I know quite a few people who can hit way farther with just a plain RDS or irons.

[High Exposure 5,661]

A magnified optic will let you see better, it will not make you shoot better under any realistic conditions.

 

At 100 yards and in I am faster and more accurate with my T1 than with my T1 and a magnifier. The magnifier does allow me to make target ID of Friend/Foe faster but slows me down as I am looking for the "perfect" dot placement.

 

My advice, spend the $$ you have set aside for the magnified optic on ammo and take a class from a reputable instructor.

 

If you are dead set on magnification, a 3x in a FTS mount is the way to go for a multipurpose carbine (CQB - 300 yards vice a designated long range weapon system).

[Vlad G 345]

I've been divided on this for a long time. Everyone I shoot 3gun with uses 1-4x or 1-6x scopes, but I use a red dot. The way I feel about it is that anything under 100yards I'm faster with a red dot, regardless of target size. Between 100 and 200, if the target is 4-6 MOA or larger, I'm still getting hits faster with a red dot. from 200 to 300 the scope edges out the red dot. At 400+ yards I can't hit 10" targets anymore because even if I can correctly account for drop without stadia's or mildots or whatever I can not account for the wind because I can't see the wind signs that far out. This bit me pretty hard last year at FNH 3gun.

 

The short version is that under 200, for me, the red dot is always better assuming realistic target sizes. Past 200 I really want a scope, and by 300 or so I really need a scope.

[2Alpha 6]

I just got a Vortex 1-6x, Been shooting mostly with a Micro before that. The great thing about the variables is the flexibility, sometime a 2x is perfect for a given target, sometime 1x, sometimes 6x. You don't have that flexibility with the RDS even with a magnifier. The last rifle match I shot was won or lost on the long range stage, just about rifle is. You could not see some of the targets on the long range stage at all without magnification, I shot using estimation based on objects I could see. Magnification provids a significant benefit here.

On a fast run and gun close target stage a red dot is faster and more forgiving. But it gives up a lot when you get at distance with low contrast targets

[NJdiverTony 27]

Thanks for all the posts guys. I'm still torn on what to do. There are pros and cons either way I go.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[alowerlevel 77]

You could always buy a inexpensive 1-4 to try out before you drop the coin on a good scope, that way you will know if its gonna be what your looking for.

Something like this http://swfa.com/Opti...mbo-P51887.aspx even comes with a mount and gets decent reviews over on ar15.com

Or the PA 1-4x https://www.primaryarms.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=PA14X

[twong11219 0]

I think ultimately it depends on what your primary intent of use is. My decision was based on something that I can use all-around. I didn't want 2 separate setups and having the need to switch between what I wanted to use. Whether it be quick targeting or slow long-range bench accuracy, I wanted a one-for-all. I opted for the 1-4x Burris XTR. The pricing costs a bit more than an Aimpoint and magnifier. Set at 1x it does take a little getting use to compared to a RDS. You don't have the eye relief of a RDS with absolutely zero magnification at any distance from your eye. The scope has a slight distortion with both eyes open depending on how you focus it. Of course, if you stick a magnifier behind an RDS, you are going to run into the same eye relief issue you would have with a scope. The XTR reticle was what sold me on it. With the lumination turned up, it provides the large eye catching center reticle for quick acquisition similar to an EOTech. 2.25mil glowing outer circle. Perfect for transitioning between targets. The reticle is also very crisp and unobtrusive. Matched with good quality glass, I get a clean, uncluttered sight picture. Now if I want to tighten my groupings, I can turn to the center dot which is .25mil. I always felt the red dot covers too much of the target when trying to get the small groupings. Instead of centering the dot on the 10 ring, I have to center the dot inside the 8 or 9 ring to get my sight alignment. Another factor in choosing the XTR was the bullet drop compensation reticle. No need to guess how high to hold when you start going beyond 100yds.

 

The only one gripe I have for the scope is the weight. That much tube and glass does weigh things down.

 

Now can I say this is great for HD situations? No. The scope sits over my rear BUIS. If the battery takes a dump, I still have the cross hairs, but forget about using it in the dark. I don't have a quick release mount so gonna need a tool to take the scope off before I can use the irons. Since my setup is not primarily for HD, I'm not concerned. I have other gear to fulfill the HD requirements.

[Alex V 99]

Here is a question I didn't see... wha is the gun for?

 

Is it a training/home defense/shit hit the fan gun?

 

or

 

Is it a bench/hunting/long range gun?

 

If your goal is to get crazy groups at 100y then you might as well get more magnification than 4 or 6. I love my NF 2.5-10x32 and it's more than enough for the short-ish ranges here in NJ (300y and under) Would I use that gun at 7yards? Not if I had a choice.

 

On my training/HD guns I do have Aimpoints but I too have been toying with the idea of a 1-4x variable. With practice I think I can be just as fast as I am with my Aimpoint, and I should be quicker at long range shots. Then again, I really dont have much of a problem hitting a 10" round steel plate at 200 yeards with the 2moa dot in my Aimpoint... My only worry is the visual cofusion while shooting both eyes open because very few 1-4s are true 1x.

 

The added weight is a big problem for me as well.

 

I would like to try it, but that could be a $2000 mistake lol

[Nikos 31]

Forgot about this thread. My Nikon M223 1-4x came in a couple of weeks ago. It's still in the box but if you want to try it out on your AR let me know and I'll bring it.

[NJdiverTony 27]

Thanks, Niko! I got sidetracked with work (started a new job at my company) and never even got around to looking for a scope. For now, I still have my red dot... which is fine. Yeah, if I can find some to actually get to the range, I'd love to try the scope out! I don't want to mess it up once you have it sighted in though... so maybe I can check it out and take a few shots with your rifle. I'll bring the ammo

[NJdiverTony 27]

Here is a question I didn't see... wha is the gun for?

 

Is it a training/home defense/shit hit the fan gun?

 

or

 

Is it a bench/hunting/long range gun?

 

If your goal is to get crazy groups at 100y then you might as well get more magnification than 4 or 6. I love my NF 2.5-10x32 and it's more than enough for the short-ish ranges here in NJ (300y and under) Would I use that gun at 7yards? Not if I had a choice.

 

On my training/HD guns I do have Aimpoints but I too have been toying with the idea of a 1-4x variable. With practice I think I can be just as fast as I am with my Aimpoint, and I should be quicker at long range shots. Then again, I really dont have much of a problem hitting a 10" round steel plate at 200 yeards with the 2moa dot in my Aimpoint... My only worry is the visual cofusion while shooting both eyes open because very few 1-4s are true 1x.

 

The added weight is a big problem for me as well.

 

I would like to try it, but that could be a $2000 mistake lol

 

My AR is an all around use rifle (home defense, SHTF, range plinker, etc)... so maybe the red dot might be the best best for it. I don't shoot more than 100 to 200 yrds anyway... but I do like doing some precision bench shooting from time to time... I've been toying with the idea of maybe replacing my Primary Arms 2 MOA red dot with an Eotech EXPS2 or EXPS3 and 3x magnifier... but still not sure. I'm having a hard time parting with the $500 to $600 that it costs! LOL!

[Nikos 31]

You can mount it on your set up -- no prob. I already have a scope mounted on my newest AR build which I need to zero at the range. I got the 1-4x for a future build, but considering the way the market is, I can't find the components I'm looking for at the moment.

[Alex V 99]

My AR is an all around use rifle (home defense, SHTF, range plinker, etc)... so maybe the red dot might be the best best for it. I don't shoot more than 100 to 200 yrds anyway... but I do like doing some precision bench shooting from time to time... I've been toying with the idea of maybe replacing my Primary Arms 2 MOA red dot with an Eotech EXPS2 or EXPS3 and 3x magnifier... but still not sure. I'm having a hard time parting with the $500 to $600 that it costs! LOL!

 

I just got 2 PA Mini-RDS last night. One went on a back up AR and the other on my SPR as a back-up sight with an 1 o'clock DD offset mount. For the $, they seem to be awesome RDS's. Bright dot and seems to be well made.

 

Going to an EOTech you will have to get used to the new reticle. Personaly, I find it distracting and like the Aimpoint better. See if you can shoot a gun with an EOTech before commiting the funds to it. I did that and decided against it.

 

Like I said, you can get into a 1-4 or a 1-6 but it will be expencive for a good one. It would only take a little more practice to get to be as fast with it as you can be with an RDS. I still feel I may go that way. Personaly, the lowerst I would go is SWFA, $800 for the 1-4 and $1000 for the 1-6. Other than that I would look at the NSX 1-4 and ultimatly Schmidt & Dender Sort-Dot.