Looking to spend no more than $700 on Tavor sights...

[karlkurtz32 0]

I'm looking into getting sights put on my Tavor and so far my head is spinning. I've narrowed

down some parameters: I want to spend $700 at most, and I probably won't be shooting past 300m on most days. Any recommendations?

[O-gre 7]

Picked up an aimpoint pro for mine during black fri

[High Exposure 5,664]

Aimpoint PRO or T1. If you have the cash, get an Aimpont 3x Magnifier in a FTS mount.

[karlkurtz32 0]

Aimpoint Pro keeps coming up. A buddy of mine who is a former Ranger recommended the same thing. I think I'll be going with that. Thanks guys. How is that FTS mount? Do you use one?

[High Exposure 5,664]

When I used a mag I kept it in a Larue Flip To Side mount, it rocked.

[karlkurtz32 0]

Awesome. Thanks for the info. I just watched a YouTube video showing an Aimpoint Pro combined with a magnifier+LaRue FTS mount and it seemed like the magnifier and Aimpoint weren't lined up properly. Was this a problem you had, too?

[High Exposure 5,664]

With a T1, not a PRO.

[karlkurtz32 0]

Ok cool. So I'll be gtg with a Pro? Thanks guys for the help. Much appreciated.

[High Exposure 5,664]

Double check with Larue. The OEM PRO mount is a weird height. Not quite lower 1/3 not quite absolute cowitness.

 

Call them and they will set you up.

[Blake 50]

I run a PRO on mine you won't be let down.  Best bang for your buck on a combat quality optic.  

 

edit:  the PRO also co-witnesses nicely with the stock flip up sights on the Tavor.

[Blake 50]

[karlkurtz32 0]

Wow, very nice setup. I think I'll be going with that

[checko 180]

Double check with Larue. The OEM PRO mount is a weird height. Not quite lower 1/3 not quite absolute cowitness.

 

Call them and they will set you up.

 

Why is that?  Aimpoint must know that it is an odd height.   Is that a standard height for some euro optics or something?  Maybe a behind the scenes deal with LaRue lol 

[High Exposure 5,664]

The OEM mount for the PRO can be set to two different heights with the addition or removal of a riser in the mount. With the riser in place, the center of the optic is about 1.535" above the rail. I am not sure in the exact height without the spacer but I think it is around 1.2" giving you an undesirable upper 1/3 cowitness on an AR. On the AR platform you need the center of the optic at 1.75" for a standard lower 1/3 cowitness, and at 1.38" for an absolute co witness.

 

I don't know for sure but my guess is that these heights make the mount useful across a wider range of platforms, as the Aimpoint is not solely an AR optic. I have mine in OEM mounts (sans riser) on an MSAR STG-E4, an MP5, and an 870 in addition to a Colt R0933 "Commando" (with the riser installed). The OEM mount gives me useful mounting options for all four platforms. Although... I am thinking about getting an ADM Low Mount for use on the MSAR. I would prefer if the optic was just a tad lower. ADM makes good gear - I have one of their MRDS mounts and I like it a lot - and they make the lowest aftermarket PRO mount I could find.

[checko 180]

I get that there are other rifles that it can be uses for but the ar15 series must be the largest portion of their market. One would think they'd have catered to those customers as much as possible.

 

I was thinking for example that the main issue rifle was a sig 556 in Sweden and the mount is made to work better with that or something.

[High Exposure 5,664]

I would bet that that may very well be the case. Aimpoint does sell an additional insert that makes the PRO sit at a true lower 1/3 cowitness.

[rightisright 3]

Another vote for the PRO.  And for human sized targets out to 300m, you don't need a magnifier.    For target work, maybe. 

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot 358]

The Meprolight is the IDF's reflex optic of choice ...

[High Exposure 5,664]

Reflex optic? No thanks. My thoughts in the IDF/ISF/etc. and their penchant for using terrible TTPs and equipment aside... The Meprolight reflex sight pictured above is an almost exact replica of the old Trijicon Reflex sight that was issued as part of the US Special Operations SOPMOD Block I in the late 80s early 90s. That optic has since been removed from the kit, and with cause.

 

The "dual illumination" that allows the the optic to be proudly advertised as "battery free" (appealing to the followers of Ned amongst us) offers abysmal performance in anything but full light or total darkness. Any lighting conditions between those two extremes and the performance of the optic degrades noticeably, especially if shooting in low light and using a bright white light for target discrimination. The condition of darkness surrounding you makes the "self adjusting brightness" of the optic think that a dim reticle is appropriate for the task at hand, but the bright white light projected from the front of your weapon illuminates the threat washing out the dim reticle rendering the optic essentially useless for any social work.

 

Plus at $530 for the Meprolight you can by an Aimpoint Pro (with a 5 year constant on battery life) at around $380 and have plenty of $$ leftover for a few hundred rounds of ammo to sight it in and enjoy a nice day at the range.

 

But, as always, YMMV and all that applies...

[Blake 50]

^ I originally was going to buy the Meprolight sight for the Tavor, then got to play with one.  I am glad I did bc I would never buy one now having shot with it for only a half hour.  After shooting it I started digging for more reviews and they all echo'd exactly what HE said above, they are terrible in anything but bright sunlight or very dark scenarios.  

 

This actually brings me to an interesting question - I still haven't purchased a dot sight for my M&P CORE.  The RMR is still the front runner, but it is a dual illumination sight.  How does the current gen Trijicon sights fair in low light conditions?   

 

Sorry if I derail the thread...

[High Exposure 5,664]

http://njgunforums.com/forum/index.php/topic/63155-optics-for-mp-core-or-fnx-tac/

 

We have already had this discussion

 

Get one of the RMRs that are battery powered. I have an RMR02 (old version - before the upgrade) on a Glock that has had the same battery in it for the last 2 years with no issues. It has an 8moa dot which is a little bigger than I would have liked, but it is FAST to pick up and the price was right.

 

If I was going to do it again, I would get an RMR06. 3.5moa and adjustable brightness. The older adjustables were less than ideal for CCW as it was easy to accidentally turn them down/off in the holster, and they had more failures that the auto brightness/dual illum models. By all reports, the new versions have solved these issues and are the bees knees.

[Blake 50]

I know I made that thread lol. Thats how I decided on the RMR. I didnt pick up on the fact I should get a battery powered model vs the dual illumination though.

 

Glad I waited and thanks for the input. Now I know exactly which models to look out for.

[karlkurtz32 0]

Thanks for the help everyone. It looks like I'll be leaning toward the Aimpoint Pro. So far I haven't heard anything bad about it. Meprolight reviews seem to be hit or miss.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Thanks for the help everyone. It looks like I'll be leaning toward the Aimpoint Pro. So far I haven't heard anything bad about it. Meprolight reviews seem to be hit or miss.

 

 

I have two of the Aimpoint Pros.. no complaints.. solid optic for the price...

[SgtToadette 59]

So what is the point of other 30mm tube sights from Aimpoint? It seems like the PRO and the T1 made them obsolete. I can kind of understand why the Comp M4 exists, but don't understand why the other 30mm sights need to continue existing.

[High Exposure 5,664]

The PRO is a 30mm tube sight. It is basically and M2/M3 with M4 electronics and an OEM mount.

[SgtToadette 59]

The PRO is a 30mm tube sight. It is basically and M2/M3 with M4 electronics and an OEM mount.

 

So better and less expensive?

[High Exposure 5,664]

I think the only real difference is a 30k hour battery life on the PRO and a 50k hour battery life on the M3. But you get a mount and lens covers with the PRO, so better and cheaper are subjective.

 

Edit: it appears that what I wrote above is no longer the case, looks like ACET tech all around. The PRO has a 50k hour battery life now as well.

Edited December 13, 2013 by High Exposure

[SgtToadette 59]

I think the only real difference is a 30k hour battery life on the PRO and a 50k hour battery life on the M3. But you get a mount and lens covers with the PRO, so better and cheaper are subjective.

 

Edit: it appears that what I wrote above is no longer the case, looks like ACET tech all around. The PRO has a 50k hour battery life now as well.

 

So for what reason would a person purchase a M3 over a PRO?

[High Exposure 5,664]

Stupidity....

 

I don't think the PRO is built to the Mil Spec for the CCO solicitation. The M3 is as it used to be the Army's M68 CCO - the Aimpoint M4 is the new M68 CCO.