Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Rifle & Shotgun Discussion
Thinking of getting away from holographic optics on my AR
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ez bake" data-source="post: 866382" data-attributes="member: 229"><p>I'm thinking of going back to an etched reticule for my AR since I mostly use it for hunting hogs anyways. I'd like to do a 3-gun with it at least once, or a carbine course maybe once (just for the experience), but its primary use is to kill hogs (and possibly deer in my son's hands).</p><p></p><p>Illuminated is nice, but I don't know that I want a holographic sight anymore. I like my EOTech, but its heavy and while the reticule was the biggest reason that I went to it over the Aimpoint - I don't know that the reticule is that effective at measuring for distance shots since its just a fuzzy piece of holographic light. I've tried to use it for hold-overs based on its measurements, but its just not sharp enough of a reticule to get exactly right no matter what brightness setting I use (or maybe its my eyes).</p><p></p><p>I was thinking of going over to an Aimpoint Comp ML3, but its non-magnified and just a dot, so no range-finding in the reticule (on the off-chance that I need to take a longer shot) is out and magnification for both this one and the EOTech are a pain (weight, cost, etc...). </p><p></p><p>I rarely see a hog more than 50yds away, so a non-magnified reticule has served me well, but I find myself more and more doing long-distance hiking when I hunt and it gets to where I want to grab the AR over my bolt-gun due to weight even for deer or coyotes (which tend to stay farther away from me than Hogs). </p><p></p><p>I don't have a problem deer hunting with it as I'm not the type to take a rushed shot and I'm typically using 75gr high-quality rounds so with even decent shot-placement, everything I've ever shot at has died quickly.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I was looking at going with a Leupold VX-I 1-4 Shotgun scope (or similar scope - the scout scope, the Mark AR, etc... are all pretty similar weight wise) on Optics Planet's Leupold Custom shop and changing the reticule to get either a Special Purpose, Mil-Dot, or Varmint Hunter just to give me enough of a reticule to take a 200yd shot (max I'd probably try to take when hunting with an AR is 200-250yds).</p><p></p><p>That reticule is expensive though, and I wonder if its worth it or should I just go with a duplex and adjust the knobs if I need to take a longer shot. I figure it would do well in the same type of scout mount that the Millet DMS-1 fits in, but I'd probably just do rings for now to keep the weight down.</p><p></p><p>I'm actually thinking of ditching Irons if I go this route, but I've honestly thought about going entirely the opposite way and ditching optics altogether to go with a light-weight setup of just irons. Problem is that I get no magnification that route and my eyes aren't getting any better as i get older so I'd probably be killing the possibility of any longer range shots at that point.</p><p></p><p>I don't know - just tossing this out there for conversation's sake I guess.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ez bake, post: 866382, member: 229"] I'm thinking of going back to an etched reticule for my AR since I mostly use it for hunting hogs anyways. I'd like to do a 3-gun with it at least once, or a carbine course maybe once (just for the experience), but its primary use is to kill hogs (and possibly deer in my son's hands). Illuminated is nice, but I don't know that I want a holographic sight anymore. I like my EOTech, but its heavy and while the reticule was the biggest reason that I went to it over the Aimpoint - I don't know that the reticule is that effective at measuring for distance shots since its just a fuzzy piece of holographic light. I've tried to use it for hold-overs based on its measurements, but its just not sharp enough of a reticule to get exactly right no matter what brightness setting I use (or maybe its my eyes). I was thinking of going over to an Aimpoint Comp ML3, but its non-magnified and just a dot, so no range-finding in the reticule (on the off-chance that I need to take a longer shot) is out and magnification for both this one and the EOTech are a pain (weight, cost, etc...). I rarely see a hog more than 50yds away, so a non-magnified reticule has served me well, but I find myself more and more doing long-distance hiking when I hunt and it gets to where I want to grab the AR over my bolt-gun due to weight even for deer or coyotes (which tend to stay farther away from me than Hogs). I don't have a problem deer hunting with it as I'm not the type to take a rushed shot and I'm typically using 75gr high-quality rounds so with even decent shot-placement, everything I've ever shot at has died quickly. I was looking at going with a Leupold VX-I 1-4 Shotgun scope (or similar scope - the scout scope, the Mark AR, etc... are all pretty similar weight wise) on Optics Planet's Leupold Custom shop and changing the reticule to get either a Special Purpose, Mil-Dot, or Varmint Hunter just to give me enough of a reticule to take a 200yd shot (max I'd probably try to take when hunting with an AR is 200-250yds). That reticule is expensive though, and I wonder if its worth it or should I just go with a duplex and adjust the knobs if I need to take a longer shot. I figure it would do well in the same type of scout mount that the Millet DMS-1 fits in, but I'd probably just do rings for now to keep the weight down. I'm actually thinking of ditching Irons if I go this route, but I've honestly thought about going entirely the opposite way and ditching optics altogether to go with a light-weight setup of just irons. Problem is that I get no magnification that route and my eyes aren't getting any better as i get older so I'd probably be killing the possibility of any longer range shots at that point. I don't know - just tossing this out there for conversation's sake I guess. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Rifle & Shotgun Discussion
Thinking of getting away from holographic optics on my AR
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom