1-4, 1-6 or 1-8 for my AR? (selection made, zeroed!)

Jayne

Jayne

Just here for the memes
Charter Member
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Joined
Dec 16, 2016
Messages
8,028
Location
Unincorporated Wake County
Rating - 100%
34   0   0
I've got a 3x magnifier behind a 4MOA dot and am finding it challenging at 200+ when the dot itself covers the entire target.

@NKD let me try out his 1-4 and it made a world of difference.

I'm looking at the primary arms or comparable vortex units (sub $400 here) and they're available in 1-4, 1-6 and 1-8.

Normally I go for the largest magnification I can get, but on something like this that has to work from 0 to 400 yards, not 100-1000 yards, what's the sweet spot?

1-4 is the cheapest, but manufacturers are all moving to 1-6 and 1-8. either it's because manufacturing is catching up and they can offer those at competitive prices, or it's just 'more is better' madness.

In the low price range, less magnification would mean a better image is my guess, a cheap 1-4 will look better than a cheap 1-8.... or are they mostly the same quality wise and the price scales with the cost to manufacture better looking 8x glass?
 
I had a 1-6 strike eagle on my 3 gun rifle and it worked well for the 400yd stage at CGGR. I setup a 400yd range at my uncle's sometimes and shoot with a buddy out there and I had a chance to look through his bushnell 1-4 and holy crap I didn't think 2x would make much of a difference but it was ridiculous. I could see the whole plate through mine and through his the plate was predominantly covered by the reticle.

That being said I stepped up another 2x and picked up a strike eagle 1-8 but I haven't had the chance to shoot with it yet.
 
Are you set on a 1-4 or 1-6? I am running a Vortex 2-7 and I am very fond of that magnification range. Now I am blind and only shoot out too 200yard with my 6.8 lol
 
I hunted with a 1-4 on my AR this season. I was hunting over a feeder, but I had lanes that offered shots just over 100yds. When looking at deer at the end of that lane, I was really wanting a little more magnification.

But, I'm talking about hunting. This may not make much difference in comparison to target shooting.
 
I shot a Burris MTAC 1-4 for years in 3 gun and it was plenty out to 400. It's still on that rifle, which is my goto AR since I know it well. I did get a StrikeEagle 1-6, set it up, and promptly life interrupted my 3gun attendance but I'm sure it is fine as well. Haven't tried the newer 1-8s.

If you can shoot a dot at 100 (and prefer field of view over mag at that range), then you will be fine with a 4x at 100.
Or pick your own "max unmagnified range" and divide into whatever range you'd like to be capable out to, and voila! You have an answer.

A little extra mag doesn't make that much difference in practice, although it does trade off for price and optical quality. They are definitely getting better at building them, although I prefer the MTAC 1-4 over the 1-6 StrikeEagle optically by just a little bit. There are lots of inexpensive 1-n scopes around to try out samples if you want to.
 
I have a Burris Mtac 1-4, its nice but I wouldnt mind a 6 or so. Last 3 gun at CGGR I missed the last 2 targets at the end. Totally not my fault, it was the scope
 
As a mostly clueless AR owner here I would ask how the AR will be used? 3-gun is different than square range distance shooting and different than home defense. I like red dots for an all-around rifle. Up close to 100 yards. But for me beyond 100' I really lose accuracy with a dot as far as target accuracy goes. I can hit center mass, but not tiny spots. If money didn't matter a high-end 1-8 makes sense to me. But at some point is a 2-7 or even 3-9 a good idea? They re cost effective. How bad are you at say 25 yards with a 3x? Probably not horrible especially if it has an illuminated dot.
 
IMO, you want the 1x useability of a red dot, which is what makes these scopes so versatile. 90% of the time my optic is on 1x.

Once you go to 2x or 3x , the ability to shoot with both eyes open and with target focus is dimished or gone completely.

I found that I started to appreciate glass quality over magnification. I'd rather have a 1-4 with good glass over a 1-6/8 with crappy glass. In fact I went from a SE 1-6 to a Steiner 1-4 and I like the 1-4 better. I miss the extra 2x, but will only get it when I can afford to have a 1-6 with glass like the Steiner. And that is going to cost $800+
You have to compare them with equal glass quality. For example:
You are going to see much more light and detail through a Vortex HD 1-6 than you could ever hope to see through a strike eagle 1-8.

It's a $1300 scope compared to a $400 scope. It's better in every way and doesn't suffer for lack of the additional 2x, imo.

I am no optics expert though, and there are many on this forum with more experience. But I think glass quality trumps magnification handily.
All that said, the strike eagle 1-6 and PA 1-6 are awesome for the money. I believe Athlon makes one too, maybe Harold knows as I think he sells those too.
 
I'm leaning toward the gen3 1-6 primary arms. I like that the whole reticle tree lights up, makes the 200-500 yard brown target on a brown background thing easier to resolve when you're not using a black reticle to figure out holdover like I've experienced at our local range. The 1-8 version only lights up the circle and the top chevron. Good for fast shots for sure, but not as good for the mid range stuff.

The 1-6 is cheaper, which frees up more money for a quality QD mount, which can be reused if I want to upgrade later. I still want to be able to use the flip-up irons as backup, and I don't see how that works in the field when people use the torqued nut style mount. To remove the presumably damaged optic to use the sights you have to have tools or a nut driver. That seems suboptimal.



But I have to sit on this for a while, who knows how I'll change my mind before I buy. It's only January 4th...
 
Last edited:
Do not skimp on the glass. any of the $400 scopes are cheap glass. Save until you can get a Razor or similar quality you will really appreciate it. If you want to see a Razor give me a yell and you can check out on of ours.
 
I would love a razor but I have a hard time justifying spending big money on some top tier items. Sure it would be nice to have the best but I would much rather buy mid grade that will work just fine and then have cash leftover to throw at other projects. Some things I will throw money at, others I skimp. It's called balance haha.
 
11B CIB said:
Not everyone needs a Vortex Razor (the 1-6 is $1400) scope. To suggest it is a little out of touch.


Atibal has a new 1-8x scope out that’s <$400 and competitive with and IMO has some better features than the PA and Strike Eagle:

https://shop.opticsplanet.com/atiba...MI4aj1rZ-_2AIViVx-Ch0azgMREAQYASABEgJNZfD_BwE
Click to expand...

Why do people build nice rifles then stick junk on them? If you can afford a $1000 rifle build or sometimes more then get good glass. It will last longer and perform better in less than ideal conditions.
 
11B CIB said:
@Jayne
You can find good deals on Vortex PST Gen 1 1-4x optics out there. The glass is very good for the money.
https://shop.opticsplanet.com/vorte...MI1pWruZi_2AIVD5t-Ch3pCgb7EAQYASABEgJMRfD_BwE

Also look at the Leupold Mark AR 1.5-4....around $299
https://shop.opticsplanet.com/leupo...MI0N2t-Ze_2AIVkaDsCh3sBAZUEAQYASABEgKiMPD_BwE
Click to expand...
I would put the PA up against that Vortex any day! I know, I know, it won’t win any Instagram photo contests, or circle jerk ego boost, but the PA is damn fine optic for the money!
 
TSConver said:
Why do people build nice rifles then stick junk on them? If you can afford a $1000 rifle build or sometimes more then get good glass. It will last longer and perform better in less than ideal conditions.
Click to expand...
Likely because 99% or even more will never surpass the capabilities of the less expensive options. I’d rather have a $400 scope and a $1000 worth of ammo than I would a $1400 scope and no ammo to train with the gun. But, I get it, that doesn’t get any “likes” online...
 
TSConver said:
Why do people build nice rifles then stick junk on them? If you can afford a $1000 rifle build or sometimes more then get good glass. It will last longer and perform better in less than ideal conditions.
Click to expand...

Maybe because they spent all their money on the rifle? Lol

I have a ~$1500 spr with a $350 athlon on top of it. I have no desire to drop another $1-2k on glass. For what I do it's just not worth it. The athlon will serve me fine and I am building multiple other gun with the money I didn't spend on glass.
 
Gear Head said:
Maybe because they spent all their money on the rifle? Lol

I have a ~$1500 spr with a $350 athlon on top of it. I have no desire to drop another $1-2k on glass. For what I do it's just not worth it. The athlon will serve me fine and I am building multiple other gun with the money I didn't spend on glass.
Click to expand...
But, but, what about impressing the keyboard commandos?? You can’t do that with an Athlon! What if you have to go to war tonight like 90% of other online gunfighters? How will you survive without a $3,000 scope??? But, but, but....
 
hlpressley said:
But, but, what about impressing the keyboard commandos?? You can’t do that with an Athlon! What if you have to go to war tonight like 90% of other online gunfighters? How will you survive without a $3,000 scope??? But, but, but....
Click to expand...

It is about performance. The distortion at the edge of the cheap glass is noticeable, on the higher end stuff it is not there. The clarity at distance or low light is much better as well. Impact from mirage is reduced on better glass. Plus the Razor is made in the US, the cheap vortexs are made in china at the same factory that makes the PA and other low end scopes. Then again they are not on cheap rifles. One Razor is on my F1 Firearm 3 Gun Rifle and the other is on my wife's F1 Firearm / locally custom built rifle.

Having shot both on my 3 gun rifles i will never go back to the cheap stuff.

For my SHTF gun I have iron sights on one and Trijicon ACOG on the other. Want it simple for fewer failure points.
 
Last edited:
TSConver said:
It is about performance. The distortion at the edge of the cheap glass is noticeable, on the higher end stuff it is not there. The clarity at distance or low light is much better as well. Impact from mirage is reduced on better glass. Plus the Razor is made in the US, the cheap vortexs are made in china at the same factory that makes the PA and other low end scopes. Then again they are not on cheap rifles. One Razor is on my F1 Firearm 3 Gun Rifle and the other is on my wife's F1 Firearm / locally custom built rifle.

Having shot both on my 3 gun rifles i will never go back to the cheap stuff.

For my SHTF gun I have iron sights on one and Trijicon ACOG on the other. Want it simple for fewer failure points.
Click to expand...

I’m certainly not ignorant as to the difference between a high end optic and the less expensive options. But, thanks for listing all of your “cool kid” entries. Perhaps someone will send you some “likes” to use at your next meeting.


I’m simply stating that the less expensive options will never be what’s holding 90% of recreational shooters back. It’s the lack of proper training. I see it at the range every weekend. $4k-$8k pistols getting smoked by Glock 34’s! But hey, the guy with the $8k pistol definitely gets the attention...until the scores come out...
 
Last edited:
A lot of good options between 250$ and 1400$, imo.
If money were no object I would have a Razor. They're amazing optics!

But, champagne taste and beer budget. Good beer, but beer none the less.
 
TSConver said:
Why do people build nice rifles then stick junk on them? If you can afford a $1000 rifle build or sometimes more then get good glass. It will last longer and perform better in less than ideal conditions.
Click to expand...

I don’t know how much the OP spent on his rifle. He posted his optic budget (~$400) so that’s what I went with

I have Trijicons, Aimpoint and higher end Vortex (not Razor HD but still not cheap) scope on my ARs. I don’t need more at this point and time but I certainly don’t need less.
 
I've had a Vortex Viper 2-7x32 on my 18" 6.8SPC. Great for both woods hunting & shooting groups at 300yds. I've got the Vortex Strike Eagle 1-6x24 waiting to go on my 10" .300BLK.

With a PA Aimpoint clone on the SBR, I can hold around 2" at 100yds, but really need some magnification for hunting. Hoping the Strike Eagle works similarly enough to a red-dot at 1x allows me to shoot with both eyes open (I'm EXTREMELY cross-dominant), close-in & have plenty of magnification on tap for longer shots on occasion.
 
hlpressley said:
I’m simply stating that the less expensive options will never be what’s holding 90% of recreational shooters back.
Click to expand...

In a Good Way, I find Great Humor with threads like this and totally agree on the training issue.

Coupled with the training issue is full knowledge of your rig, etc.

I also believe many recreational shooters ( nothing wrong with the recreational shooter ) get confused and intimidated because of LIMITED disposable income and want to make the best choice possible for their needs.
This goes back to Knowing your equipment and concerning scopes, how many have actually tracked their scope ( low or high priced ) to get a DOPE ?

It's not what you have, but how you use what you do have.

My next scope, Hubble Jr.
Waiting for the 200mm rings from NASA.

compound.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: NKD
Forgot to mention my youngest son purchased a Leupold Mark AR MOD 1 1.5-4x20mm Firedot and has it on his AR. Works great for him and he got it for less then $500.

mark-ar-mod-1-1-5-4x20mm

FireDot_G_SPR-380x.png


CD
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: NKD
NKD said:
A lot of good options between 250$ and 1400$, imo.
If money were no object I would have a Razor. They're amazing optics!

But, champagne taste and beer budget. Good beer, but beer none the less.
Click to expand...
We know I'm a huge Vortex fan, but damn if Steiner aint trying t sway me away every time I look through their stuff. Don't think you'll find anything from them in the sub $600 range though.
 
They discontinued the SWFA 1-4 FFP in favor of the 1-6x, but SWFA's used scope website has 2 of the 1-4's like the one I have currently for a decent price($500). They are both graded Demo B: Shows Very Slight Wear From Use. FYI, I paid $640 for mine when it was on sale down from $800.

https://samplelist.com/catalog/product/view/id/178648/
https://samplelist.com/catalog/product/view/id/178642/

They also have a strike eagle for $280 with scope end caps.

https://samplelist.com/catalog/product/view/id/178571/
 
TSConver said:
It is about performance. The distortion at the edge of the cheap glass is noticeable, on the higher end stuff it is not there. The clarity at distance or low light is much better as well. Impact from mirage is reduced on better glass. Plus the Razor is made in the US, the cheap vortexs are made in china at the same factory that makes the PA and other low end scopes. Then again they are not on cheap rifles. One Razor is on my F1 Firearm 3 Gun Rifle and the other is on my wife's F1 Firearm / locally custom built rifle.

Having shot both on my 3 gun rifles i will never go back to the cheap stuff.

For my SHTF gun I have iron sights on one and Trijicon ACOG on the other. Want it simple for fewer failure points.
Click to expand...
Being a cheap SOB I'm familiar with the edge distortion you mention. Most of my optics are mid to low range Millet, Vortex, Weaver, Bushnell models. What I fail to see is why it really matters. My eye can only examine one spot in detail at a time. The entire field of view is necessary for locating the target, spotting movement, etc. which IMO don't require perfect clarity. When I need the fine resolution and clarity I'm on target and looking through the center. What am I missing?
 
Last edited:
+1 on the Steiner P4Xi, I had 2, sold one off, regretted it and bought it back. For around $550 with throw lever and mount, it’s a great deal I think. I personally would like higher end magnification, but I hardly ever, if ever shoot past 100yds. I went to the Steiners from PROs due to my crappy eyesight. It’s US made, has great glass and is plenty durable for me. I toy with the idea of trading one off every now and again for an MRO, just to try another RDS, but I think I’d regret it again just to end up buying a new one all over again.
 
11B CIB said:
@Jayne
You can find good deals on Vortex PST Gen 1 1-4x optics out there. The glass is very good for the money.
https://shop.opticsplanet.com/vorte...MI1pWruZi_2AIVD5t-Ch3pCgb7EAQYASABEgJMRfD_BwE

Also look at the Leupold Mark AR 1.5-4....around $299
https://shop.opticsplanet.com/leupo...MI0N2t-Ze_2AIVkaDsCh3sBAZUEAQYASABEgKiMPD_BwE
Click to expand...
I looked at the leupold at PSA a while back and decided that's what I would hold out for. It really dialed in to compensate for my poor vision.

Anyone want to buy My aimpoint M2 so I can afford it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom