JimConway
Instructor
14 July 10
The "magnification-factor"
Non-magnifying optics on serious rifles provide the Operator with significant advantages over iron sights. Of that there is little doubt.
The elimination of the need for wearisome maintenance of the alignment of front and rear sights with the shooter's eye is the main selling point for rod-dots. The aiming point (dot) needn't be in the exact center of the rear lens. Even when it is near the edge, it is still on target, and this represents a genuine advantage, because the Operator's head and face don't have to be positioned precisely behind the rear sight, a substantial benefit when shooting from awkward positions.
The other main feature of optics is the ability of the Operator to see, while looking through his optic, downrange detail that is under the aiming point. With most iron sights, such details is blocked out.
For competent fighting, my preference is Aimpoint's T1 or H1 (on LaRue mounts), mounted well forward and away from the Operator's eye. Aimpoints are not eye-relief critical, and can therefore be mounted anywhere on the top rail. The T1 and H1 are both exceptionally compact and non-magnifying.
However, many police executives insist on magnifying optics, because they want to see downrange detail, detail that is important to report-writers, less important to active combatants!
Most good scout-scopes are 2.5x or less, are also not eye-relief critical, and can thus be forward-mounted. They too represent a good choice for serious rifles. Magnification beyond 2.5x requires close eye-relief and is not recommended.
Close-eye relief optics make it difficult for the Operator to see around the scope, so the scope becomes his whole world. This may suffice when someone else is watching your back, but not a good idea when you're operating alone!
Another issue with high-magnification optics is the constant temptation to analyze the downrange situation through the scope. Big-game hunters do this all the time. However, we must remember that, in doing so, you're necessarily and deliberately pointing your gun in the direction of what may be innocent people.
High-magnification optics, in my opinion, are well suited for hunting non-dangerous game at extended ranges. When fighting for one's life, for reasons enumerated in the foregoing, they represent a poor choice!
For fighting rifles, non-magnifying rod-dots are the way to go.
/John
The "magnification-factor"
Non-magnifying optics on serious rifles provide the Operator with significant advantages over iron sights. Of that there is little doubt.
The elimination of the need for wearisome maintenance of the alignment of front and rear sights with the shooter's eye is the main selling point for rod-dots. The aiming point (dot) needn't be in the exact center of the rear lens. Even when it is near the edge, it is still on target, and this represents a genuine advantage, because the Operator's head and face don't have to be positioned precisely behind the rear sight, a substantial benefit when shooting from awkward positions.
The other main feature of optics is the ability of the Operator to see, while looking through his optic, downrange detail that is under the aiming point. With most iron sights, such details is blocked out.
For competent fighting, my preference is Aimpoint's T1 or H1 (on LaRue mounts), mounted well forward and away from the Operator's eye. Aimpoints are not eye-relief critical, and can therefore be mounted anywhere on the top rail. The T1 and H1 are both exceptionally compact and non-magnifying.
However, many police executives insist on magnifying optics, because they want to see downrange detail, detail that is important to report-writers, less important to active combatants!
Most good scout-scopes are 2.5x or less, are also not eye-relief critical, and can thus be forward-mounted. They too represent a good choice for serious rifles. Magnification beyond 2.5x requires close eye-relief and is not recommended.
Close-eye relief optics make it difficult for the Operator to see around the scope, so the scope becomes his whole world. This may suffice when someone else is watching your back, but not a good idea when you're operating alone!
Another issue with high-magnification optics is the constant temptation to analyze the downrange situation through the scope. Big-game hunters do this all the time. However, we must remember that, in doing so, you're necessarily and deliberately pointing your gun in the direction of what may be innocent people.
High-magnification optics, in my opinion, are well suited for hunting non-dangerous game at extended ranges. When fighting for one's life, for reasons enumerated in the foregoing, they represent a poor choice!
For fighting rifles, non-magnifying rod-dots are the way to go.
/John
