Agnotology
NES Member
So long as you zero for the tip of the ^ , where's the issue?Aside from the chevron, I don’t mind those as a concept or other aspects of their reticles. Chevrons though… man.
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
So long as you zero for the tip of the ^ , where's the issue?Aside from the chevron, I don’t mind those as a concept or other aspects of their reticles. Chevrons though… man.
Wow, so cheap, am gona need one for my shotgun lol.
And have to deal with their sh*tty glass?If I was gonna spend that kind of scratch I'd get a Sig Sauer Tango
I know Aimpoint is off the table for the OPAimpoint has some of the most perfect round dots.
So long as you zero for the tip of the ^ , where's the issue?
The tip is ambiguous. The claim is “infinitely precise”, but in reality it is infinitely difficult to ensure the tip is re-used at the same spot.
Then you have all the area below the tip, it can kind of obscure the target when trying to shoot at 200-300 and you are trying to account for a little wind. It’s not my jam. It got fielded on the TA31 ACOG, but has since been ditched on the currently issued ACOGs because it’s silly and doesn’t provide the benefits it promises. None of the currently issued optics use chevrons.
The only people in the optics world who still put it in their reticles is Dimitri, the guy who designs the ACSS reticles. He’s obsessed with them, but he’s never actually been in combat. So the Combat part of ACSS is suspect.
Operators I've met who said they've played in the sandbox mostly say they loved their ACOGs. What's bad about the pointy reticle? Bad guys go squint. Good guys look for the steeple lol.
View attachment 840709View attachment 840710
And how would you show that when there is a near infinite number of combinations and variables?That is by far the worst comparison I've ever seen, the one thing that matters - sight picture - is shown 0 times on either scope / dot set up.
Not to get too far off topic but that’s how I always felt about that military shrink author who wrote On Combat and On Killing, when he’s never been in combat. I’m sure he’s a great writer but I always just kind of shook my head when people would pay so much money to go hear him talk or buy his books.He’s obsessed with them, but he’s never actually been in combat. So the Combat part of ACSS is suspect.
Dave Grossman. I've never read any of his work.Not to get too far off topic but that’s how I always felt about that military shrink author who wrote On Combat and On Killing, when he’s never been in combat. I’m sure he’s a great writer but I always just kind of shook my head when people would pay so much money to go hear him talk or buy his books.
At the very least, show the sight picture through the models you are showing?And how would you show that when there is a near infinite number of combinations and variables?
it was created by Operators for Operators. Your point is invalid.The tip is ambiguous. The claim is “infinitely precise”, but in reality it is infinitely difficult to ensure the tip is re-used at the same spot.
Then you have all the area below the tip, it can kind of obscure the target when trying to shoot at 200-300 and you are trying to account for a little wind. It’s not my jam. It got fielded on the TA31 ACOG, but has since been ditched on the currently issued ACOGs because it’s silly and doesn’t provide the benefits it promises. None of the currently issued optics use chevrons.
The only people in the optics world who still put it in their reticles is Dimitri, the guy who designs the ACSS reticles. He’s obsessed with them, but he’s never actually been in combat. So the Combat part of ACSS is suspect.
I just kinda figured those airsoft ones wouldn't hold up or hold zero. Are there actually usable ones for that little money?Three pages an no Pinty suggestions? (or did I miss it?)
There is a thread on these someplace here I think.I just kinda figured those airsoft ones wouldn't hold up or hold zero. Are there actually usable ones for that little money?
I would 100% pass.There is a thread on these someplace here I think.
I don’t have any first hand knowledge.
I’d personally pass, but that’s me. YMMV.
Yup. & Rare to get this type of discount. Best of luck w your choice!That is twice as much as I was looking to spend.
STOP BEING POORThat is twice as much as I was looking to spend.
I bought this Vortex, it is in you price rage and has decent reviews.View attachment 840733
STOP BEING POOR
I would 100% pass.
In this world, most of the time, cheap means more expensive. (Doesn't mean that expensive is always better).
You will throw money at those, they will break, then you will end up buying something better later on.
The crossfire can handle recoil. I have one on a 45/70 lever action.My concern is anything that says its for "airsoft".
Hire me.
That's too cheap to be any good, right?
You're underqualifiedMy concern is anything that says its for "airsoft".
Hire me.
That's too cheap to be any good, right?
I work for cheap. Ask @Marty McFlyYou're underqualified
Price is only a factor in the absence of valueI work for cheap. Ask @Marty McFly