Holographic or LPV?

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Jibjab260

    Member
    Jul 22, 2017
    16
    Vortex AMG UH-1 with Vortex Magnifier
    OR
    Trijicon Accupower 1-8 with Illuminated Mil Reticle?

    Optic is going on LWRC IC DI with Geiselle SSA Trigger
     

    PIPES

    Member
    Apr 6, 2013
    26
    Between those two I’d go with the accupower 1-8.
    If you’re interested in The accupower I’d suggest looking at the primary arms platinum 1-8. You can find fantastic deals on them and they offer very similar glass, but a better(imo) reticle. There have also been several complaints with the illumination bleeding on the Accupower. The only complaint I’ve heard with the platinum 1-8 is the weight, but it’s about the same as the Trijicon.
     

    alucard0822

    For great Justice
    Oct 29, 2007
    17,643
    PA
    The accupower is more compact, simpler to operate, and has more than double the magnification with a reticle far more useful at longer range, not even close in utility, but it is double the cost. Despite having used EoTech/magnifier combos in the past, I sold or traded off all but 1 cheap magnifier I use for sighting in only. A RD/HWS is light, compact, and really fast at closer range, I would rather use hold-overs or give up a little precision past 200 yards than add a magnifier that is almost always in the way. A LPVO has more magnification, and usually a better reticle for distance, while not giving up much to a dot sight at close range, except for a little bit of weight, and maybe a little "fishbowl effect" on cheaper models.
     

    Shamr0ck

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 6, 2011
    2,505
    Frederick
    I'm looking for an optic for a rifle too and given my astigmatism, get both starburst/constellation with a red dot and when I look thru the Razor, the reticle looks like a red wooly-bear caterpillar rather than a nice crisp line.

    Leading me to either a prism or a LPV and open to the collective wisdom of MDS.

    I didn't care for the small (to me) reticle of the Vortex 3x Prism and between the Vortex 1x with the twin ring reticle, and the Primary Arms 1x with the ACCS I like the ACCS better. How are the PA optics on battery consumption and reliability?

    will mount on my E4 rifle for range use out to 200yds

    thoughts?
     

    Bountied

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 6, 2012
    6,893
    Pasadena
    I had an Eotech magnifier combo, it was heavy and bulky. I would go with any 1-X variable scope over a magnifier setup.
     

    alucard0822

    For great Justice
    Oct 29, 2007
    17,643
    PA
    I'm looking for an optic for a rifle too and given my astigmatism, get both starburst/constellation with a red dot and when I look thru the Razor, the reticle looks like a red wooly-bear caterpillar rather than a nice crisp line.

    Leading me to either a prism or a LPV and open to the collective wisdom of MDS.

    I didn't care for the small (to me) reticle of the Vortex 3x Prism and between the Vortex 1x with the twin ring reticle, and the Primary Arms 1x with the ACCS I like the ACCS better. How are the PA optics on battery consumption and reliability?

    will mount on my E4 rifle for range use out to 200yds

    thoughts?

    vortex claims 250-3K, about the same for PA, but that is under "ideal" and less than practical use. Neither is "daylight bright" IMO, you get a black, or a maroon reticle if turned to 11, really only useful in low-light. For me, any 2032 powered illumination only last till you bump the knob, or forget to turn it off, so I keep plenty of spare batteries. The prism also gives the same residual magnification effect of most LPVOs, your left eye sees the actual distance from the target, the right eye sees the distance from the objective lens or a bit less distance to the target, so it can take some getting used to the effect of one eye being "closer". A true 1X RD/HWS only places a flat peice of glass or two is in-between your dominant eye and the target, both eyes effectively see the same distance.

    I have astigmatism, and generally crappy vision, Always hated that red dots seemed so useful, but always looked like crap to me. There are 2 things that do give a very useful crisp dot though, and I can run them just fine. First is to get a good one, cheap red-dots have more glass distortion(not truly flat), which can interfere with the dot, they also use LEDs that have a "messy" output that spread out from a specific wavelength, and a glass coating that reflects a wider wavelength of light, or isn't as reflective in the LED's wavelenth, adding tint and distortion to the image. Holographic sights use a hologram, so the glass can be transparent, and where the laser projects it, they don't need the same selectively reflective coatings that LED based RDs do. The other issue is brightness, the brighter the dot/hologram compared to the background, the more it can bleed out, flair, and distort. If you run it just bright enough to see the dot, it's usually clear for me.
     

    erwos

    The Hebrew Hammer
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 25, 2009
    13,866
    Rockville, MD
    I run them all on my rifles.

    Prisms are simpler - they're always at the same magnification, eye relief never changes, the reticle isn't magnification-level dependent, etc. Downside is that 3x/4x only gets you so far, you can't switch back to 1x when you don't need magnification, there's not a lot of options not at "AR height" (1.5"), and illumination is generally not daylight bright in the cheaper prisms. The Steiner M332 is a stupid awesome deal when they're in the $300-$350 range.

    LPVOs are more flexible, but also more complicated and expensive. I think where people get in trouble 1-X scopes is going cheap - like, I've got a couple 1-4x scopes in the $200-$300 price range, and IMHO, the qualify difference by going to the Burris XTR II was more than worth it, even with the weight and price increase. The Burris XTR II 1.5-8x dual focal plane scopes are REALLY nice for the price (<$600 on sale), and I don't find the 1.5x floor to be a meaningful downside compared to having an FFP reticle and the crazy bright SFP illumination you get with them. Just do your homework if daylight-bright reticle matters to you, because there's a lot of people who claim their scope has one when it really doesn't... maybe like "overcast bright".

    I use the reflex sight plus magnifier combo in situations where suitable BDC isn't available in a prism sight, but I still want the option of magnification. I will definitely concede that it is my least favorite of the options, but it's still very usable when set up correctly. In particular, if you're running your rifle in classes where you're working at short-ish ranges most of the time, being able to go reflex with the option of magnification can sometimes be very handy. Just don't buy a cheap magnifier and/or mount. The PA FTS mounts are EXTREMELY bad in my opinion, and my baseline would be an Aimpoint 3X-C in a LaRue/ADM mount, or maybe an Eotech G33. Frankly, I'd almost argue the magnifier is the thing you should spend more money on compared to the reflex sight at this point.
     

    Shamr0ck

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 6, 2011
    2,505
    Frederick
    I run them all on my rifles.

    Prisms are simpler - they're always at the same magnification, eye relief never changes, the reticle isn't magnification-level dependent, etc. Downside is that 3x/4x only gets you so far, you can't switch back to 1x when you don't need magnification, there's not a lot of options not at "AR height" (1.5"), and illumination is generally not daylight bright in the cheaper prisms. The Steiner M332 is a stupid awesome deal when they're in the $300-$350 range.

    LPVOs are more flexible, but also more complicated and expensive. I think where people get in trouble 1-X scopes is going cheap - like, I've got a couple 1-4x scopes in the $200-$300 price range, and IMHO, the qualify difference by going to the Burris XTR II was more than worth it, even with the weight and price increase. The Burris XTR II 1.5-8x dual focal plane scopes are REALLY nice for the price (<$600 on sale), and I don't find the 1.5x floor to be a meaningful downside compared to having an FFP reticle and the crazy bright SFP illumination you get with them. Just do your homework if daylight-bright reticle matters to you, because there's a lot of people who claim their scope has one when it really doesn't... maybe like "overcast bright".

    I use the reflex sight plus magnifier combo in situations where suitable BDC isn't available in a prism sight, but I still want the option of magnification. I will definitely concede that it is my least favorite of the options, but it's still very usable when set up correctly. In particular, if you're running your rifle in classes where you're working at short-ish ranges most of the time, being able to go reflex with the option of magnification can sometimes be very handy. Just don't buy a cheap magnifier and/or mount. The PA FTS mounts are EXTREMELY bad in my opinion, and my baseline would be an Aimpoint 3X-C in a LaRue/ADM mount, or maybe an Eotech G33. Frankly, I'd almost argue the magnifier is the thing you should spend more money on compared to the reflex sight at this point.



    Thank you!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,925
    Messages
    7,259,296
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom