Low-Mid Price Reflex Sights

[JessicaB]

All of the sights being discussed above are reflective, not holographic. I do not know of any holographic sights that would be in the OP's price range.

Yeah, uhhh duh on my part. Way too long of a day. Red or green dot preferred for outside during the day? Any optics that should just be avoided?

 

[cyphertext]

Yeah, uhhh duh on my part. Way too long of a day. Red or green dot preferred for outside during the day? Any optics that should just be avoided?

I prefer red, but only because I have never tried green. All of my optics are red only. I think red would be easier to see though outside in daylight.

I think you should stay with the ones typically suggested... Bushnell TRS-25, Primary Arms, and Vortex SPARC. I would be willing to try the Center Point from Cabela's at $29.99. No risk, as if you don't like it you can easily return it.

I took a chance on an older Bushnell Multi Reticle from Cabela's Bargain Cave that I am happy with as well. Again, red only. The newer generation has red and green.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

So I'm not sure if I agree with this or not but for discussion, I'll accept it for now. To me that then says the difference between the $25 CP and the $50-100 Brand X is that the product was "binned", pre-inspected and placed in a bin appropriate for the quality/price. That says if I can buy the product for $25 and have the option of inspecting it and returning it until I get one "I like", I'm doing the same function and saving money.
y.

Let's put your theory to the test. A Primary Arms MicroDot is about $80. Where do you see an identical one with a different label on it for $25?

Primary Arms wasn't trying to sell a better optic for a higher price, they were culling out the junk which earned them a reputation. I remembr it at the time because I was buying a compact 4x scope from them and they had posted that they personally check every one for crooked reticles and other problems before shipping. Since then they have worked with the manufacture in China to build sights to their specs with some degree of success and frustration as they write on other Forums.

A few moths ago, Primary Arms did get a shipment of MicroDots that were made for a different buyer with the emitter at 6 o'clock (PA had long ago changed the specs for their MicroDot sights to put the emitter at 4 o'clock to better cowitness on an AR platform) and those were sold a bit cheaper but that was a special situatuation where the other buyer didn't work out with the manufacturer for whatever reason.

 

[headcase650]

You can find Bushnell holosights used for around $100 give or take if you are patient and want a true holographic sight. They were eotech clones, same reticule, same adjustments. The build was slightly less robust and they were water resistant but not submersible. I have a first gen (longer one) on a super redhawl 44 mag and its held up just fine for over 10 years. Bushnell stopped making them because their licensing agreement with eotech expired.
Edit: They came with a 1 moa dot surrounded by I think a 30 moa circle with tit marks at 12, 3, 6 and 9 oclock. Not effected by astigmatism if that's important to you.

 

[smokindog]

Don't really understand your response. I was referring to people comparing like items such as the TruGlo to the CP to the XX that all are visually very similar if not exact. I would presume you'd want to compare the PA to similar items. I understood your premise to be that in "look a likes", PA provided a better product because of their QA?

Let's put your theory to the test. A Primary Arms MicroDot is about $80. Where do you see an identical one with a different label on it for $25?

Primary Arms wasn't trying to sell a better optic for a higher price, they were culling out the junk which earned them a reputation. I remembr it at the time because I was buying a compact 4x scope from them and they had posted that they personally check every one for crooked reticles and other problems before shipping. Since then they have worked with the manufacture in China to build sights to their specs with some degree of success and frustration as they write on other Forums.

A few moths ago, Primary Arms did get a shipment of MicroDots that were made for a different buyer with the emitter at 6 o'clock (PA had long ago changed the specs for their MicroDot sights to put the emitter at 4 o'clock to better cowitness on an AR platform) and those were sold a bit cheaper but that was a special situatuation where the other buyer didn't work out with the manufacturer for whatever reason.

 

[JessicaB]

Planning on shooting less than 100 yards. MOA suggestions?

 

[cyphertext]

Planning on shooting less than 100 yards. MOA suggestions?

Not sure I understand the question... are you wanting to shoot less than MOA, or are you asking about dot size?

If you are wanting to shoot less than MOA, forget the 15-22. For dot size, it depends. Some like a larger dot for faster target acquisition. Some like a smaller dot for "precision" shooting. Most of the time, the smaller the dot, the higher the price. A two to four MOA dot works well for my use, with both the 15-22 and my M&P 15.

 

[JessicaB]

Actually I'm not quite sure what MOA is but when researching red dots I see numbers for MOA so what number is the better one? Also any opinions on UTG dots?

 

[cyphertext]

Actually I'm not quite sure what MOA is but when researching red dots I see numbers for MOA so what number is the better one? Also any opinions on UTG dots?

MOA is minute of angle. If you shoot a 1 MOA group, that means it is a one inch grouping at 100 yards. That would equate to a .25 inch group at 25 yards.

In a red dot, the MOA is basically the same. If you have a 3 MOA dot, it is going to cover 3 inches of the target at 100 yards. The smaller the number, the smaller the dot. Smaller dots don't cover as much of the target, but they are also harder to pick up quickly. The size of the dot needed will depend on the type of shooting you are doing. For hunting, I use a small dot. For ringing steel as quick as possible, I use a larger dot.

Again, stick with the tried and true inexpensive optics. Bushnell, Primary Arms, Vortex SPARC. No reason to be a guinea pig.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Again, stick with the tried and true inexpensive optics. Bushnell, Primary Arms, Vortex SPARC. No reason to be a guinea pig.

Exactly, and all of these are available with specific mounts designed to co-witness on an AR platform. Sure beats the endless number of guys who buy xyz optic and end up struggling to figure out what type of generic do-all mount and riser might work...

 

[imashooter2]

While all of those type of reflex sights are made in Asia, what happens after they leave the Orient and what kind of QC that vender wants them built to can make a big difference. I have checked out more than a dozen ones sold under various brands and while they may be built similar they often do not perform the same. What I attribute that to is what the US vender does in the way of QC when they get here. I have found that the Truglo have sharper edged reticle patterns than any of the ones sold under $45. Also many of the cheaper ones are not too bright in high daylight so they get hard to see.
Also most bigtime steel shooters use dot sizes often 8 MOA and sometimes as high as 16 MOA. Only bullseye shooters use small dot sizes. There is a reason for this. Using a small dot means you actually have to look at it. A bigger dot often does not require directly looking at it to know where it is. This allows your eyes to move ahead of where your gun is pointing. My C-mores always use 8 MOA dots for steel. I have dot modules for 4 and 6 MOA also but seldom use them because it slows me down. Except at the PSA Rimfire Challenge where targets as small as 1" wide are sometimes used. So when using the TruGlo on my 15-22 I generally use either the crosshair dot or the circle dot. The single dot slows most down because you have to actually look at it. Small dots are good for precision shooting but not for speed shooting by most. Bigger dots make look ahead shooting viable and that is what most pro shooters do. By the time you are squeezing the trigger for the shot your eyes should be on the next target. That way the gun automatically will be drawn to where you are looking. Doing this while still being able to call your shot and still be able to do a makeup shot is what separates the pros from the wannabes.

While your statement regards QC has merit, a good one is a good one, no matter whose name is on it.

Funny you should mention the PSA rimfire. That is the only steel match I attend with this rifle. I spend a lot more time plinking and shooting casual targets and find the 4 MOA dot much more conducive to accuracy in general shooting. Everything is a compromise.

And frankly, if the only difference between the pros and I were the ability to do look ahead shooting, I'd be a mighty happy guy!

 

[Vinney47]

I have a sightmark ultra shot QD mount, and have really liked it. When viewing the sight, it's very minimal - no dials or panels of switches, battery compartments taking up the view. just the glass with a protective shroud over it. I haven't done any kind of torture tests on it, but it's spent plenty of time in the trunk during transport and has never lost zero. Been taken on and off the gun several times and never lost zero. I've had mine for a while, only wish I had the green one.