DarkLordOfOptics
Politics • Science & Tech • Sports
Guns, Optics, 2nd Amendment and resisting the Left in everything they touch.
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?

Learn more first
Starter ARs and Starter Optics

Various optics for the AR-15 make for a very frequent topic on here, so I thought that a brief aside on a somewhat particular case might be in order.
Here, in the great state of New Mexico, Democrats have a super majority so by and large they do whatever the hell they want and keep on getting re-elected. Once in a blue moon, however, they do pay attention to the voters.
A little earlier this year, they proposed a set of anti-2A laws that would make Gavin Newsom cream into his g-string a little (for the politically correct out there: I have not idea what underwear the esteemed Mr Newsom prefers, but he sure looks like he's got something uncomfortable up his ass at all times), they got so much apparently explicit feedback that most of it did not make it out of the committee. Naturally, there were also a few lawsuits getting ready to go. It did, for a moment, look like AR-15s would get outlawed in out state.

Unbeknownst to me, a friend of mine decided that he should probably pick up an AR-15 while he still can. Had he told me about it, I would have built him one in any configuration he wants, but he did not tell me and I did not know he was looking to get one.

I learned about all of this well after he bought the rifle when he asked which red dot and magnifier he should get.

The primary purpose of the gun is self-defense, general purpose plinking and occasional shooting beyond MPBR. The gentleman who owns the rifle has reasonable experience with shooting. I saw him shoot and his fundamentals are perfectly reasonable. However, he has been out of it for a while and he is planning to pick this hobby back up.

I did some digging around the safe and found what I think is a reasonable solution for his needs, but the project is not yet entirely done.

There is a good chance that he will read this, so what follows in the next few sentences has a real chance of hurting his feelings a bit. I think I can live with that. I am pretty certain he can too.

The specific configuration of an AR-15 that he bought makes no sense. I do not know why S&W makes it that way. I do not know why a self-respecting gunshop would carry it. Maybe the margins are good, but given how evolved modern ARs are and how easy it is to find a better configuration, this is odd to me.

Before I crap all over it any further: it seems adequately accurate. It did not display any reliability issues during the one shooting session we had with the gun. It is a perfectly competent AR, except the configuration makes no sense.

The carbine appears to be a version of S&W's M&P Sport II product line, kinda like the MOE version here: https://www.smith-wesson.com/product/m-p-15-sport-ii-with-magpul-moe-m-lok-
except his came with a Magpul buttstock. Interestingly, the castle nut was loose and a quick look suggested that there is not threadlocking compound on it. Not sure if it came like that from S&W or if the gunshop people were messing with something.

Let's go over the highlights:

16" barrel with threaded muzzle and A2 flashhider -- perfectly reasonable

Melonite finish -- this is a good thing.

5.56 chamber -- I'd prefer an intermediate chamber, but this is not a major deal

1-in-9" barrel twist -- this one is just retarded. Why do people still do this? Most 5.56/223 loads with decent terminal ballistics will not reliably stabilize in this barrel. It will work fine with 55gr plinking ammo. It starts getting marginal with bullets heavier than 60-62 grains. It will work with some 69gr ammo that uses shorter bullets. If you want good terminal ballistics, your best bet is probably Barnes 55gr load ( https://bit.ly/3zZZFVu). 62gr TSX may or may not stabilize. Unless you are building a dedicated varminter, go with either 1-8" or 1-7" twist.

Carbine gas system -- why would you put carbine gas system onto a 16" barrel? Mid-length gas system on a 16" barrel seems pretty standard and gets you a mellower recoil cycle.

Medium weight barrel -- I am not sure what it is under the handguard, but forward of the gas block, it appears to be right around 0.7" diameter. On a fairly basic carbine not intended for distance, all it does is make the gun heavier and the handling poorer. If there ever was a good application for a pencil barrel, this is it.

Fixed tower A2 front sight -- I am not a fan, but that's a personal preference. If you plan to use optics, a fold down BUIS is a better option in my mind.

Non-free floating MOE handguard -- if there is a good reason for it other than profit margins, I'll be damned if I know what it is. There is a TON of simple free floating handguards out there with almost all of them being a better option than this. Eventually, I'll replace this monstrosity with a two piece handguard from MI (https://bit.ly/3UGqyHn) or something along those lines. I've had good luck with MI handguards, so that will likely be the way to go if he chooses to keep the fixed front sight. The gas block looks to be nicely pinned, so it might be a b@#$% to remove. I have seen some that could only be removed with a prayer and a jackhammer.

Magpul folding rear sight -- this is a perfectly reasonable budget option.

A2 grip -- other than it not being designed for human hands, there is really nothing wrong with it.

In the grand scheme of things, all of this is fixable and me bitching about is mostly a reflection of my personal preferences. It is a perfectly reasonable first AR for someone getting back to shooting. Over time, he will figure out what works for him and what does not.

So far, I set him up with optics (which we will cover next). In the next few days, I will take it apart to take a closer look at everything. After that, I will cinch everything down with loctite where appropriate and swap out the grip for something better.

The gentleman who owns the rifle has had some experience with red dot sights and, since he already has irons on there, that seemed like a good way to go. However, given that I was pretty certain he will want to stretch the distance at some point, I though that he could use a little magnification. Well, I have plenty of red dots and magnifiers here. Personally, I really like ultra compact magnifiers, but if you want to retain a folding BUIS rear, you will have eye relief issues with pretty much all of them. I do have a few full size magnifiers around. They are still pretty small, but bigger than the compacts. That means the eyepiece extends further back and we have a better chance of getting one of these to work.

In the specific case of this carbine, we set it up with Primary Arms MD-25 red dot sight https://bit.ly/3IBbPcq and PA's SLx FS 3x magnifier https://bit.ly/3UBkNuR

I do not know what exact sighting system he will settle on eventually, so it did not make sense to invest into a higher end optic. Besides, MD-25 has been nicely robust in my experience (frankly, for around $140 at the moment, it is a steal). Slightly larger optic diameter does work better with magnifiers which is important in this situation. ACSS CQB reticle, combined with a magnifier, will let him shoot at plates out to 500/600 yards depending on how we do the final sight in. The 3x SLx magnifier is quite respectable optically, so it is very doable.

If you look at the picture carefully, the magnifier is still not quite as far back as it needs to be for comfort. I think I can push it back a little further and, next time we meet, I will have him go through a range of shooting positions to finetune this a little bit.

Most magnifiers do not have all the flexible of eye relief which can cause problems as you transition between shooting positions. Collapsible stock can help with that, of course. It is not uncommon to set the stock up a click or two longer for shooting prone than standing.

We'll see how it pans out. Ultimately, the magnifier needs to be just right when shooting prone. Shooting quickly off hand would normally imply that the magnifier is flipped to the side.

If we can't get this one properly set up, I think I have a few more magnifiers here somewhere that are a little bit longer.

Interested? Want to learn more about the community?

Learn more first
What else you may like…
Videos
Posts
Articles
PA GLx 2x Final Resting Place

Here is a final, likely, wrap up of where I think the GLx 2x from Primary Arms belongs.
It is likely the best general purpose optic for AKs and ARs I have seen in a while for shooting inside of $200. Definitely the best for the money and per ounce.
Now, when I say "inside of 200 yards" I do not mean trying to shave a hair of of a mosquito's left testicle. Assume shooting at typical subjects the size of a human torso, or a hog's vital zone.
Most of the time, I have the GLx sitting on a 300BLK pistol. I used it to teach one of my kids to shoot and it was a very easy and forgiving optic to use for a 7 year old. It is equally easy and forgiving for adults as well. It is just that easy to get behind and moderate magnification helps with the ease of use tremendously.
Now that pistol braces are verbotten, the GLx ended up on a 7.62x39 AK (a somewhat tricked out WASR-10) and I think it is going to stay there permanently.
https://alnk.to/ge40PLW
The ACSS reticle on this one is done just ...

00:12:30
SwampFox Sentinel red dot sight

This one is a very simple review:
-it is small
-it is robust
-it works they way it is supposed to
-it does not cost a huge amount of money
-the Ironside shield is a good idea
-RMSc footprint is a good idea

I messed up on price in the video. It is about $50 less than I thought at Brownells: https://alnk.to/a41u5D4

Ironsides stainless steel shield adds $40 to it: https://alnk.to/hDo4gJf

00:07:04
Kicking things off with 5x prismatics: SwampFox and Vortex

I plan to examine a few more prismatics as I go along, but here is the first installment that discusses SwampFox Saber 5x36 and Vortex Spitfire Gen2 5x25.
The interesting part is how little they have in common and how they do compromises differently.
Saber used a large CR123 battery, for example, but the housing gets in the way of a conventional offset red dots or irons should you choose to use one. However, the red dot mounted on the body of the sight, I think, works better.
Vortex, unlike the SwampFox comes with two different mount heights, so I was able to use it on both AK and AR platforms. It is more at home on a lightweight AR though.
The approaches to FOV, reticles, packaging and mounting are very different, which makes it all interesting to me.
The next video on 5x prismatics will talk about the Element Immersive 5x30 and Primary Arms SLx 5x Micro in some length.

00:24:28
AR-15 barrel profiles

We somehow veered into this discussion in the comments of the previous post. I have an hour to kill in an airport lounge, so I figured I'll go find a good explanation of why the ubiquitous "government profile" barrel ended up the illogical mess that it is.
I vaguely remembered that Matt has talked about it and it turned out that, for once, my memory was spot on:
https://www.everydaymarksman.co/equipment/government-profile-barrel/

Over the years, I have talked to quite a few people about barrel profiles, encompassing both barrel manufacturers and AR-15 builders.

My basic question was simple: "where do you remove metal on a barrel if you are trying to save weight?"

In the meantime, since I have had a chance to build a significant number of ARs over the years, with most of them being fairly light, I have looked very carefully at how different profiles behave when warmed up. Now, they were not all made by same makers, but there are still some noticeable trends.

I have looked at barrels ...

It looks to me that their barrel is no longer roll-wrapped with an entire sheet of CF but I can not tell mnf process just by the look. Also the heat-pressed and forged CF stock /chassis seems interesting.

Questions and Solutions for Ring/Mount Height
I have always wondered how one determines what height of rings/mount should be getting for a new specific build. Instead of going off experiences, I was developing this height-adjustable ring/mount to mock the installation of actually mounting a rifle scope to the platform before the purchase of the rings/mount. It would be resulting potentially fewer returns when they don't fit.
This is a scratch of two-piece rings and the height range should be from 0.9 to 1.6in (Still working on it). The one pice mount's design is coming out soon.
This tool is meant to be a measuring tool and not really for the final installation of scopes for long-term use.
What yall think? Inputs are welcomed.

post photo preview
Non-magnifying Optic Parallax Error
A Dose Of Reality

The discussion of how much parallax red dot sights have pops up all the time.  It gets very emotionally charged.  Measured parallax error gets converted to MOA.  Everyone knows that MOA is right around one inch.  Large parallax error in MOA at close distances looks like a huge problem.
What is frequently forgotten is that 1MOA is exactly one inch at only one distance: ~95.5 yards.
At closer distances, it is a lot less than an inch.


Here is a table that calculates linear parallax error at different distances for a given angular error in MOA:

One of the problems is that most manufacturers of red dot sights claim their sights are parallax free.  What they really mean by that is that they are parallax free in the sweetspot (some center region) at one particular distance (usually 40 or 50 yards).

EoTech, apparently and to their credit, actually posted some numbers that are about right based on what I have seen:

The only othe rhologrpahic sight on the market, Vortex UH-1 is slightly better than that at the edges.  However, with both EOTech and UH-1, I can only see parallax error fairly close to the edges.  Most of the center portion of the window has sufficiently low parallax error that the natural dispersion of my shooting completely conceals it.  

Suppose you are doing a CQB drill and go really fast.  You end up taking a shot where the aiming point is somewhere toward the edge of the window of the sight.  Worst case, you are picking up about 10MOA of error from the optic.  That is 1.5 inches at 10 yards.  Does that constitue a problem for a CQB scenario?  Not in the slightest.  The only time I can think of when it might be an issue is a hostage-type drill, but every time I have done it, there was enough time to roughly center the aiming point in the sigh tpicture.  That brings parallax error down to zilch and you get to concentrate on dealign with gun wobble, accelerated heart rate and general stress (and that assumes noone is shooting back at you).

As the distances increase, so does the magnitude of linear parallax error, assumign a fairly constant angular error.  However, I am rapidly getting past the point where I should be taking shots at anything much beyond two hundred yards without magnification (I will be hunting deer with an iron sight muzzleloader in the fall, so I will test this out in preparation).

If I am shooting at something 100+ yards away, chances are I will have an extra second to center the aiming point.

Now, none of this means that we should not check for parallax with our holographics and red dot sights.  However, what I care about the most is the size of the sweetspot: the center area of the sight picture where parallax is negligible.  As long as it is not too small, I do not get too hung up on the parallax performance at the edges.

Read full Article
HET8: Top Level Summary

Since I am pathologically late on everything, I figured I should release at least a summary as I try to put the final video content together.  I plan to do a livestream as a wrap up as soon as I organize all the data.  Below is a run down of a few categories.  Let me know if I missed something and I will add more detail.

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
Reference Standard - 2024

I mentioned the whole reference standard idea about six months ago: https://darklordofoptics.locals.com/post/4249701/coming-soon-to-the-mailbox-near-you

The plan is to select a few scopes as my reference standards in a few categories and make sure I keep them on hand for at least the entire calendar year.  If they move on somewhere, I have to designate something else as the reference standard in that category.  There might be a couple of reference standard designs in each category to split them by price range.

Since I just went through the riflescope category exercise https://darklordofoptics.locals.com/post/5212669/riflescope-type-classification (the "reference standard" idea is one of the reasons I did that), let's stick with roughly the same framework.

Do keep in mind, that some categories I am not as well versed in as I'd like to be.  Also, there might be scopes in each category I consider exceptional, but do not have on hand.  Reference standard has to be something I have here and will use as a basis for comparisons.  I will endeavor to use optics that I believe to be at the top of their category, but it is not always possible.  Natirually, these will lean heavily toward mrad designs.  I avoid MOA like the plague whenever possible.

 

Fixed 1x
For prismatics, this has to be Primary Arms SLx 1x Microprism.  https://bit.ly/3uLqu0E I have a few different 1x prismatics on hand, but SLx is the only one that has been here long enough to be the standard for 2024.  For now.  There are some really interesting options in this range.

 

Fixed mag small prism
This can go in a variety of different directions depending on personal preferences and price.  It is not practical to have a reference standard for every magnification and with compact prismatics I do like 3x as a good compromise magnification.  These scopes are a step up from people who have been using red dots with magnifiers and want a better experience at distance.  This one will also go to Primary Arms.  Technically, I like GLx 2x more than SLx 3x, but 2x is such a unique magnification that it is not a very good yard stick for comparisons.  SLX 3x Microprism it is, then.  https://bit.ly/4bMMclz

 

Fixed mag large prism

Somewhat oddly, with large prism scopes, I start leaning toward higher magnifications.  I want these in 4x or 5x.  I view these differently.  These are, to me, alternatives to LPVOs and spiritual successors of old general purpose 4x and 6x fixed power scopes, except more compact and with wider FOV.  There a couple of good options and, unsurprisingly, my favourites are Element Immersive 5x30 https://bit.ly/3NjJ4mJ and the discontinued Elcan Spectre OS 4x.  The dual power Spectre DR is still thriving, as expensive as it is.  https://bit.ly/4bQpwAN  I have the single magnification 4x and it is a very good yardstick for what a high end prismatic should be.  With the Element, I am clearly biased since I designed the reticle for it.  In other words, I got to put a reticle I could not get other people to make into a scope I like.  You should not be terribly surprised to see it here.

 

LPVO

This one gets tough and there will be several options here.  Keep in mind that I like FFP LPVOs once we get up in price.

With budget LPVOs, for now, it is Primary Arms SLx 1-6x24 with Nova reticle. https://bit.ly/40LeLdt It has some competition this year, but until I spend more time looking through it, PA takes it.

On the mid-range, it is a battle between SAI6 1-6x24 with mrad reticle https://bit.ly/49Nomo4 and PA PLxC 1-8x24 with meters BDC reticle. https://bit.ly/3Bn3951  With PA, I am not a fan of their other reticles, but I like how light and short it is with an excellent eyepiece.  With SAI6, I like the whole reticle line-up but lean toward the mrad designs for general purpose use.  The X-Wing style high visbility feature is not for everyone, but it works for me.  I suppose I will keep both here.  

If you go up in price, my basic opinion has not changed.  Vortex Razor Gen3 1-10x24 is the one to beat if you want a nuclear bright reticle.  https://bit.ly/3w1Ah2T

This leaves a little of a "no-man's land" with LPVOs that are designed to be true general purpose designs, like the side focus equipped March Shorty 1-10x24 and Delta Stryker 1-10x28.  They are a little too different to serve as a useful yardstick for anything but each other.  For now.

 

Dangerous Game

I may have to skip one because I do not really have anything on hand right now that fits the description and I have had long enough to make it a reference standard.  I do have some ideas, so stay tuned.

 

MPVO

For the time being, the one to rule them all is the dual focal plane March 1.5-15x42 https://bit.ly/4bjm15X  This category, almost by definition, is the one where compromises are made for the most flexibility.  This March is not perfect, but it is the best we currently have.  On the budget end, the yardstick should be Athlon's excellent Helos BTR Gen2 2-12x42, but it is sitting on top of a friend of mine's rifle two states to the West.  It can't be a reference standard if it is not here.  In the meantime, the old reliable SWFA SS 3-9x42 will do.  I have a couple of them.  https://swfa.com/swfa-3-9x42-ss-hd-mil-quad-reticle-30mm-tube-1-mil-clicks-ffp/

 

Tweener

I do not like to use a discontinued scope as a yardstick, but Razor HD LH 1.5-8x32 has got to be it.  It is not a common scope category, so we will hoble along like this until I come up with something still manufactured (that fits the profile and I like).  On the low-ish end of the price range,  I do like SWFA 2.5-10x32 Ultralight and have a couple of them.  https://swfa.com/swfa-2-5-10x32-ss-ultralight-msr-556-bdc-reticle-1-tube-25-moa-clicks/ 

 

Crossover

For once, this one is easy and I'll keep it all within a sane-ish price range.  Vortex Razor HD-LHT 4.5-22x50 https://bit.ly/3KEbZyA and Delta Stryker 3.5-21x44 https://annexdefense.com/delta-stryker-hd-3-5-21x44-rifle-scope/ are the purest expressions of the crossover idea I have seen to date, this side of Tangent TT315M that you will see a couple of categories down.

 

Traditional Hunting

This get difficult again because it is not a type of a scope that is common around these parts and the ones I look at do not stick around too long.  I simply happen to be an FFP guy.  However, some hunting scope articles are very much overdue and I do have an excellent Delta Titanium 1.5-9x45.  In sticking with sane prices, let's add Tract Toric 2.5-15x44 with illuminated reticle to this list.  https://tractoptics.com/toric-uhd-30mm-2-5-15x44-ffp-illuminated-mrad-mrad-hunting-rifle-scope

These two should give me a decent ability to compare.  On the high end, there are several real interesting options, but I do not have any on hand since the two categories bracketing this one fill that role for me.

 

General Purpose Practical Precision

Given how much this crosses over with, oun intended, crossover designs above, I could have merged them into signle category.  It would make too much sense so here we are.  Tangent Theta TT315M 3-15x50 is still it to me. https://bit.ly/41dz6c8

In the less eye-wateringly expensive world, the current range of 4-25x50 (or thereabouts) designs from LOW seem to offer a lot for the money.  Tract's version is a good example.  https://tractoptics.com/toric-4-25x50-34mm-mrad-elr-rifle-scope

Moving further down in price, I think Burris XTR3i 3.3-18x50 takes the cake https://bit.ly/48ViwQX  I really like how capable it is at very near to $1k, so it will be here for a while.

 

Long Range Practical Precision

I might catch a lot of flack for this one, but so be it.  

High end: still Tangent Theta 5-25x56 https://bit.ly/3ORWU0n

Best bang for the buck on the high end: Vortex Razor Gen3 6-36x56  https://bit.ly/3VcAXJD

Mid-range: Delta Stryker 4.5-30x56 (there is a bunch of simlar scopes in this category and I happen to have this one)  https://www.edgunwest.com/store/delta-optics/item/delta-stryker-4-5-30x56/

Low-mid range: Meopta Optika6 5-30x56 (again, there are several to choose from that are similar, but this one is on hand) https://bit.ly/3Ia4QX9  and Delta Javelin 4.5-30x56.  There are some similarities between them, but these are not identical scopes  https://annexdefense.com/delta-javelin-4-5-30x56-rifle-scope-ffp-smr-1-do-2470/

 

Short Range Target: I'll have to skip this one for now.

Long Range Target: Ditto.  It is not a category I look at much, so I do not have anything on hand that will fit.  I will rectify that.  Until then, the best paper shooting scope I have and intend to keep is March 5-42x56.  It bridges several categories nicely since it is FFP, but it pulls target shooting duty for me.  If I decide to do a comparison review on target scope, this Marhc will serve as the reference standard.  https://bit.ly/3TdABox

Field Target: I do not have a Field Target setup, so this category is going to be skipped for now.  Hopefuly, not for too long.

Read full Article
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals