"Duty Grade" optics

[Sirshredalot]

Just to muddy the waters,

I was very impressed with the burris rt6 at the nra show....especially for the price.

Shred

 

[T-DOGG]

Just to muddy the waters,

I was very impressed with the burris rt6 at the nra show....especially for the price.

Shred

We've already steered off course, my opening post wasn't the best wording to begin with.

I have an RT6 and really like the reticle design. The glass seems similar to Strike Eagle quality. Burris says the RT6 is considered for competition use. If I would have been willing to pony up the extra money at the time, I'd rather have a PST 1-6. Better overall and the red dot is very bright.

 

[Trapper Jim]

Leupold/Burris

might think different if I lived in China or Bulgaria

 

[jrh84]

I hope I didn't start the optic version of "my PSA rifle is just as good as" thread. I'm really just trying to figure out what magnified optics aren't considered junk, but don't cost thousands of dollars either. Is there a middle ground? Is $500 enough for a quality scope. $700? Or is $1000 the minimum needed.

Here's a more exact example of what I'm thinking about. I want to shoot my 5.56 BCM accurately out to 300 yards and see bullet holes at least at the 100 yard line. Will an Athlon Argos BTR 6-24x50 scope accomplish this? Its $313 on Amazon. Or do I need something better? Do I need a different brand and add a few hundred more dollars to the price?

Back to the original question....I've got a pile of Vortex scopes, and an Athlon Argos 6-24. For the price range I think you're talking about, I'd be all over a refurb from Alan.

https://aaoptics.com/REFURBISHED--VIPER-HS-T-4-16X44-RIFLESCOPE-VMR-1-MOA_p_533.html

The Athlon works, dont get me wrong. I can't say that there's anything it DOESN'T do, but the Vortex just does it a bit better. Sharper glass, and more positive adjustments, and easier to get behind. It's a bit more expensive than the Athlon, but feels like a big step up in quality in my opinion.

I've got a pile of Vortex products, and I've yet to have any issues with them. I've used the snot out of a Gen 1 PST 1-4 shooting high power, and haven't had a single hiccup. Same with a PST 6-24. Dialing up from a 200 yard zero to 600 yard or 1000 yards and back, no issue. Repeatable adjustments, good tracking, and good enough glass to see scoring rings at 600 yards.

 

[T-DOGG]

Back to the original question....I've got a pile of Vortex scopes, and an Athlon Argos 6-24. For the price range I think you're talking about, I'd be all over a refurb from Alan.

https://aaoptics.com/REFURBISHED--VIPER-HS-T-4-16X44-RIFLESCOPE-VMR-1-MOA_p_533.html

The Athlon works, dont get me wrong. I can't say that there's anything it DOESN'T do, but the Vortex just does it a bit better. Sharper glass, and more positive adjustments, and easier to get behind. It's a bit more expensive than the Athlon, but feels like a big step up in quality in my opinion.

I've got a pile of Vortex products, and I've yet to have any issues with them. I've used the snot out of a Gen 1 PST 1-4 shooting high power, and haven't had a single hiccup. Same with a PST 6-24. Dialing up from a 200 yard zero to 600 yard or 1000 yards and back, no issue. Repeatable adjustments, good tracking, and good enough glass to see scoring rings at 600 yards.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/accessories-gear/470916-duty-grade-optics.html#post7986137

Already bought the 6-24x50 HST refurb from Alan. I ran it last Saturday and was very impressed with it. The glass is definitely better than anything else I have currently. The turrets have very positive clicks and the reticle is perfect for what I wanted to do. It certainly helped reiterate what many folks have stated time and time again that you get what you pay for with optics (and other things).

 

[Tombs]

I'll admit, I hate selecting optics for rifles. I generally gravitate towards the lower end of the scale in regards to pricing, generally stuff labeled as decent for the money "budget" level. I've had a few Acogs also, they were nice but not easy on the wallet. During some research lately I see alot of reviews on optics where the person will state they like it, but wouldn't consider it "duty grade".

So here is my question to get a good conversation going. What is considered "duty grade" in optics, what features make something good enough for duty and how much does duty grade cost? This question is mainly aimed at magnified optics for rifles, but we can generalize to include others as well. Looking at different levels of offerings in manufacturers scopes, at what level does their scope go into "duty grade" is what I can't figure out.

I did not serve in the military, so I don't have first hand experience with hard use of gear. I don't use my gear hard anyways, but I do like to find value in things while saving money too. I appreciate good glass, but how much do I need to spend to not have that doubt in the back of my mind that my optic isn't good enough? Part of me understands that I don't need high end stuff for what I do, but the firearms community has the other part of me convinced that I'm doing myself an injustice by being cheap.

What's considered duty grade? Things that have been tested and certified to be duty grade.

If you want a bomb proof magnified optic, look no further than the trijicon acog.
If you want a bomb proof red dot optic, look no further than aimpoint's M series.

When it comes to variables, you are not going to have the same degree of durability, it's not physically possible. Price tags for duty grade variable optics start at $2500 from the likes of S&B.

Remember, this isn't a feature, it's a matter of being proven over decades in active combat theaters around the world. You can't simply add a feature to something or overbuild it and make it rise to the level of duty grade. It's a matter of track record and proof of performance. Don't trust your life to anything that lacks a track record.

I hope I didn't start the optic version of "my PSA rifle is just as good as" thread. I'm really just trying to figure out what magnified optics aren't considered junk, but don't cost thousands of dollars either. Is there a middle ground? Is $500 enough for a quality scope. $700? Or is $1000 the minimum needed.

Here's a more exact example of what I'm thinking about. I want to shoot my 5.56 BCM accurately out to 300 yards and see bullet holes at least at the 100 yard line. Will an Athlon Argos BTR 6-24x50 scope accomplish this? Its $313 on Amazon. Or do I need something better? Do I need a different brand and add a few hundred more dollars to the price?

For your purposes, SWFA super sniper series is what you should be looking at. The SWFA SS single magnification is a scope I'd trust my life to, the variables, not so much.(But I wouldn't trust any variable in a life or death capacity) The important thing here isn't necessarily the clarity of the glass. It's the precision of the turrets and the repeat-ability of them. It's also the durability of the optic. SWFA uses screw in steel rings in front of and behind each lens in the scope, making them light years ahead of most other inexpensive optics. The optics track properly and will survive being thrown around.

Also a 6-24x is laughable for 300 yards. With a quality 4x scope you will be able to see your bullet holes in paper at 100 yards. Anything over 8x is comical for shooting at 300. You should be looking at something in the 6x range. Saving money by not buying features you don't need is a good way to buy a quality scope. At only 300, you won't be dialing your turrets, and you won't need more than 6x to be able to spot your own impacts on steel. You also will be fine shooting out to 600 yards with a 6x scope. The rule of thumb for magnification is 1x per 100 yards. Also remember, the more magnification you have, the darker the image will be unless you buy those insanely expensive optics.

This is a fantastic scope for your purposes that won't break the bank: https://www.swfa.com/swfa-ss-6x42-tactical-30mm-riflescope-3.html
If you're dead set on needing variable powers... Consider this: https://www.swfa.com/swfa-ss-3-15x42-tactical-ffp-mil-rifle-scope-bobro-kit.html

I'm running an SWFA 3-15x on a PTR91 with a claw mount for fun and it has been a fantastic set up for stretching out to uncomfortable distances without going bankrupt. On my life and liberty rifles I'm running a TA31 and a TA50 from trijicon.

One last point, your scope is also only as good as the mount you use. Don't skimp on the mount. The bobro included with the variable in the link I provided is an A++ mount.

 

[T-DOGG]

What's considered duty grade? Things that have been tested and certified to be duty grade.

If you want a bomb proof magnified optic, look no further than the trijicon acog.
If you want a bomb proof red dot optic, look no further than aimpoint's M series.

When it comes to variables, you are not going to have the same degree of durability, it's not physically possible. Price tags for duty grade variable optics start at $2500 from the likes of S&B.

Remember, this isn't a feature, it's a matter of being proven over decades in active combat theaters around the world. You can't simply add a feature to something or overbuild it and make it rise to the level of duty grade. It's a matter of track record and proof of performance. Don't trust your life to anything that lacks a track record.



For your purposes, SWFA super sniper series is what you should be looking at. The SWFA SS single magnification is a scope I'd trust my life to, the variables, not so much.(But I wouldn't trust any variable in a life or death capacity) The important thing here isn't necessarily the clarity of the glass. It's the precision of the turrets and the repeat-ability of them. It's also the durability of the optic. SWFA uses screw in steel rings in front of and behind each lens in the scope, making them light years ahead of most other inexpensive optics. The optics track properly and will survive being thrown around.

Also a 6-24x is laughable for 300 yards. With a quality 4x scope you will be able to see your bullet holes in paper at 100 yards. Anything over 8x is comical for shooting at 300. You should be looking at something in the 6x range. Saving money by not buying features you don't need is a good way to buy a quality scope. At only 300, you won't be dialing your turrets, and you won't need more than 6x to be able to spot your own impacts on steel. You also will be fine shooting out to 600 yards with a 6x scope. The rule of thumb for magnification is 1x per 100 yards. Also remember, the more magnification you have, the darker the image will be unless you buy those insanely expensive optics.

This is a fantastic scope for your purposes that won't break the bank: https://www.swfa.com/swfa-ss-6x42-tactical-30mm-riflescope-3.html
If you're dead set on needing variable powers... Consider this: https://www.swfa.com/swfa-ss-3-15x42-tactical-ffp-mil-rifle-scope-bobro-kit.html

I'm running an SWFA 3-15x on a PTR91 with a claw mount for fun and it has been a fantastic set up for stretching out to uncomfortable distances without going bankrupt. On my life and liberty rifles I'm running a TA31 and a TA50 from trijicon.

One last point, your scope is also only as good as the mount you use. Don't skimp on the mount. The bobro included with the variable in the link I provided is an A++ mount.

See posts #23 and #45 (literally the one prior to your post).

I already bought the laughable/comical 6-24 scope, I like it and it makes me smile, but I did not laugh, just smiled.

No, I can't see .22 bullet holes at 100 yards with a 4x optic, I've already tried in the past with a PST 1-4 & Acog. I'm glad you can accomplish this, I can't.

I already have a 1-6, a 3-9 and 4-12 power scopes. I wanted more magnification than that. I'm shooting for groups on paper, not steel and I wanted it to be easier to see my target.

I disagree on the clarity of the glass, it matters to me.

If the glass isn't supposed to matter, why would the turrets matter, if I won't be dialing my turrets at only 300 yards anyways?

Why is anything over 8x comical for shooting out to 300 yards? Because that's what I want and not what you want? I want more magnification than that. I guess I don't see why that would be considered comical.

I don't have access to 600 yards, only 300 yards.

I don't agree with 1x per 100 yards for what I want to do with my rifle.

I'm aware of quality scope mounts, my go-to are Warne and Bobro.

 

[T-DOGG]

The next time I start an optic thread, I'll try and be more specific about what goal I want to accomplish and what optics I've had experience with. Or maybe I should have just said, "what's the best 6-24 scopes in these price ranges?". I'll use better wording and try to not come off as such a dumbass, sometimes my communication skills lack and I don't type out my thoughts very well. I appreciate all of the insight, even the stuff that was slightly insulting and confusing. ​

 

[Tombs]

See posts #23 and #45 (literally the one prior to your post).

I already bought the laughable/comical 6-24 scope, I like it and it makes me smile, but I did not laugh, just smiled.

No, I can't see .22 bullet holes at 100 yards with a 4x optic, I've already tried in the past with a PST 1-4 & Acog. I'm glad you can accomplish this, I can't.

I already have a 1-6, a 3-9 and 4-12 power scopes. I wanted more magnification than that. I'm shooting for groups on paper, not steel and I wanted it to be easier to see my target.

I disagree on the clarity of the glass, it matters to me.

If the glass isn't supposed to matter, why would the turrets matter, if I won't be dialing my turrets at only 300 yards anyways?

Why is anything over 8x comical for shooting out to 300 yards? Because that's what I want and not what you want? I want more magnification than that. I guess I don't see why that would be considered comical.

I don't have access to 600 yards, only 300 yards.

I don't agree with 1x per 100 yards for what I want to do with my rifle.

I'm aware of quality scope mounts, my go-to are Warne and Bobro.

When you're talking about a duty grade scope, the last thing I would have assumed is wanting to shoot paper at 300 yards for the tightest groups possible.

Running too much magnification is bad because you loose so much field of view it has almost no practical usage, which once again is irrelevant if your concern is shooting paper for groups. The reason for the rule is that you will have the correct amount of field of view to still maintain awareness of your surroundings, while still providing enough magnification for positive identification and precision.

In a duty capacity, the difference between a one inch group and a half inch group is usually not the primary concern. I didn't intend to be insulting with anything I said, I've just seen way too many people dive on a 6-24x scope for their AR and end up being unable to do anything but shoot the rifle off a bench.

 

[Goodcat]

When you're talking about a duty grade scope, the last thing I would have assumed is wanting to shoot paper at 300 yards for the tightest groups possible.

Running too much magnification is bad because you loose so much field of view it has almost no practical usage, which once again is irrelevant if your concern is shooting paper for groups. The reason for the rule is that you will have the correct amount of field of view to still maintain awareness of your surroundings, while still providing enough magnification for positive identification and precision.

In a duty capacity, the difference between a one inch group and a half inch group is usually not the primary concern. I didn't intend to be insulting with anything I said, I've just seen way too many people dive on a 6-24x scope for their AR and end up being unable to do anything but shoot the rifle off a bench.

i would not want anything over 2x power on the low range if my job and life constantly depended on my optic.

 

[T-DOGG]

When you're talking about a duty grade scope, the last thing I would have assumed is wanting to shoot paper at 300 yards for the tightest groups possible.

Running too much magnification is bad because you loose so much field of view it has almost no practical usage, which once again is irrelevant if your concern is shooting paper for groups. The reason for the rule is that you will have the correct amount of field of view to still maintain awareness of your surroundings, while still providing enough magnification for positive identification and precision.

In a duty capacity, the difference between a one inch group and a half inch group is usually not the primary concern. I didn't intend to be insulting with anything I said, I've just seen way too many people dive on a 6-24x scope for their AR and end up being unable to do anything but shoot the rifle off a bench.

I agree with you on this. I apologize for being a jerk in my response. This is my fault and your points are relevant to the title of the thread and my opening post. I started the thread with two different thoughts about optics in mind and confused myself and probably everyone else on what answers I was seeking.

Really I should have asked two separate questions or even started two separate threads. Something like this:

(1) What does everyone consider "duty grade" when it comes to optics?

(2) I want to shoot benchrest with my 5.56 AR up to 300 yards and want a higher magnification scope to shoot for groups on paper. I'm looking at an Athlon Argos, should I spend more money and why.

 

[thoroughbred]

Im late to the party...but I think you made a good choice for what you clarified in the later posts...Id also suggest another option to anyone else looking for something similar the nikon black fx1000 6-24x its what im trying to teach myself on...slowly shooting out further and further...feel like more "duty grade" 1-8x/1-10x lvpos are on the horizon soon as companies continue to improve stuff...i just want more quality prism stuff