Thread: Red dot scopes on rifles.

What is the eye relief like with these? I resume you still need to have a good cheek weld and repeatability?

Originally Posted by Ricochet

That does look interesting, not too pricey, I might give it a go. Thanks.

Year no worries Ricochet I'm going to pick one of these up as I said in the states. Need one for driven boar in France as well as Roe in the UK. I also hunt some very tight stuff. I think for the Kaimais this would be ideal. Let me know how you get on cheers Sideshow

Originally Posted by 223nut

What is the eye relief like with these? I resume you still need to have a good cheek weld and repeatability?

I'd try to mount it as low/close to the barrel as possible so you can get that running shot in if need be. But that's just me.

Originally Posted by 223nut

What is the eye relief like with these? I resume you still need to have a good cheek weld and repeatability?

There is no Parallax error using these so if you can see the dot that’s where the shot will hit.
The Holosun is significantly smaller and lighter than a Vortex strike eagle or any other low magnification variable scope for example.
If you are hunting in the thick stuff something like the Holosun would be better in my opinion.
The other option is one of the fixed power red dots, something around 3 power.

Red dot scopes are fantastic gor close shrug or snap shots. They are easily field accurate out to 300m, anyone who says otherwise doesn't know how to shoot with one.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

Been thinking g of putting one on the 10/22, only use it gets it possums up the tree so 20m range, often have them on the move and wait for them to stop currently with the scope.

Originally Posted by Koshogi

Red dot scopes are fantastic gor close shrug or snap shots. They are easily field accurate out to 300m, anyone who says otherwise doesn't know how to shoot with one.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

I am not going to dispute that they have their place and their uses. And I know how to use one and had one for quite some time. And I agree whole heartedly on your comment "Red dot scopes are fantastic gor close shrug or snap shots."

But if the dot is big enough to see for those "close shrug or snap shots."then it is too big for any accuracy further out. If it is small enough to be accurate at ranges over 150m, it is so small that you cannot see it in a hurry. Those snap shots in the bush require a bight dot to be 4 to 6 moa in size in order to be a 2" to 3" circle (or there abouts) at 50 metres. Thats a 6 inch bread and butter plate at 100m. At 300m that dot is 18 inches across and this is likely to mean your group will be similar. That is not good enough for a long shot. You can get a nice bright 1moa dot scope, that has a nice tight dot so at longer range you get a smaller group, problem is when you look at a pig at 50 metres you are now looking through your scope for a dot on the animal the size of a 10c copper coin. Try seeing that in a hurry.....This is not just a dot problem. Look at cross hairs too. A big thick bold cross hair is easy to see fast, but obscures a lot more of a target. Try shooting a 2 inch cricle at 100m when the cross hair is is wider than that.... a fine thin precise cross hair can see a 1 inch circle at 100m but is hard to pick up in a hurry.

It is all a balance / compromise. If you want fast acquisition in thick bush then a bright dot or a thick bold cross hair is ideal with the dot having the advantage, but if you want accuracy at 300m at small targets then the fine cross hair will out perform them. Anything in between is a balance between the two.

If you are likely to be using it in close range and bush then a dot may well be ideal. If you dont mind being a little slower on acquisition then the cross hair of a low powered scope like a 1x-4x up to a max of 6x will still be able to do better at those longer ranges when that opportunity comes up. This is partly why the 3-9x40 has been such a popular size. 3x is low enough for a decent field of view and fast (ish) acquisition and 9x is fine for 400m long shots on decent sized targets like deer. This makes it a good balance for most hunting situations. thicker the scrub, lower the magnification, the more open and clear it gets the bigger the scope 4-12x or 4-16 even. Horses for courses.

Leupold firedot crosses over to having your cake and eating it to some extent, I use 3-9 x 40. Sometimes in the bush wish had a 1-2 low end but can still do precision out to 250m which need for shot placement on a 223 AR . I keep looking at changing out of being a consumer but only scope I really like to replace with would be a compact illuminated 2.5 x 10 nightforce at a nice price

I have one of these with the "K dot" recticle

MeoStar R1 1-4x22 RD - True 1x magnification for instinctive, split-second, aiming precision.

Its phucking magic! The glass is fantastic and you can turn the illum off and have a black recticle.It takes a bit of getting used to bit its fast for close up stuff and wound up it does well at longer range.

I'm another user,
I limit myself to 150 with it then put the pm2 on for anything else

Do it, ive swapped my holosun 403 solar between most of my guns and can't fault it for hunting to 100m as long as the rifles up to the task. Shit ive even used it on my ar15 for ipsc matches out to 300m on 300mm steel plate and never needed 2nd shots, which is minute of deer to me. It now lives on ny 9mm ar which is a match made in heaven.
As above the 1-4 and 1-6s are mostly too dark in twilight and especially the vortex wau too heavy, too busy reticle for hunting and quite short eyebox.
Maybe it all comes down to how good your eyes are

Originally Posted by timattalon

I am not going to dispute that they have their place and their uses. And I know how to use one and had one for quite some time. And I agree whole heartedly on your comment "Red dot scopes are fantastic gor close shrug or snap shots."

But if the dot is big enough to see for those "close shrug or snap shots."then it is too big for any accuracy further out. If it is small enough to be accurate at ranges over 150m, it is so small that you cannot see it in a hurry. Those snap shots in the bush require a bight dot to be 4 to 6 moa in size in order to be a 2" to 3" circle (or there abouts) at 50 metres. Thats a 6 inch bread and butter plate at 100m. At 300m that dot is 18 inches across and this is likely to mean your group will be similar. That is not good enough for a long shot. You can get a nice bright 1moa dot scope, that has a nice tight dot so at longer range you get a smaller group, problem is when you look at a pig at 50 metres you are now looking through your scope for a dot on the animal the size of a 10c copper coin. Try seeing that in a hurry.....This is not just a dot problem. Look at cross hairs too. A big thick bold cross hair is easy to see fast, but obscures a lot more of a target. Try shooting a 2 inch cricle at 100m when the cross hair is is wider than that.... a fine thin precise cross hair can see a 1 inch circle at 100m but is hard to pick up in a hurry.

Why does the size of the dot equate the size of your group?

How big is a iron front site post at 100m? At 300m?

An AR front site post for example is 11MOA, does that mean my groups will be 11 inches at 100m? Or 33 inches at 300m? No, because I'm not obscuring the target with the entire post. I'm using the tip of the post, the same can be/is done with a dot.

If accuracy is the priority then clearly the preferred option is a magnified optic. To say that a red dot isn't accurate past 100m though, is .....well inaccurate.

Also to remember with the likes of Eotech has a 65Moa ring for close stuff, centre is 1 Moa for out further, Aimpoints depending on what size dot you choose say 2 MOA you can full up and down with power for light or to increase for size. These two brands were and still really are the benchmark for many years but others seem to be catching up. Holosuns sound ok and the look remarkably similar to one of Sig Sauers releases at half the price. There's some good Korean ones recently released supposed to be up close to Aimpoint quality.

the advantage red dots have with close range and when shooting long range is that you shoot with both eyes open once you get used to it the dot I use trijicon mro's is only 2mm and because you can adjust the brightness means you can shoot dark bush to bright sunlight using both eyes means it dosnt obscure the target way faster than a scope dont know about a bolt action tho for follow up shots yesterday pest control came across a mob of 29 goats got 26 30 metres to 200 metres ar 15 with trijicon mro

Originally Posted by Koshogi

Why does the size of the dot equate the size of your group?

How big is a iron front site post at 100m? At 300m?

An AR front site post for example is 11MOA, does that mean my groups will be 11 inches at 100m? Or 33 inches at 300m? No, because I'm not obscuring the target with the entire post. I'm using the tip of the post, the same can be/is done with a dot.

If accuracy is the priority then clearly the preferred option is a magnified optic. To say that a red dot isn't accurate past 100m though, is .....well inaccurate.

Again I am not disagreeing with you.I am simply saying that if you are after accuracy at those longer shots then, as you say, a magnified optic is better. Its all about a balance between what is best at both. Going right back to the original post I have quoted below. that a red dot would be much more suited at those ranges. The size of the dot matters to an extent because if it as large as you suggest, then while you can hit the centre of the dot, if it obscures the target that much you cannot be sure where the target is behind the dot. The one I had was great for those quick close shots, but at 200m it would obscure almost the whole goat and not being about to see behind the dot meant I could not know if it moved or whether I was still aiming at a vital organ or not. I could not see the target clear enough to guarantee a clean shot.

The point I was trying to make is not so much "To say that a red dot isn't accurate past 100m though, is .....well inaccurate." but rather more like To say that a red dot isn't as accurate as a scope past 100m . You find someone who can shoot an accurate group with a Red dot at a range past 100m, and then see what happens if they use a magnified optic at the same range......And as most rifles are set up for those 100m + distances they tend to use magnified optics as a default.

Originally Posted by Ricochet

Sorry if this is a super dumb question but I hunt the Kaimais and all deer I encounter are within the 50m range. (Actually more often than not it's more like 10m).

Wouldn't a red dot scope be better suited to this range than my 3-9? Why haven't I ever seen one on a bolt action before?

At those ranges, yes, most certainly a red dot would be great. The reason you probably have not seen one on a bolt action is that most would be set up for longer ranges than you are encountering.