Or, why the RDS is still king. Bear with me now, I know many of us are very fond of our LPVOs because “recce” and all. Nonetheless, I think an RDS and a magnifier are better for most people most of the time.
At work, I have used RDS optics more often than not, though I have almost always had a 3X Aimpoint magnifier behind it. Most of the time the magnifier stays off to the side, but several times over the years, the 3X has allowed me to use the RDS when it otherwise would have been sub-optimal or even useless.
I also use LPVOs with offset RDS, though my idea of an LPVO may be different than yours. I don’t actually have any use for a 1-X FFP scope. I have always preferred a 2 or 2.5-10 as my main optic. Second focal plane, of course. Let’s look at those two aspects separately for a minute.
A 1X scope can work just fine, assuming you can see the reticle. However, it will never have the ease of use of an RDS at 1X, since the eye box and eye relief are much more limiting. If I want a scope, it’s because I want to see more. A 2x or 2.5X bottom end gives me as much speed as a 1X and is no worse positionally. At the same time, I can see quite a bit more detail at 2X than I can at 1X.
Where a typical LPVO tops out at 6 or even 8, my 2-10 gives me that much more for distance shooting or locating and identifying targets. Yes, there is a 1-10 LPVO, but I am not fan enough to switch.
First Focal Plane is fine for a precision rifle where you will not normally use the low end for much at all. On a carbine, the low end is your default setting, and it must get the job done. A fine reticle that can barely be seen is not what you want. Second Focal Plane scopes offer good reticles at low power and are no hindrance for holdovers at distance, where you are going to want to be on full power anyway.
The exception to this is nighttime use with clip-on night vision, but that is not a concern for most people and is not something I will address here. If that is a part of your job, you should already know what you need.
So, we have a 2.5-10 as our primary optic on a “GP” rifle, but is it better than an RDS with a magnifier? What is your use for the carbine? Home defense? RDS makes the most sense to me. Ranch rifle? A scope may be the way to go. Home defense and a ranch rifle? How big is your ranch? I’m only sort of joking there, but an RDS and a magnifier will cover a lot of ground.
As mentioned, an RDS is ideal for home defense. If you need to shoot a varmint a bit further out with your home defense gun, flip your magnifier in place and have at it. I have always used a 3x magnifier, but am currently testing a 5x and a 6x and will report back on those at a later date.
One nice benefit of the RDS/magnifier is that you can take the magnifier off if you really don’t need it, making the gun a fair bit lighter and handier. I don’t remember ever doing that. On the other hand, the combo still usually weighs less than an LPVO, and while the weight is close, that weight gives you the ideal close-quarters optic as your primary, while allowing for a fair ability to see further and better when needed. An LPVO gives you superhero sight, but you never get the ideal speed/position option that the RDS gives you.
Pick the optic that accomplishes your mission, but I think that an RDS and a magnifier accomplish most tasks, and should probably be the default setup, barring specific reasons to go in another direction. I’ve heard about zeros being off when using a magnifier. All I can say is that I have not had this issue come up. I zero my RDS with the magnifier in place and properly adjusted to the RDS. The two 3X Aimpoint magnifiers that I have used over the past 20 years or so have both been completely satisfactory. Initial testing of the 5X and 6X that I have now is also good, but I will have to do more with them before saying anything definitive.
On the other hand, I have seen lots of people dress the part, but fail to utilize their LPVOs correctly. Magnification on the wrong setting, parallax not set correctly (thankfully most don’t have a parallax knob, but at least a few do. Not recommended.), user unsure how to adjust magnification on the fly without looking at it, illumination not working or unworkable. Another very common mistake is picking the wrong reticle for the job. The scope companies are not very helpful in this regard, but some useable reticles do exist.
To sum up, while the scope is a great choice for sporting purposes, most users don’t seem to be able to employ it well under greater stress. For that matter, I see the same mistakes in the hunting field every year too, so… The RDS gives you the most forgiving reticle/optic combo and for the non-sporting jobs that a carbine will be called upon to perform in the United States, it offers everything that might be needed. For those of us who can use an LVPO well under stress, we gain a little utility but lose some of the primary benefits of putting an optic on the gun – ease and speed of use under the majority of situations actually encountered. Even without a magnifier, the RDS better fulfills most real-world domestic roles and gives you a lighter, handier carbine to boot.
If you need a scope, get a scope. And learn how to use it. If you don’t really need a scope, you may find that the old RDS will more than carry the water for you.
The LPVO vs RDS argument seems to get hashed out quite a bit these days.
I have a carbine upper with a RDS but 99%, my preference is still a LPVO. Not only is my astigmatism an issue, I don’t care for the magnifier hanging off the side. Thankfully we have options ?
It does seem to get talked about a lot lately. I think that’s because most people are making their decisions based on theory and video watching, rather than actual ability and experience. My go to personal carbine has an LPVO on it. That doesn’t make it the right choice for other people, but it works well for what I actually need to do with the gun. My go to work gun has an RDS and a magnifier because it works well for what I have to actually do with it. That doesn’t make it the right choice for other people.
Try a 1x prism, the etched reticle is great if you have astigmatism and as a bonus, it works unilluminated if your battery dies; put your magnifier on a quick detach mount for times when you don’t need it. My bedside gun has a pencil barrel and 1x prism while my heavy barrel tack driver gets a scope and bipod. Horses for courses.
Once upon a time you advised me to purchase an NXS 2.5-10×32. At the time I was pretty unsure as all the cool dudes on the Internet had modern 6x or 8x LPVOs.
~5 years later I’m still using that NXS with an offset red dot. I’ve tried the LPVO thing 3 separate times since then but keep coming back to the NXS + dot for a “GP” rifle I can go run 5-15 miles with and shoot fast from 5-600 yards.
It’s a shame NF abandoned the x32. I don’t particularly want the larger 42mm bell or parallax adjustment.
Great optic. I have one on my DMR.
They would still make that model if it sold. The problem is, a lot of shooters with myself included, prefer a FFP model. I really like the range of the 2.5-20 NX8, but would be happy with a smaller 2-12x or similar with a small objective.
No doubt, there are some real benefits to FFP when you get past MPBR, or if you’re transitioning between. I’ve definitely tripped myself up on stages where I needed to hit small plates at ~100-200 and then engage targets at 400-600 and didn’t turn the mag up.
The NX8 is a larger and much heavier scope that isn’t as easy to use at 2.5x. it’s much better geared towards those longer shots.
If we’re making wishes I’d wish for the same 2-12 as you but using the FC-DMx reticle in the package of the 2.5-10×32.
Dude, that is awesome to hear, thank you for letting me know. I could not agree more, the x32 is where it is at. Cost is not the deciding factor, but these scopes tend to cost a fair bit less than an LPVO, and I think they offer more. I appreciate you reading and taking the time to let me know how it is going.