Low power AR scope opinions

[Arp32]

After finally tossing the wandering zero NC Star junk I've had for way too long, I'm looking to get some quality low power optics in the $250-$400 range. Had considered the long Aimpoint tubes, but would like the option of at least some magnification.

At this point I'm trying to decide between a Nikon M223 1-4x20 and a Leupold Mark AR 1.5-4x20 for my Bushmaster AR carbine. I'm looking for some firsthand opinions. I read all the reviews on Optics Planet and Amazon, but I'm guessing THR has a more discriminating group of users.

Mostly I plink at stuff inside of 100 yards out in the desert, but I'd like to occasionally set up some targets a bit further out. No hunting or competition shooting, just having fun on weekends when it's not too hot out.

Any first hand opinions by folks that have used either of these scopes? I'm interested to know how they compare in terms of brightness, how solid they are, how tactile/positive the clicks are, etc. Basically which is the highest quality option that will give me the most years of service. Feel free to offer other suggestions in that price range. To be honest, if I was going to spend $500-$1,000, I'd rather get a nice revolver.

Thanks!

 

[marinetowgunner]

I would give the Burris MTAC a look as well. Should come in right a $400 most places. Another one to look at might be the Vortex Viper PST 1-4 with capped turrets. Might be a little over budget (I think that it falls in the 480 range?)but worth taking a look at.

http://www.riflescopes.net/burrismtac1-4-200437.aspx

http://www.outdooroutfitters.com/burris-riflescopes-mtac.aspx

http://www.sportoptics.com/burris-mtac-rifle-scopes.aspx

Just a few places to help with the search.

 

[Arp32]

Thanks for the links, gunner. Adding that to my list. It just hurts to think I'd be close to $500 with the mount included. I know you get what you pay for, it's just...

I also started looking at an Optisan scope/mount combo that was $150, but have decided I should probably stick with a brand name (that comes with a real warranty).

I think right now I'm leaning towards the Nikon (mainly because of the reticle), but still hoping an owner will chime in before I commit.

 

[fallout mike]

Im about to get that Nikon you are looking at. I've heard great things about it from owners.

 

[DesertFox]

This thread has a picture of what I'd recommend. Optisan Mamba 1-4x:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=8150452#post8150452

http://swfa.com/Optisan-1-4x24-Mamba-EAR30-Mount-Combo-P51887.aspx

 

[HJ857]

This may be only somewhat useful.

I have a couple Burris scopes, one a 1x4 XTR and a 2.5x10 Euro (discontinued). Both turrets are hunter style and a bit mushy, however on the XTR I zero at 100 yards and never adjust it after that so the knobs are kind of irrelevant. I use the reticle for holdover on the Euro because I can't seem to get good clicks with it, though I could send it in for a target turret upgrade. Maybe someday.

Both Burris scopes have bullet drop references on the reticle. I handload only and the reticle never matches up to my loads. I have a feeling that very few load/barrel combinations will exactly match up to the bullet drop indicators, so if you want some level of precision, click value is the way to go. On the other hand, you get used to using the drop indicators pretty fast so you can figure it out easily enough.

I also have a Nikon M-223 3x12 with the rapid adjust knobs. These knobs are have very nice clicks and are very repeatable and are tactical/target style. These knobs have distance indicators on the knobs, but again they do not match up to my loads at all. But they are good references for fast adjustment. For example the 500 yard hash mark on the turret is 50 clicks, my 550 yard click value is 46, so I just dial the turret to 500 and back it off four clicks. Easy.

The Nikon seems to have more parallax issues, even with the side focus capability. And while the side focus knob has distance references, it does not really match up. For example, 100 yard focus is actually better if set to 75 yards. Parallax is more noticeable vertically.

More interesting is that both Burris scopes are a great deal clearer than the Nikon. The Nikon doesn't suck, but it is definitely not as good as the Burris scopes. It's interesting because I expected better from Nikon. The glass in the Burris Euro is awesome and the XTR is just about as good.

 

[Arp32]

Thanks for the quality insights, HJ. Not making it easier!

 

[Arp32]

Ended up making a spur of the moment choice at LGS. Wanted to handle a few options, but they only had cheap off-brand 1-4x scopes in stock. Ended up deciding the Leupold 2-7x33mm was probably easy enough to pick up quickly on the 2x setting, so I took it home on impulse. They didn't have any good one-piece picatinny mounts though, so I won't get to try it out for at least another week.

Hope it works out, if not I'll just have to move this scope to a .22 and start again.

 

[Haxby]

I had both a 1-4X20 and a 2-8X32 for years. I like a 2-7 or 2-8 better than a 1-4.
The new Leupolds look good. Which version did you get?

 

[Creature]

Take a look at the Burris AR332 or AR536.

 

[Arp32]

Haxby, it was a VX-II with a plain duplex recticle.

Went out with a buddy this morning and he let me shoot his 3-gun AR with an ACOG, kinda took the fun out of the Leupold for me... Too spendy for my taste, but very cool.