Scout Rifles: Jeff Cooper on Red Dot Sights, 1994

[Kendal Black]

Annnd everyone still ignores the1.5-5x Leupold Firedot that I have linked repeatedly, sigh!

Nah, Gordon mentioned it. I am sure it is a great optic. I am a staunch fan of Leupold scopes. The dot sight solves a different problem, a simpler problem if you will. Train rifle, at once see aiming pip in your real-world view of your surroundings. If that is all you want your sight to do, a 1x dot sight does a brilliant job.

 

[Duster340]

Put one on my deer/cedar wetlands/thick woods bumming around rifle. I like it. Quick handling and easy to find in the low light conditions of my land. The mount clears the rear peep so I can still use the iron sights if need be. And no problem out to 100yds bright sunlight at the range. Overall I'm happy with it.

 

[herrwalther]

Frankly, as I recall, it really wasn't a good optic. Modern bargain optics, like the Tasco TRS-25, are significantly better than than mid-tier red-dot sights from back then.

Bushnell makes the TRS-25. Not Tasco.

This is part of the reason that I have changed the Red-Dot on one of my guns to one with movement sensing activation. It is also solar powered.

I looked at a few solar powered red dots just yesterday. I wish more companies would explore the technology, as it seems promising.

That definitely addresses my concern. How does it effect battery life? I assume if you were walking with the gun, the sensors would be tripped almost constantly, and so the sight would be on?

Edited to add: Aimpoint is claiming tens of thousands of hours continuous use on one battery change...

Speaking from personal experience, some high end red dots have impressive battery lives. My service rifle used a Aimpoint CompM4. I left that sight on for 10 MONTHS on the same battery.

Red dots are great. Scout rifles are great....for CQB, and people targets. They lack something in the woods. Specifically, accurate (fine) shot placement at distance, finding a hole in the brush to shoot through, and trophy judging. If you are shooting gongs or targets, or enemy soldiers, fine. If you are trying to pick the boar out of a group of writhing, rutting hogs, no. This was supposed to be the boar. I had him all lined up and ready to shoot. Somebody wiggled, I missed it in the 2x EER scope, and I shot the sow; tasty, but not the one I wanted.

I agree on much of what you posted. I have used red dots with great effect on 2 legged critters on 2 way ranges. They are good for general body hits at 300 meters and beyond, depending on skill of the shooter. I love red dots. My service rifle had backup iron sights. And my home rifle has the same backup sights with almost the same optic. But my hunting rifle has a Leupold 1.5-5x scope on it.

 

[TTv2]

A red dot with 1x magnification is not much better than iron sights, it's only advantage would be in low light applications. The idea of using a magnifier with a red dot is silly to me, I'd rather have a scope with an illuminated reticle and good quality, but low price scopes like that exist, Primary Arms makes 2.5x illuminated Prism scopes with the ACSS reticle for not much more than a red dot.

 

[kBob]

I was using a SinglePoint Ocluded Eye type scope in the 1970's on an AR-180 .....and folks made fun of me and poo-pooed the idea.

-kBob

 

[BilliamB.]

This is part of the reason that I have changed the Red-Dot on one of my guns to one with movement sensing activation. It is also solar powered.

Sounds good. Who makes it? TIA

 

[Hasaf]

Sounds good. Who makes it? TIA

I didn't name it because I have not shot it enough to form a solid opinion. It is the HoloSun HS403c. the reviews online seem fairly positive. I have it on a "braced" CZ Scorpion EVO 3 S1. This is a very lite recoiling arm; so I cannot say how it would do on anything else. As far as the basic features (being on whenever I pick it up, and staying zeroed), it seems to work well.

image from here

Just as a comment, while I posted a link to the official site, if you do a search, you will find it for a lot less elsewhere. It ships with a high and low riser. The low riser is better for the CZ Scorpion. The tall riser is best for the AR.

 

[Kendal Black]

A red dot with 1x magnification is not much better than iron sights, it's only advantage would be in low light applications.

True if you look only at max achievable accuracy, but I find the dot faster to put on the target, also faster to transition between targets, and very simple to use.

The idea of using a magnifier with a red dot is silly to me, I'd rather have a scope with an illuminated reticle. . .

It is a bit of a Rube Goldberg lash-up, I gotta admit. It is only sensible if you already prefer the 1x dot sight for the reason above, but think you might sometimes need a little magnification.

 

[Gordon]

When La Rue started making Aim point mounts and magnifier mounts, suddenly the concept changed and became VERY effective and reliable in mid 2000s. And then there was the use of the magnificent Trigicon ACOG and the great impact they showed on military rifle use. With an RMR mounted on one for a true red dot you have the best of both worlds.They are not long eye relief tho. The long eye relief thing for bolt chamber access is kinda difficult to surmount. I really lost interest in it because of flaring with sun behind you , which is tactically a good idea generally. The Leupold Fire dot scout scope on 1.5x does show up as a red dot so is better. I have one on my remaining 600 Remington Brown Precision Kevlar Scout .308 , but have not hunted with it yet
.

 

[Kendal Black]

Whatever is the best way to do it, a red dot, or a variable scope that starts at 1x, or some other solution, I am convinced that the scout rifle is improved by a 1x optic. Both eyes view the target in natural perspective, the aiming reference is in the same visual plane as the target, so aiming's very fast and seemingly natural.

The best arguments I can think of for the red dot sight are that it has no eye relief limits as such, and it is forgiving if your eye is off the optical axis.

 

[ATLDave]

Jeff Cooper was a good writer and charismatic. He was pretty smart and pretty well-read. He was also a man of his times. Some of the stuff he said was right, some of the stuff he said was wrong, and some of the stuff he said was right at the time and is now wrong.

The same can be said of just about anyone. No reason to treat the guy or his various remarks as divinely-inspired gospel.

 

[Kendal Black]

It is interesting to follow the logic that led Cooper to the scout rifle concept, something not all critics of the concept bother to do before opining. Once you see the reasoning you can analyze it and draw your own conclusions.

Another point that might be revisited is action type. Can we, nowdays, build a field-tough self-loader in .308 that is light and convenient to carry? The objection formerly was that the rifle would end up heavy and clunky; it was the era of the M14 and the FAL.

A more nearly ideal scout than those we now have, if it could be produced, would "make weight" while being a semi-auto bullpup with a HUD sight. Shorter is better, quicker is better...

 

[1KPerDay]

A red dot with 1x magnification is not much better than iron sights, it's only advantage would be in low light applications.

Disagree. A 1x red dot is a LOT better than iron sights in almost every situation. There's a reason every swat team and military carbine and competition rifle has a red dot sight. And pistol carry optics are taking hold.

 

[ATLDave]

Yeah, that's just crazy talk. Being able to shoot target-focused, as opposed to focusing on the front sight and dealing with a blurry target (or quarry or opponent), is a material advantage.

 

[TTv2]

Disagree. A 1x red dot is a LOT better than iron sights in almost every situation. There's a reason every swat team and military carbine and competition rifle has a red dot sight. And pistol carry optics are taking hold.

For a pistol I would agree, but for a rifle I don't see how a 1x on a BOLT ACTION rifle is better than a set of good iron sights.

 

[ATLDave]

For a pistol I would agree, but for a rifle I don't see how a 1x on a BOLT ACTION rifle is better than a set of good iron sights.

For speed.

 

[1KPerDay]

Speed, field of view, target/threat focus, 2 objects to align rather than three, much quicker follow up shots or transitions. For offhand/prone target shooting at fixed distances at standardized targets, a good set of iron sights with elevation marks might have an advantage. In pretty much every other case (minus battery or electronic failure) the red dot is clearly superior.

I shoot irons all the time in multigun.

 

[TTv2]

For speed.

I use a bolt action for accuracy, not speed. To me it's a waste on a rifle that can reach out 300 yards, but to each their own.

 

[HB]

I think eventually irons on pistols will be a small red dot and thats it. Like a low pro fastfire.

Same goes for rifles. After you retrain a dot is much better. Look at NRA bulleye.

 

[ATLDave]

I use a bolt action for accuracy, not speed. To me it's a waste on a rifle that can reach out 300 yards, but to each their own.

The whole point of the “scout rifle” was to be fast. Maybe just for the first shot. Fast-handling guns are worth something in the field.

Think about large-caliber dangerous game rifles. They are usually either doubles or bolt actions. They are rarely long-barreled things built for long-range accuracy. They are usually built with a premium on fast handling to deal with a charging cape buffalo or whatever.

 

[chicharrones]

For a pistol I would agree, but for a rifle I don't see how a 1x on a BOLT ACTION rifle is better than a set of good iron sights.

Makes me think of the driven hunt videos with bolt guns using tube type Aimpoint red dots on top. https://www.aimpoint.com/product/aimpoint-h30l/

 

[1KPerDay]

I use a bolt action for accuracy, not speed. To me it's a waste on a rifle that can reach out 300 yards, but to each their own.

Quick first shot in heavy cover? No?

Okay how about this: holdovers with iron sights obscure your target. The farther out you go, the less of your target you can see. This is not ideal in hunting for obvious reasons. Not the case with a red dot.

BUT WAIT, there's more!!! It slices, it dices, it mashes, it smashes! NOW HOW MUCH WOULD YOU PAY?!?

 

[TTv2]

Makes me think of the driven hunt videos with bolt guns using tube type Aimpoint red dots on top. https://www.aimpoint.com/product/aimpoint-h30l/

I've seen this video, this guy has trained and practiced with speed shooting bolt actions. He's really good at it, the average Joe is going to be far behind him.

Quick first shot in heavy cover? No?

Okay how about this: holdovers with iron sights obscure your target. The farther out you go, the less of your target you can see. This is not ideal in hunting for obvious reasons. Not the case with a red dot.

Or with a 1x scope.

The whole point of the “scout rifle” was to be fast. Maybe just for the first shot. Fast-handling guns are worth something in the field.

Think about large-caliber dangerous game rifles. They are usually either doubles or bolt actions. They are rarely long-barreled things built for long-range accuracy. They are usually built with a premium on fast handling to deal with a charging cape buffalo or whatever.

Would be a lot faster with semi auto or a lever action.

 

[ATLDave]

The first shot with a semi-auto is not faster than the first shot with a bolt.

Not a lot of .375 H&H selfloaders in any event.

 

[Kendal Black]

The mystique of the first round hit certainly figures into the scout rifle idea, such that how fast you can fire again is not the biggest question, but a bolt action is not exactly slow to those who have learned how to twist its tail...



https://shootery.blogspot.com/2010/06/fast-bolt-work-how-to-fire-bolt-action.html