Red-dot & reflex scopes are handy. Highly-visible reticle, fast acquisition with both eyes open, great for low-light conditions. Recently they have gotten even better, with adjustable reticle patterns, dual-color reticles, and even a variable-size reticle model from Bushnell. But red-dot scopes have a weakness: battery power. Most people who use red-dot scopes have had a battery die on them. Hopefully they had a spare battery handy. If not, good luck hitting the target with no reticle to aim with. Trijicon and other companies have attempted to deal with the battery issue by powering their scopes with tritium capsules and/or fiber-optics . . .
Fiber optics work great during the day, but since there is little ambient light at night, another method of illumination is needed. Tritium is a radioactive gas, and it is not a perfect solution for illuminating a reticle because it only offers limited brightness, and tritium will get dimmer over time (half-life of 12.5 years). As long as the tritium is fresh, a fiber optic/tritium scope like the Trijicon ACOG is very effective. But these scopes are expensive. And once the tritium has decayed to half of its original luminosity, it will be harder to use effectively in low-light conditions, especially in dawn/dusk transitions when the fiber-optics cannot gather enough light.
Trijicon also designed a Tripower scope which adds battery power to the tritium and fiber-optic systems. While that compensates for tritium that dims over time, you are still tied to the battery leash. No battery = no reticle.
Yes, the 12.5 year half-life of tritium is a long time. But that clock starts ticking when the tritium is created, not when the manufacturer built the scope, and not when you buy the scope. For those people who plan on keeping their guns for a long time, that expiration date is a concern. While that may not be a concern for military/police users who have their old equipment replaced regularly, civilian users who pay for their own gear might not like the prospect of having to replace or service their scopes down the road.
Leupold created a new type of scope called a Prismatic scope which uses a unique reticle system which directly addresses the reticle-illumination issue. They have a few different versions, with retail prices of about $500. I mounted a Prismatic scope on a rifle, and did some comparisons with a rifle that has a traditional red-dot scope.
Leupold builds nice stuff, and the Prismatic isn’t cheap. The Prismatic scope is 4-3/8″ long; it has the thickest tube Leupold has ever made, and they claim it is practically indestructible. A rail-mounting bracket is included, along with 3 different risers. The battery-operated illumination module is included as well. It mounts to the Prismatic scope like a scope-ring would, and uses a small N-size battery.
Optically, the Prismatic scope is as sharp as a tack, and about as bright as viewing with the naked eye. There is no magnification whatsoever (unlike some “1x” scopes), and it is easy to keep both eyes open while taking aim. The ocular lens is large, and you don’t lose a lot of forward vision because of non-optical components around the ocular lens. The reticle is a “Circle-Plex”. It is etched into glass and permanently visible. When lighting conditions get iffy, you can activate the illuminator and the reticle lights up in red. But you always have the etched reticle to rely on. Click the picture to get a good look:
Now let’s look at a traditional red-dot; a Bushnell Trophy with 4 selectable red reticles to choose from.
Retail is usually about $90. As long as you have battery power, you have a reticle to aim with. But if your battery dies, you are up the creek without a paddle. The optics are of a smaller diameter than the Prismatic, so you have a narrower field of view. And, the optics are surrounded by a lot of metal, so you lose a little of your forward vision. Click for a bigger view:
The difference isn’t just build quality. The Leupold is a better, more advanced design. I am not aware of any other scope with this reticle system. Aligning the etched reticle and the illumination system takes precision and that is not cheap. And with a permanent daytime reticle, a dead battery will not render your gun useless. That may not be a factor on a range toy, but if you plan on relying on a scoped gun to protect yourself, what price do you put on peace of mind? Murphy’s Law affects us all.
Your mileage may vary, but I am convinced. The Leupold Prismatic is not cheap, but you get what you pay for. Seeing the optical quality, knowing that it’s tough enough to last and having the reassurance of never having to rely on a battery is worth the investment to me. The Prismatic is staying on my SHTF long-gun.
Unfortunately, like most things, no red dot is perfect. To, me the Aimpoint’s come the closest. Their M4, M3 and T1 models measure battery life in years. At about 80%, they are rated for about 6, 5, and 4 years when run continuously.
The problem with any sight that relies on ambient light such as the tri-power, is that it is possible to be in an area much lower in ambient light than the target and have the reticule wash out. Another issue with the Tri-power is when using the tritium illumination the reticle is nearly impossible to see–should have been called the dual power.
During daylight, the Prismatic’s black etched reticle is easy to see, unless against a black target. Lumination by its battery only lasts a handful of hours.
Some people prefer the large, double reticle of the Eotech over a single red dot, some don’t. Their history has been plagued with reliability issues and they turn off every 4 hours automatically from the last time they were turned on or adjusted. I prefer my equipment not to make its own decisions.
What do you think of the C-More?
Just a note – I’m pretty sure you can set all EOTechs to an 8 hours turn-off. Sure, it is still turning off after 8 hours, but it is 8 hours and turning it back on, or resetting the internal timer, is a matter of pushing a button.
I believe you are right. If my corrected memory serves, it depends on how you turn it on.
Either way, I still prefer to make my own decisions. I don’t want to have to remember to push a button to keep it turn on nor worry if it is on or not when I need it. Eotech calls it a “feature”, I call it a mistake
I have not heard good things about their reliability so I never tested the C-More myself. I have seen them on lots of competition guns, but never on tactical guns.
typo on my first text. “At about 80%,” should have read: “At about 80% brightness,”
The Russian PK-AS red-dot sight also features an etched circle and dot reticle, and has been around for a few years. Russian military optics lack the refinement (and warrantees) of better domestic and European makes, but they’re half the price and built like T-72 tanks.
Half the price and built like tanks are great features! Wouldn’t mind trying one.
My old eyes need high magnification for targets at 50 yards or so. Do any multipliers work well with these sights or should I stick to conventional scopes?
Prismatic in use at a convention: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrsBUDgtbc4
The simplicity of the Prismatic is what appealed to me. I never have to hit a button to have a reticle. I have heard the battery life at maximum brightness is 10 hours at moderate temperature and 4 hours in extreme cold.
The Russian stuff is cheap, but the adjustments are vague and optically they do not perform as well as Japanese scopes [narrower field of view, etc]. And they tend to be heavier.
For target competition today, an Anschuetz is a “normal” rifle.
Anschuetz is the only company out there where you could take a talented young athlete into one of their retail centers and walk out, outfitted from head to toe with the rifle, jacket, pants, shoes, sights, glasses, blinders, slings, you name it.
The US gun companies used to make rifles that were used in real target shooting. They used to make very nice, bolt-action .22’s. You people in the shooting public started whining and moaning about the price, so the US gun companies ceased making real target rifles. Even Marlin used to make a real target rifles. You used to be able to buy them surplused through the CMP. They’re all gone now. They also used to sell H&R, Kimber (of Orgeon) and other bolt-action .22 rifles. Right now, the CMP has a Savage Mark I and Anschuetz 1903 target rifle for under $300 and about $1500, respectively.
You want a nice target rifle at a nice price? OK, you’ll have to actually learn something about target rifles. This means that you will cease reading all the mass-market gun rags, because they don’t know jack about actual target rifles. Oh, they’ll huff and puff that they do, but they don’t. They’re part of the reason why US gun buyers think that a semi-auto rimfire can be a “target rifle.”
Go look at the older Winchesters (Model 75, 52), Remington (Model 37, 513T, 541, 40X), H&R (M12 and US DOD/Army purchases of same), Kimber 82, Mossberg 44’s, 144’s. Or you could look at a Browning Low-Wall if you like older falling block style rifles. Springfield made training .22LR target rifles that look very similar to a 1903. These are rapidly becoming quite valuable to collectors.
I’d budget no less than about $800 to get into an older target rifle (Win 75, Kimber 82) with peep sights. Serious competition-grade rifles will typically go over $1K, with Winchester 52’s adding more to the price just because they’re Winchesters and are now being sought out by collectors. Just the aperture rear sight and the globe front sight set off a serious .22 target rifle cost more than the typical piece-of-junk .22LR rifles produced today. The sight set on my Anschuetz cost me just under $400 – and it is hardly top-of-the-line. Some of the older sight sets on American target rifles are collected in their own right, and some people have started to strip off the sight sets and sell them apart from the rifle, which is tragic, IMO.
Now, with all of that said, you’ll still not be able to find a used rifle that will beat the current Anschuetz trigger. Even if you had some of the best target aftermarket triggers hung on the best of the rifles I’ve listed above, for competitors at the highest end of the .22 target game, the trigger lock times available won’t meet (much less exceed) the lock times of the Anschuetz. I’ve got a Win52B with a Canjar trigger on it. It is a very nice trigger, but you’ll need an experienced gunsmith to support a Canjar or Kenyon trigger, because both gentlemen who had the guts and fortitude to make and support these target triggers in the absurdly litigious and lawyer-infested environment we have in the US have now passed away. if you’re going to look at Win52’s without a custom trigger, look for the Win52D variant. They improved the triggers in later years.
Want a new sporter-like .22 bolt action rifle that shoots above its price class? You’d do well to look at CZ.
Want to know why there are no more US-made real target .22’s out there? Want to know why you can’t reliably replicate those shots Kristen is making with a “normal” .22 rifle? You, the gun buying public, are the reason why. Our gun industry used to make lots of target-grade .22’s that could take on the Annies, Walthers and Feinwerkbau’s back in the 50’s and 60’s. Because so many people think that getting a piece of crap at a low price is better than getting a nice rifle at the price it takes to make money for the company making it, you get what we have here: Very few custom and off-shore rifles made at even higher prices, because almost all the market competition is now gone. Anschuetz’s prices have gone up markedly in the last 10 years – because there really are no more companies making the product they make. If you want to start competing in the serious .22 target game, you just go buy an Annie, usually a rifle based on the 54 action, and you start there.
When anyone ever says “I believe in the 2nd amendment… but”, everything before the “but”is Bravo Sierra.