Did anyone here ever end-up trying out the Meopta 1-4x with a lit reticle?  Something tells me I ran across something some time ago and one or two people were expecting to receive them soon.  Did they review it?  Thank you.  

Quoted: Did anyone here ever end-up trying out the Meopta 1-4x with a lit reticle?  Something tells me I ran across something some time ago and one or two people were expecting to receive them soon.  Did they review it?  Thank you.

I did.  Ended up selling it without ever mounting it, BUT that was only because I am a little bit overly paranoid about the "unknown" aspect of it, NOT because it didn't seem well made.  Here's a short review.

1)  The glass is possibly the best I've ever looked through.  Seemed better than a couple of USO SN-4's I've tried, better than Leupold MkIV's I've tried, better than the 3 or 4 ACOG's I've tried, at least as good as Nightforce.

2)  The "K-Dot" reticle is easily bright enough to use in full Texas noontime summer sun.  Roughly as bright as the first click down from the highest setting on my Aimpoint ML2.  Turns off between settings just like the Short Dot, which is kinda cool.

3)  The reticle is pretty good for use as an illuminated reticle, but seemed a bit small if you were going to use it unilluminated.  (2nd focal plane, so it appears the same at all powers.)

4)  The tube extends about 3 or 4 inches forward past the objective lense, which really annoyed me, and could be an issue with cleaning the lense or getting crap out if it ever got in.  The overall length of the scope is almost as long as the distance from the charging handle to the front sight on a "carbine" length AR.  I actually considered taking a pipe-cutter to it if I had decided to keep it, but the design looks like that might allow the objective lense to fall out.

Bottom line is that I bought it for $500.00, which is an awsome price for this scope, but I would not have even tried it at the "going rate" retail price.  Not saying it's a bad deal, just that the ruggedness (or lack thereof) was an unknown that I couldn't live with.  The rediculously long empty tube in front of the objective and the fear of the unknown were the only reasons I decided to sell it.  I have a Short Dot on the way, but if that was not an option, I might have stuck with the Meopta.

Bump, and a "thank you" to Grant.  

couldnt let this thread get to far back.
tag
cp

"Grant - have you tried the IOR 1.1-4x with the CQB reticle yet? If so, how does it stack up against the others? I liked the Talon until I saw the EXTREMELY busy reticle, so now I am leaning towards the IOR CQT but no one seems to have a decent review of it yet. If the IOR doesn't stack up then I am going for the Accupoint."

I have one and a Leupold M2 MRT.  

The IOR's donut is too thick-- it seems to block some of the target-- it would have been nice to have just been a chevron instead of the donut/dot but otherwise it isn't bad-- at least there is a scale for holdovers.  

It has a provision for ranging but it is unconventional and I would have to work with it to see if it would work.  (head ranging circles)

The MRT has a nice fine reticle which is nice for precise work but seems a little slow for quick work-- unfortunately due to the problems with the IOR and Leupold reticles thy are both about the same speed.  Which isn't terrible I just wish it was slightly faster feeling-- it would inspire a little more confidence.

I was recently awarded a DoD Contract to supply these scopes: www.kahlesoptik.com/products/Helia_csx_1.1-4x24.html

Interesting!  Another competitor between the Trijicon and S&B price range.

Thank you Grant  for starting this and others for bringing it back to the front  - outstanding info.

Here's the SB on my mocked up ABS build. It should be done by next weekend, if all goes well.

I got the Meopta 1-4 MeoStar w/ K-Dot in earlier this week, but no time shooting it yet. Honestly, the only advantage I see the SB having is the reticle. The Meopta has the clarity to compete, but the reticle just blows.  It'd also be nice if the Meopta didn't have that extra "sunshade" at the end of the tube.

I'm going to talk to some folks and see if we can't make the Meopta a more serious contender. As it is right now, it's a nice alternative to the Accupoint or the dot sight + magnifier.

The optical clarity is amazing... For $550, it was at least as good as my Short Dot.

As to my thoughts about the Short Dot?

It's big, heavy, and the best damn thing out there as far as I know. It's a tank. The things I like about it, I love, and the things about it that I dislike, I hate. There are a lot more things to love,  though For $2000, it's worth every penny.

Target discrimination is beyond excellent with the SB. The optics are just a work of art. Locking turrets are neat, especially on the illumination knob. No accidentally turning it on and wasting that precious 100 hour battery life.

The LaRue SPR-E mount, BTW... Is the only choice for mounting these. It is by far the most rugged, dirt simple, rock solid, reliable mount I've ever thought of owning for the AR. The fact that it is QD is just a nice bonus. With it I can shoot NTCH... With a freaking Short Dot!

Aimpoint, watch out... There's a new master in the CQB-intermediate range arena.

Quoted: img.photobucket.com/albums/v307/capcocrunchopoint/ABSStuff.jpg Here's the SB on my mocked up ABS build. It should be done by next weekend, if all goes well. I got the Meopta 1-4 MeoStar w/ K-Dot in earlier this week, but no time shooting it yet. Honestly, the only advantage I see the SB having is the reticle. The Meopta has the clarity to compete, but the reticle just blows.  It'd also be nice if the Meopta didn't have that extra "sunshade" at the end of the tube. I'm going to talk to some folks and see if we can't make the Meopta a more serious contender. As it is right now, it's a nice alternative to the Accupoint or the dot sight + magnifier. The optical clarity is amazing... For $550, it was at least as good as my Short Dot. As to my thoughts about the Short Dot? It's big, heavy, and the best damn thing out there as far as I know. It's a tank. The things I like about it, I love, and the things about it that I dislike, I hate. There are a lot more things to love,  though For $2000, it's worth every penny. Target discrimination is beyond excellent with the SB. The optics are just a work of art. Locking turrets are neat, especially on the illumination knob. No accidentally turning it on and wasting that precious 100 hour battery life. The LaRue SPR-E mount, BTW... Is the only choice for mounting these. It is by far the most rugged, dirt simple, rock solid, reliable mount I've ever thought of owning for the AR. The fact that it is QD is just a nice bonus. With it I can shoot NTCH... With a freaking Short Dot! Aimpoint, watch out... There's a new master in the CQB-intermediate range arena.

Capt
 Your rifle looks exactly what Im going to build this summer when I have some cash.

RemMan

The crazy thing is that with a M96LT-C and a PEQ, it actually still feels pretty light. The Short Dot and the SPR-E put the balance right smack dab in the middle of the receiver, and it still handles like a dream. I'm trading the PEQ out for something lighter and more low profile and getting a larger SF, so hopefully it'll all stay the same. I'll probably add a bipod, but I'm not decided on which yet.

I just got an MR/T 1.5x5 and tried it out today. It is the best scope for me I've ever used. I own an MR/T 3x9, Aimpoint, Eotech, and I've used the CQ/T and an ACOG 4x. For some reason the SPR reticle was easier for me to use at 200yds than the 3x9 mildot, and the optics seem to be more clear. Using it in a dark building was an even more dramatic improvement over what I can do with a red dot. I'm a big believer in different optics for different people, based on their eyesight, dominant eye, and whether they're old enough to need reading glasses (like me). I would feel comfortable selling everything else I own and keeping this one. I've never used the S&B, so I can't compare it to that, but I can't imagine being happier with an optic than I am now.

Nobody posted the differences between the Gen 1 and Gen 2 Schmidt and Bender short dots, so i thought i'd post it.  I did not type this and take no credit for it, however it's good info and relevant.

Taken from the 10-8 forums (written by Larry Vickers)
Here is the link if anyone wants it.

www.10-8forums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=4435&page=&fpart=all&vc=1




-----

At the request of my friend Dave Pennington I am filling in the blanks on the history and development of the Schmidt & Bender CQB Short Dot 1.1 - 4 x 20 scope. I hope this answers some questions about the details of this optic.

A need for a milspec low powered variable optic came up after Somalia in 1993. Bad guys mixed with civilians were sticking their heads around corners 100 meters or farther down an alley or street in order to gain SA on the whereabouts of US forces operating in that area. The Aimpoint setup being used at that time did not provide any ability for target discrimination. This was a real problem for those GI's posted outside for external target security.

A market search was done and at that time the closest thing that could be found was a scope called a microdot ; a 1.5 - 4 powered optic that had a red dot like a reflex sight. These were used for quite awhile and served well considering they were a scope made for civilian non milspec activities; sport shooting, hunting, etc. Shortly after these were fielded a major US scope company was approached about making a more milspec 1 - 3 or 1 - 4 powered optic with a red dot capablility. This particular company makes milspec scopes but was (and still is) primarily a hunting/sporting scope company that has historically put little effort into the military/LE side of things - and was way behind the power curve on illuminated reticles or dots in scopes. After a couple years a prototype was seen that had alot of promise but still no red dot. It had other features also that were not applicable and after some T&E it went back to the factory with a list of things to change/enhance.

A few more years pass with no sign of a gen II version when a phone call is received saying the scope is ready with good news and bad news; They are in production and can be received ASAP but you take what you get - no changes. This was not received well as the concept of this scope was brought to the attention of this company and it was finalized with no further input except for a T&E prototype years before. Once the final production sample showed up and was virtually the same as the prototype, flaws and all, except with a poorly executed illuminated reticle/dot, the die was cast - other vendors were going to be solicited for product. To say we were disappointed in this scope would be an understatement.

All the major scope makers were approached with none being interested in helping us except for Schmidt & Bender. I had a S&B scope, knew of their reputation, and had heard they were very responsive to user needs. I also knew they made a scope called a 1.25 - 4 x 20 flashdot. After meeting with the CEO Hans Bender we decided the best approach was to modify the flashdot to suit our needs. A list of specs was draw up by me and presented to Hans. They were;

1) 1 - 4 x 20

2) external adjustments in 1/2 moa elevation and windage

3) BDC cams for green tip, 75 gr Hornady, and M118LR for 16 and 20 inch barrel SR 25's

4) Detents between the red dot brightness adjustments to allow the user to place the dot off between settings

5) Make the first few settings for NVG use then day light use for the settings after that

6) Shorten the scope as much as possible

7) Install the then new Zenith short throw variable power ring

8) keep the dot size of the flashdot - approx 5.5 moa

In a little over 1 month S&B had a prototype ready for me that was approx 80% of the gen I short dot we know today. Additional testing and refinement occurred and approx 1 year after my initial contact with S&B a contract was let for several hundred gen I CQB short dot scopes as it was now called. The final specs were as above with the following tweaks;

1) the first 6 settings are for NVG use

2) a 6-8 hr battery shut off

3) A 'skeletonized' mil dot reticle which means on 4 power it can be used as a typical mildot reticle but on 1.1 power it will virtually disappear allowing the eye to pick up the dot quicker. The downside to this is with no red dot on it can be hard to see on 1.1 power.

The minimum power setting was 1.1 due to the fact that the original flashdot was designed to be a 1.25 power - when you made it a 1 power it actually had a slight ghost image (the inside of the tube at the objective end) when your eye got closer than normal for proper eye relief. 1.1 power made this go away with very little to no difference for up close reflex work. Also it is worthy to note that the reticle is in the first focal plane which means it grows in direct proportion to the target; in the real world this means you can mil dot at any power setting. Also it means your zero cannot shift during magnification as the reticle is not moving. Despite what anyone else may tell you I believe this is critical for a milspec variable powered optic. Of equal note, the Short Dot is also extremely forgiving in the areas of eye relief and eye positioning compared to other magnified optics.

The Gen II Short Dot came about when some users complained about accidently turning the external adjustment knobs during vigorous activities. In hind sight I wish I would have had the gen I prototype made with a feature S&B offers for their hunting scopes; a low profile windage adjustment cover that houses a spare battery. The external click adjustments would go away but to me thay are not a must have and a spare battery would be better. This may have prevented the gen II development also as the windage adjustment is much more prone to accidental adjustment. Live and learn.

The gen II Short Dot has only 2 BDC's - green tip and M118LR. The knobs are larger also. The key difference is they are spring loaded and are locked into position when in the 'down' position and in order to adjust them you pull up all the way and adjust - release and they will spring back into the locked position. Very slick.

The end result is a scope that is without peer on the market today. It is rather large and heavy (particularly compared to an Aimpoint) but offers features no other scope has; as far as I know the NVG intensity adjustments, the auto battery shut off and the new gen II locking turrets are found no other scope on the market. Another very unique feature that end users like is the intensity adjustments and the ability to turn 'off' the dot with one click, and turn the dot 'on' to your preferred intensity with one click. Dispite the integration of cutting edge technology for a scope, problems have been very few (we all know about man made items) and S&B is very responsive when a problem arises.

What I find is if someone has the scope on their rifle they love it; they have committed to it and have decided the features it provides are ones that appeal to them and their needs. If there is a better general purpose rifle optic in the world today I don't know what it is.

I will close this out plugging Schmidt & Bender and Larue Tactical. I now have 5 S&B scopes with a 6th on the way. In my opinion Schmidt & Bender makes the absolute best scopes that money can buy. PERIOD. No scope company is more responsive to user needs and the quality of the optics and execution is superb. They are very simply the finest. They are not cheap but the best never is; you get what you pay for. Experience has taught me there are very few exceptions to that rule; even less than most people think.

Mark Larue is a friend of mine and as we know his mounts have completely taken over the tactical market - he was the first on the market with a mount for the S&B short dot and after a couple minor tweaks his mount is THE way to go not only on the short dot but on any other combat optic. Larue gets my vote - his stuff is top of the line.

I hope this clarifys some things reference the short dot. Enjoy.

Cheers

Larry Vickers



-----END

I am hoping they have a smaller FFP dot (at 4X) and adjustable cams (or at least 75 grain cam availability) on the rumored Gen III Short Dot.

Somebody really oughta tack this thread.  Lot of good info here about low powered variables, which I think are the wave of the future...  




...at least 'til that innovative company (who shall remain anonymous) releases their automatic-ranging, self-adjusting scope that charges it's own batteries using the mechanical gyrations of the rifle as it fires and cycles.  

That story changes everything. I see that so called "American" scope manufacturers turned their backs on our soldiers after Somolia. I guess I'm going to do the same to them now and save up for a S&B Short Dot. Anybody want to buy a Leupold?

Quoted: I was recently awarded a DoD Contract to supply these scopes: www.kahlesoptik.com/products/Helia_csx_1.1-4x24.html Look for a review from me on these in the future. C4

Quick question:

Can you use the Accupoint w/Larue EER mount on a 16" rifle with F marked FSB? My gut says no (because the FSB would hinder the view), but my wallet says yes . . .hinking.gif

USO SN4

I just received one as a barrow - a quick second to what Grant has already stated - at "1x" your eyes do a double take to find the ret and target - it is nothing like a red dot.

Great glass though.

Good luck

Tag.

I don't want to see this one fall too far so - some more info for those considering spending $800 to $2,100 on an optic:

The barrowed SN4 compared to a 4x ACOG and a Loopy VX2 3-9 (used at  4ish)

Ranges: 443yrds and 778yrds

Light - low and fading (evening); gathering light and incoming fog (dawn)

Notes:

The ACOG and the VX2 were brighter than the SN4.

Resolution - SN4, VX2, ACOG - the ACOG was least able to resolve fine detail of objects (words on a sign for instance or steps / stairs) at the two distances as the light grew dim.

Value - IMHO yada.....yada - If  a TA11C (or your favorite flavor) is running around $950 new and an SN4 is more like $1,250+ - definately buy the ACOG.  If you can find an SN4 for $1,000 or less - I'd take the SN4 due to the ability to resolve and the adjustable brightness of the lit ret. The 1x feature of the USO is meaningless.

The USO "Posi Lock" - WTF? - that is crap.


Hope it helped.

Good luck

tag

Quoted: Somebody really oughta tack this thread.  Lot of good info here about low powered variables, which I think are the wave of the future...   ...at least 'til that innovative company (who shall remain anonymous) releases their automatic-ranging, self-adjusting scope that charges it's own batteries using the mechanical gyrations of the rifle as it fires and cycles.  hock.gif

+1  Please tack it!

Quoted: The only problem with the 1-4X idea is that on 1X, the scopes are still not parallax free. Eo-techs and aimpoints are, which is a major advantage. No variable power scope on 1X will ever be as good as an aimpoint or eotech in rapid acq/close combat. That being said, the short dot looks nice (but dont sell your aimpoint after you get one) The more optics you have, the better.

I had the Eotech, aimpoint and the IOR1.1-4.  at CQB, parallax is not that big of a deal.  In Law Enforcement I prefer a 1-4 any day over a red dot because they can be used from CQB out to 200 yards with great accuracy.  The aimpoints and Eotechs are great for CQB only.  The IOR is a really good scope.  Especially with the CQB reticle and you can use the lines underneath for bullet drop.

Grant,

Thanks for tupdate on the Helia C-Dot scope, it looks very good.  

Being an EOTech kind of guy I also like the reticle too!  BTW, what are the sizes of the outer ring and center dot?

So, can these things take a beating or are these more of a light use scope?

Lastly, how many bones is this gonna cost?

C4,

You tried the Meopta Meostar yet?

Quoted: For those of you that want a S&B Short Dot, but don't want to spend that much, this optic is a close second for a lot less money!

AHHHHhem

Which mount is appropriate for the Short Dot? The SPR or the SPR-E?

how about Schmidt Bender 1.1-4x24 Zenith ?

Close to S&B short dot but cheaper, around $1400

S&B Zenith 1.1-4x24

Quoted: S&B Zenith 1.1-4x24

That unit has no target turrets, no BDC cam and no illumination.  It has the same body as a Short Dot but I beleive it has differeent glass and/or coatings as well.  Id take a Meopta Meostar over that scope every time for half the price.

Quoted: Quoted: S&B Zenith 1.1-4x24 That unit has no target turrets, no BDC cam and no illumination.  It has the same body as a Short Dot but I beleive it has differeent glass and/or coatings as well.  Id take a Meopta Meostar over that scope every time for half the price.

Ditto!  If you're going to spend $1400+, why not go ahead and get the Short Dot?

DevL, did you ever buy a Meostar or just fiddle with one on display someplace?  Just wondering if you've put it through the ringer enough to see how tough it is, how well it tracks, etc.  The glass is AWSOME, but the lack of a track record for hard use applications, plus that loooooong "sunshade", were the main reasons I sold mine.

I dont own one, Capn Crunch does.  We were supposed to go to the range and I could have shot with it but things keep getting in the way so far I have only messed with one not shot it.  He can give much better info on tracking, etc.  Saving my pennies for a Short Dot and hoping the rumored 3rd generation version comes out at Shot.

"Value - IMHO yada.....yada - If a TA11C (or your favorite flavor) is running around $950 new and an SN4 is more like $1,250+ - definately buy the ACOG. If you can find an SN4 for $1,000 or less - I'd take the SN4 due to the ability to resolve and the adjustable brightness of the lit ret. The 1x feature of the USO is meaningless."


How is the 1power feature any more worthelss on an SN-4 than say an IOR or S&B or Meopta etc?

When running ACOG's and talking to people running them after I quit the biggest gripes were :
Short and unforgiving eye relief
and
Lack of a low power for reflex work.


I just bought a USO SN4 1-4 with the JP1 reticle in hopes of getting the high points of an ACOG with a low power for close range work.  Is that not going to happen?  And Why?

Excuse the newbie Q, but what kind of mount is that S&G in on the 1st page?

Thanks,
David

police marksman II ( short dot )

zenith 1.1-4x24

Check it out ~

Both has the 5.5MOA-6MOA flash dot, but the short dot has something that is the zenith hasn't.

e.g.
designed for use with night vision goggles ,  locking and non-locking turrets  , at 4x that's a Sniper class scope , the short dot is shorty size (10.6")

$21xx vs $13xx. Difficult to choose .

Quoted: Quoted: Excuse the newbie Q, but what kind of mount is that S&G in on the 1st page? Thanks, David You must be new! hat C4 www.GRTactical.com www.laruetactical.com/lt/productImages/m4%20scope%20mount.bmp

Yes.... very new.. all of my experience has been w/Kalashnikovs... I just recently came over to the dark side. ht
Thanks again,
David

Anybody help with this?


"Value - IMHO yada.....yada - If a TA11C (or your favorite flavor) is running around $950 new and an SN4 is more like $1,250+ - definately buy the ACOG. If you can find an SN4 for $1,000 or less - I'd take the SN4 due to the ability to resolve and the adjustable brightness of the lit ret. The 1x feature of the USO is meaningless."


How is the 1power feature any more worthelss on an SN-4 than say an IOR or S&B or Meopta etc?

When running ACOG's and talking to people running them after I quit the biggest gripes were :
Short and unforgiving eye relief
and
Lack of a low power for reflex work.


I just bought a USO SN4 1-4 with the JP1 reticle in hopes of getting the high points of an ACOG with a low power for close range work.  Is that not going to happen?  And Why?

Quoted: Anybody help with this? "Value - IMHO yada.....yada - If a TA11C (or your favorite flavor) is running around $950 new and an SN4 is more like $1,250+ - definately buy the ACOG. If you can find an SN4 for $1,000 or less - I'd take the SN4 due to the ability to resolve and the adjustable brightness of the lit ret. The 1x feature of the USO is meaningless." How is the 1power feature any more worthelss on an SN-4 than say an IOR or S&B or Meopta etc? When running ACOG's and talking to people running them after I quit the biggest gripes were : Short and unforgiving eye relief and Lack of a low power for reflex work. I just bought a USO SN4 1-4 with the JP1 reticle in hopes of getting the high points of an ACOG with a low power for close range work.  Is that not going to happen?  And Why?

Not sure what he is talking about and my experience is limited, but I have a USO SN-4 and it is awesome.  1x power has one of, if not, the best FOV.  You can use them like a red dot sight or acog if you choose you reticle properly.  Their circle chevron reticle looks like a great choice.

I keep the turret caps on so I never had a problem with any turrets getting knocked off---USO does have a lifetime warranty.

I have a question for you C4: What other scope has a similar system to USN, I mean I love the fact that the reticle changes size as you change power, it keeps the ranging feature active at any power?  I am just wondering who else make them like that, as I need another scope?

I purchased a Nightforce about a year ago, and it is a beautiful scope too, but I would love to be able to range at all powers not just 22x.

Thanks,
Edwin

P.S. My LE6920 with USN, Larue 7.0, Surefire, beta mag, and rail covers weighs a mere 12lbs......12lbs of pure evil that is!!!!