Looking at 1-4 and 1-6 optics. There aren't any shops near me to look at the scopes in person. The new PA 1-6 looks great for the money. Also for a little more there is the Burris 1-4 or 1.5-6 and the Bushnell throw down. Which should I spend my dough on and why?

Yeah. I'm hoping to get one of the above when that first batch comes out. I just don't want buyers remorse.

On paper the PA seems to be the clear choice. With it and the Bushnell not having seen use yet, it's a waiting game though.

I think it's a bit more difficult than that.

The PA 1-6x has the best reticle and magnification... but it's SFP.

The Bushnell Throw Down PCL has an OK reticle and only 4x magnification... but it's FFP and has a well-designed throw lever, which is huge for the price point.

The Burris Tac30 has an OK reticle (IMHO, worse than the Bushnell), only 4x magnification, and it's SFP... but it has a well-known positive history, which counts for a lot.

Unless the reliability, glass, or illumination on the PA 1-6x winds up being a lot worse than the Tac30, I'm not sure I see the point of the Tac30 anymore. No shame to the Tac30, it's simply an older design now.

I personally bought the Bushnell because I'm a sucker for FFP optics, and am looking forward to reviewing it when it comes.

I just sold a SS1-6x24 because, although ffp was nice, I didn't really need it as much on such a low power scope.  I love ffp on my ss5-20x50 and Bushnell ET6-24x50 because I shoot longer distances that 1.require a ranging reticle and 2.use varying magnification for those long shots.  Most will always shoot on the highest mag if using a 1-4/6 so as long as the mils/bdc is accurate there, the scope performs fine.  This will not be the case for all shooters, but most of the SS improvements over the XTR14 did not justify the $$ I had in it.  I will miss such a nice scope but my XTR14 is back on that AR and will perform well as it always has.

I think the TAC30/MTAC are nice for the price.  Is the PA1-6 made in China like the 1-4?  How are the Bushnell AR223 line compared to Nikon M223 or Burris scopes?

Just a  question....why does SFP matter in a "tac rifle" scope? They all have built in hold over reticles anyway, pretty much fire and forget, nobody I know ranges with that kind of scope....

FFP is not about ranging. Its about holdovers working at all powers. No one I know even ranges with a scope anymore. That's why we have these things called laser range finders.

Laser range finders don't work all that well in many conditions. I was in an urban sniper course about two months ago and we had a Swarovski, Leica and a Vectronix in the class- yea, the really fucking expensive "gold standard" of range finders and not one of them could accurately range a half turned steel plate (20x40") at 800 yards with moderate fog/morning haze. One guy had a Zeiss PRF and he took about 10 readings and half of them were right, the other half he got nothing....The point about the "holdovers" is valid, hadn't thought of that.....