AR Sponsor
Primary Arms PLXc 1.5-12x38mm (Page 1 of 3)
Posted: 1/20/2026 11:33:23 PM EDT
|
WOW! Primary Arms just announced a very impressively spec'd optic!    |
|
Originally Posted By cttb: That's got potential. It'll be interesting to see how big the eye box is at higher magnifications and how much eye relief varies through the magnification range. If it's big and not much, that scope should be awesome. 36mm/12x = 3mm exit pupil. Pretty acceptable especially since it's FFP. What is harder to know is if the eye relief is fixed or if it moves. Also how is the depth of field? On shorter scopes they tend to be shorter. Also curious to see if it tunnels. Is the field of view advertised anywhere? Under 20oz is awesome |
|
Originally Posted By PistoleroJesse: Under 20oz is awesome This is the part that raised my eyebrows |
“Necessary? Is it necessary for me to drink my own urine? No, but I do it anyway because it’s sterile and I like the taste.” -Patches O’Houlihan
2023/24 Arfcom FPL Champion
2023/24 Arfcom FPL Champion
There is nowhere left to go... this is it.
Joined:
May 2004
Posts:
16333
EE: 100% (191)
USA
|
Originally Posted By spyderboy03: Yep.  It is the gen 2 version so it is much smaller, but it is still a Chevron. Originally Posted By spyderboy03: Originally Posted By 11boomboom: Does it still have a chevron center? It is the gen 2 version so it is much smaller, but it is still a Chevron. That’s disappointing. PA: Make a simplified reticle with a dot instead of a chevron and no grid or rangefinder please… |
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin
Ben Franklin
|
You get a choice between the ACSS Griffin MIL G2 or the ACSS Raptor G2. They look fine to me. https://primaryarmsoptics.com/reticles/ If I were shooting in DMR Precision Class, I'd get this scope with the Griffin MIL, if I didn't already have the ZCO. |
|
Originally Posted By doty_soty: The chevron is dumb but it looks like the intent is this optic is to use holds and not dial. The chevron only matters @ exactly 100 yards with no wind. Outside that you're in the tree anyway. |
|
Originally Posted By doty_soty: The chevron is dumb but it looks like the intent is this optic is to use holds and not dial. The chevron only matters @ exactly 100 yards with no wind. Outside that you’re in the tree anyway. I've never really struggled with the Chevron. The tip - shoot there. If you're short on time and need to shoot fast, then it's a bigger dot than a dot, and good enough. But then, I cut my teeth on iron sights, where you shoot at the tip top of the post. This is a better version of that, so cool. Everybody hates the Chevron. I don't. |
|
This scope looks FANTASTIC...other than the stupid chevron. PA's obsession with forcing this dumb triangle into every optic on the planet is out of control. No matter how light, rugged, or tiny they've made this scope, I have zero interest in it if the means of achieving an optic's main purpose (aiming at things) is inferior to competitors.
|
|
I don't know what's so hard about a simple mil/mil reticle with a fine cross hair in the middle and thicker posts on the bottom and sides. I guess it wouldn't be tactical enough looking for a lot of buyers. At least scope sellers are starting to pay some attention to weight again. |
Joined:
Jan 2024
Posts:
39
EE: 0% (0)
MO, USA
|
Originally Posted By cttb: I don't know what's so hard about a simple mil/mil reticle with a fine cross hair in the middle and thicker posts on the bottom and sides. I guess it wouldn't be tactical enough looking for a lot of buyers. At least scope sellers are starting to pay some attention to weight again. Leupold exists if you have a thing for shitty reticles. |
Point shooting will give you monkeypox. - John_Wayne777
The Emu War could have been won if the Australians used red dots on their handguns.
The Emu War could have been won if the Australians used red dots on their handguns.
|
Originally Posted By 45-Seventy: Leupold exists if you have a thing for shitty reticles. Originally Posted By 45-Seventy: Originally Posted By cttb: I don't know what's so hard about a simple mil/mil reticle with a fine cross hair in the middle and thicker posts on the bottom and sides. I guess it wouldn't be tactical enough looking for a lot of buyers. At least scope sellers are starting to pay some attention to weight again. Leupold exists if you have a thing for shitty reticles. If Leupold made it, it would have a duplex. |
|
Attached File |
Point shooting will give you monkeypox. - John_Wayne777
The Emu War could have been won if the Australians used red dots on their handguns.
The Emu War could have been won if the Australians used red dots on their handguns.
|
There is no negative to the chevron in this scope. You can easily stack rounds into a single hole at 100 yards and keep your one ragged hole group completely inside a 1" circle without having a single bullet hole edge touch the edge of that circle. You can shoot groups .25 MOA center to center no problem. You can have your spotter describe and call you onto individual blackberies on a bush as a training exercise and shoot individual black berries off the vine at 100 yards no problem. It is quite a fun exercise. But perhaps you guys have more precise things to shoot at 100 yards and your AR15s shoot sub 1/4 MOA groups? The adjustable turrets have no zero stop or lock so you will leave them capped. Past 100 yards the chevron is not your aiming point. And this is a small chevron in comparison to others... like 5x smaller. It is basically a floating dot. I even wish there were more smaller 1/2 mil dots or crosses in the tree and bottom of the horseshoe... its not cluttered enough for me... just need really super thin 1/2 mil elements like + marks that are only visible in good light at 10x and up. This is not a high magnification dialing scope... it is a quick use SPR scope that will get zeroed once and you will use holds on both elevation and windage for an AR. IMO if you want a thin reticle or floating dot to use with a zero stopping turret for dialing you want a more powerful scope magnification with better turrets that weighs more too, like the Mark5 3.6-18×44. I have two of those, but they are a totally different beast. The Primary Arms 1.5-12x is like a Mark5 2-10x but better in every single way. Including the reticle. |
|
Originally Posted By DevL: There is no negative to the chevron in this scope. You can easily stack rounds into a single hole at 100 yards and keep your one ragged hole group completely inside a 1" circle without having a single bullet hole edge touch the edge of that circle. You can shoot groups .25 MOA center to center no problem. You can have your spotter describe and call you onto individual blackberies on a bush as a training exercise and shoot individual black berries off the vine at 100 yards no problem. It is quite a fun exercise. But perhaps you guys have more precise things to shoot at 100 yards and your AR15s shoot sub 1/4 MOA groups? The adjustable turrets have no zero stop or lock so you will leave them capped. Past 100 yards the chevron is not your aiming point. And this is a small chevron in comparison to others... like 5x smaller. It is basically a floating dot. I even wish there were more smaller 1/2 mil dots or crosses in the tree and bottom of the horseshoe... its not cluttered enough for me... just need really super thin 1/2 mil elements like + marks that are only visible in good light at 10x and up. This is not a high magnification dialing scope... it is a quick use SPR scope that will get zeroed once and you will use holds on both elevation and windage for an AR. IMO if you want a thin reticle or floating dot to use with a zero stopping turret for dialing you want a more powerful scope magnification with better turrets that weighs more too, like the Mark5 3.6-18×44. I have two of those, but they are a totally different beast. The Primary Arms 1.5-12x is like a Mark5 2-10x but better in every single way. Including the reticle. I’m of the same opinion, this is built for use on a fighting rifle oriented towards long range use, not a dedicated precision optic. The low end 1.5X gets it as close to being an LPVO as possible without gimping itself in its primary use case like a 1-10 does. I’m in the minority, never had an issue with chevron reticles. Definitely plan on getting hands on one of these, they seem like the perfect SPR optic on paper. Granted, I’m the type that prefers to zero the scope and use the reticle for everything rather than dialing, so this is exactly what I want in a long range scope. Lacking a zero stop doesn’t bug me one bit, but I can see that being the disqualifying factor for most. I reckon if enough people bug PA, they might put out a version with a zero stop elevation turret. |
|
Dark Lord of Optics JUST posted a video about it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dc2XErE27a4 |
|
I’ve said before (maybe in this thread IDR) that the chevron, whether you like it or not, is a complete non-issue in this optic. It’s clearly meant to be held, not dialed. As such, it is only the POI @ 100 with no wind. So unless you’re shooting strictly the tightest groups @ 100 all the time, in which case you got the wrong optic anyway, it doesn’t matter. Any scenario outside that, you’re down in the tree. That’s besides the point that the RDB chevron is a fraction the size of the earlier models, it’s more like a tiny tick mark anyway. I think their chevrons are goofy too, but it’s a complete non-issue in this optic. |
|
Originally Posted By doty_soty:
I’ve said before (maybe in this thread IDR) that the chevron, whether you like it or not, is a complete non-issue in this optic. It’s clearly meant to be held, not dialed. As such, it is only the POI @ 100 with no wind. So unless you’re shooting strictly the tightest groups @ 100 all the time, in which case you got the wrong optic anyway, it doesn’t matter. Any scenario outside that, you’re down in the tree. That’s besides the point that the RDB chevron is a fraction the size of the earlier models, it’s more like a tiny tick mark anyway. I think their chevrons are goofy too, but it’s a complete non-issue in this optic. |
Point shooting will give you monkeypox. - John_Wayne777
The Emu War could have been won if the Australians used red dots on their handguns.
The Emu War could have been won if the Australians used red dots on their handguns.
|
Originally Posted By doty_soty: I’ve said before (maybe in this thread IDR) that the chevron, whether you like it or not, is a complete non-issue in this optic. It’s clearly meant to be held, not dialed. As such, it is only the POI @ 100 with no wind. So unless you’re shooting strictly the tightest groups @ 100 all the time, in which case you got the wrong optic anyway, it doesn’t matter. Any scenario outside that, you’re down in the tree. That’s besides the point that the RDB chevron is a fraction the size of the earlier models, it’s more like a tiny tick mark anyway. I think their chevrons are goofy too, but it’s a complete non-issue in this optic. "It's worse than standard reticles in one scenario. It's the same in other scenarios. Therefore it's a non-issue."  It's an issue for those of us who want to optimize combination reticle performance in all scenarios. All combination reticles make tradeoffs, of course, but this one just self-owns by including a dumb chevron with no counter-benefit as compensation. There's no excuse for it, especially when there are multiple competitors offering better-optimized reticles over the course of this optic's magnification range. PA let the smell of their own chevron marketing farts negatively impact the real-world performance of a product. It's like they stubbornly and consistently value their branding more than their product's performance on this one stupid thing. It's ridiculous at this point. And it's super frustrating when they do this with a product that otherwise looks excellent. |
|
Originally Posted By bigfatOTMs: "It's worse than standard reticles in one scenario. It's the same in other scenarios. Therefore it's a non-issue." It's an issue for those of us who want to optimize combination reticle performance in all scenarios. All combination reticles make tradeoffs, of course, but this one just self-owns by including a dumb chevron with no counter-benefit as compensation. There's no excuse for it, especially when there are multiple competitors offering better-optimized reticles over the course of this optic's magnification range. PA let the smell of their own chevron marketing farts negatively impact the real-world performance of a product. It's like they stubbornly and consistently value their branding more than their product's performance on this one stupid thing. It's ridiculous at this point. And it's super frustrating when they do this with a product that otherwise looks excellent. |
Isaiah 1:18 - "Come now, let us reason together," says the LORD: "though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow"
|
I agree with both sides that the ACSS is fine and useable and also with the fact that it's comical how PA is shoving it down peoples throats. They knew this was going to be a popular scope so theyre forcing the ACSS once again onto the masses even after feedback that people dont like it. PA is so invested in it they kind of have no choice tbh |
|
[b]Originally Posted By Stonia:[/  b]Any chance this scope is long enough to fit a long action bolt rifle with normal rings? Im thinking the tube sections aren't quite long enough. Yeah, I know that's not it's intended purpose. Above picture says 9.75 inches long. Measure pixels and do some conversions? |
|
Originally Posted By bigfatOTMs: "It's worse than standard reticles in one scenario. It's the same in other scenarios. Therefore it's a non-issue." It's an issue for those of us who want to optimize combination reticle performance in all scenarios. All combination reticles make tradeoffs, of course, but this one just self-owns by including a dumb chevron with no counter-benefit as compensation. There's no excuse for it, especially when there are multiple competitors offering better-optimized reticles over the course of this optic's magnification range. PA let the smell of their own chevron marketing farts negatively impact the real-world performance of a product. It's like they stubbornly and consistently value their branding more than their product's performance on this one stupid thing. It's ridiculous at this point. And it's super frustrating when they do this with a product that otherwise looks excellent. Originally Posted By bigfatOTMs: Originally Posted By doty_soty: I’ve said before (maybe in this thread IDR) that the chevron, whether you like it or not, is a complete non-issue in this optic. It’s clearly meant to be held, not dialed. As such, it is only the POI @ 100 with no wind. So unless you’re shooting strictly the tightest groups @ 100 all the time, in which case you got the wrong optic anyway, it doesn’t matter. Any scenario outside that, you’re down in the tree. That’s besides the point that the RDB chevron is a fraction the size of the earlier models, it’s more like a tiny tick mark anyway. I think their chevrons are goofy too, but it’s a complete non-issue in this optic. "It's worse than standard reticles in one scenario. It's the same in other scenarios. Therefore it's a non-issue." It's an issue for those of us who want to optimize combination reticle performance in all scenarios. All combination reticles make tradeoffs, of course, but this one just self-owns by including a dumb chevron with no counter-benefit as compensation. There's no excuse for it, especially when there are multiple competitors offering better-optimized reticles over the course of this optic's magnification range. PA let the smell of their own chevron marketing farts negatively impact the real-world performance of a product. It's like they stubbornly and consistently value their branding more than their product's performance on this one stupid thing. It's ridiculous at this point. And it's super frustrating when they do this with a product that otherwise looks excellent. In the future please understand my post before you attempt to argue with it. But here, I’ll simplify it for you: If you bought this scope with the intent of dialing, it’s clear from its feature set you’ve bought the wrong scope, and better products will suit you. If you bought this scope with the intent of shooting tiny groups @ 100 with no wind, it’s clear from its feature set you’ve bought the wrong scope, and better products will suit you. ^ Those two scenarios are the only scenarios where the center chevron (whether you enjoy the thing or not, and FWIW I don’t) matters. In either event, you didn’t select the right product. Speaking of shooting groups with the PA chevron though, incidentally, I went and confirmed zero on my 13.9 Criterion homebuild today w/ 5 shots @ 100. It’s got a PLXC with a chevron several times larger than the one being discussed w/ this model. I got a .6 MOA group. Somehow I managed. |
|
Originally Posted By doty_soty: In the future please understand my post before you attempt to argue with it. But here, I'll simplify it for you: If you bought this scope with the intent of dialing, it's clear from its feature set you've bought the wrong scope, and better products will suit you. If you bought this scope with the intent of shooting tiny groups @ 100 with no wind, it's clear from its feature set you've bought the wrong scope, and better products will suit you. ^ Those two scenarios are the only scenarios where the center chevron (whether you enjoy the thing or not, and FWIW I don't) matters. In either event, you didn't select the right product. Speaking of shooting groups with the PA chevron though, incidentally, I went and confirmed zero on my 13.9 Criterion homebuild today w/ 5 shots @ 100. It's got a PLXC with a chevron several times larger than the one being discussed w/ this model. I got a .6 MOA group. Somehow I managed. It should be fine for basic shooting at 100 yards like you showed. For longer range dialed shooting I could see the argument for a cross hair with an empty aiming point so that your reticle isn't obscuring the target, but if someone is comparing a chevron to a large aiming dot like on the athlon 2-12x it seems like even for dialed or zeroed shooting the chevron would be superior in terms of not covering your precise point of aim. But I am also probably not experienced enough to know what I don't know. |
|
Originally Posted By doty_soty: I’ve said before (maybe in this thread IDR) that the chevron, whether you like it or not, is a complete non-issue in this optic. It’s clearly meant to be held, not dialed. As such, it is only the POI @ 100 with no wind. So unless you’re shooting strictly the tightest groups @ 100 all the time, in which case you got the wrong optic anyway, it doesn’t matter. Any scenario outside that, you’re down in the tree. That’s besides the point that the RDB chevron is a fraction the size of the earlier models, it’s more like a tiny tick mark anyway. I think their chevrons are goofy too, but it’s a complete non-issue in this optic. FwIW, in my experience as a Bullseye distance shooter, who has tested this wirh a PA Griffen scope, your score will be higher if you dial, rather than just hold. By a good bit. |
|
Originally Posted By lazyengineer: FwIW, in my experience as a Bullseye distance shooter, who has tested this wirh a PA Griffen scope, your score will be higher if you dial, rather than just hold. By a good bit. Why would you even buy this optic if your intent is dialing? |
Point shooting will give you monkeypox. - John_Wayne777
The Emu War could have been won if the Australians used red dots on their handguns.
The Emu War could have been won if the Australians used red dots on their handguns.
|
Originally Posted By lazyengineer: FwIW, in my experience as a Bullseye distance shooter, who has tested this wirh a PA Griffen scope, your score will be higher if you dial, rather than just hold. By a good bit. Originally Posted By lazyengineer: Originally Posted By doty_soty: I’ve said before (maybe in this thread IDR) that the chevron, whether you like it or not, is a complete non-issue in this optic. It’s clearly meant to be held, not dialed. As such, it is only the POI @ 100 with no wind. So unless you’re shooting strictly the tightest groups @ 100 all the time, in which case you got the wrong optic anyway, it doesn’t matter. Any scenario outside that, you’re down in the tree. That’s besides the point that the RDB chevron is a fraction the size of the earlier models, it’s more like a tiny tick mark anyway. I think their chevrons are goofy too, but it’s a complete non-issue in this optic. FwIW, in my experience as a Bullseye distance shooter, who has tested this wirh a PA Griffen scope, your score will be higher if you dial, rather than just hold. By a good bit. I agree many shooters will likely shoot more precisely dialing vs holding, but of course the tradeoff is speed too. |
|
Originally Posted By Daggertt: I mean, isn't the point of the chevron to provide an infinitely small aiming point at the tip of the chevron? It should be fine for basic shooting at 100 yards like you showed. For longer range dialed shooting I could see the argument for a cross hair with an empty aiming point so that your reticle isn't obscuring the target, but if someone is comparing a chevron to a large aiming dot like on the athlon 2-12x it seems like even for dialed or zeroed shooting the chevron would be superior in terms of not covering your precise point of aim. But I am also probably not experienced enough to know what I don't know. https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTF1by6hPxKr22-QloFqcTuLRfhlbyqEKxDiPMP4ApZFxARBFJHLfvodJY&s=10 Originally Posted By Daggertt: Originally Posted By doty_soty: In the future please understand my post before you attempt to argue with it. But here, I'll simplify it for you: If you bought this scope with the intent of dialing, it's clear from its feature set you've bought the wrong scope, and better products will suit you. If you bought this scope with the intent of shooting tiny groups @ 100 with no wind, it's clear from its feature set you've bought the wrong scope, and better products will suit you. ^ Those two scenarios are the only scenarios where the center chevron (whether you enjoy the thing or not, and FWIW I don't) matters. In either event, you didn't select the right product. Speaking of shooting groups with the PA chevron though, incidentally, I went and confirmed zero on my 13.9 Criterion homebuild today w/ 5 shots @ 100. It's got a PLXC with a chevron several times larger than the one being discussed w/ this model. I got a .6 MOA group. Somehow I managed. It should be fine for basic shooting at 100 yards like you showed. For longer range dialed shooting I could see the argument for a cross hair with an empty aiming point so that your reticle isn't obscuring the target, but if someone is comparing a chevron to a large aiming dot like on the athlon 2-12x it seems like even for dialed or zeroed shooting the chevron would be superior in terms of not covering your precise point of aim. But I am also probably not experienced enough to know what I don't know. https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTF1by6hPxKr22-QloFqcTuLRfhlbyqEKxDiPMP4ApZFxARBFJHLfvodJY&s=10 I had an Athlon for a bit, and it’s fine for real-world shooting as the dot is like 1 MOA. But yes when trying to shoot it as precisely as possible (which isn’t what it’s for) it definitely got in my way, at least for me. I’d dial one click high and float the target against the top rim of the dot…almost like a less precise chevron  These problems go away when you get off the bench and shoot your gun in the real world though. Shooting 1” dots @ 100 is a lot of peoples’ shooting experience and many shooters try to make every rifle into a pseudo bench rifle just with field/tactical equipment, which is where you see a lot of these goofy ultra-precision arguments start to crop up that fall apart rapidly when shooting under more authetic conditions. I say that as an owner of some very precise gassers |
|
Originally Posted By 45-Seventy: Why would you even buy this optic if your intent is dialing? Originally Posted By 45-Seventy: Originally Posted By lazyengineer: FwIW, in my experience as a Bullseye distance shooter, who has tested this wirh a PA Griffen scope, your score will be higher if you dial, rather than just hold. By a good bit. Why would you even buy this optic if your intent is dialing? Because I value multi-function capability. In my experience PA dials are pleasant. I run an SFAR 20" 6.5 Creedmoor. So a rifle the size and weight of an Ar15A2 that i can run 1000 yards and stalk hunt and precision dial and fast acquiire gongs using the drop tree and CQB and and and.... is valuable to me. This scope finishes the concept, due to light weight and better 1000 yard capability than my current PA 2-10 GLX, and lighter than my current 2-10 as well. Only wrinkle is Im not willing to spend $2k on it right now,but we'll see. |
|
Originally Posted By lazyengineer: Because I value multi-function capability. In my experience PA dials are pleasant. I run an SFAR 20" 6.5 Creedmoor. So a rifle the size and weight of an Ar15A2 that i can run 1000 yards and stalk hunt and precision dial and fast acquiire gongs using the drop tree and CQB and and and is valuable to me. This scope finishes the concept, due to light weight and better 1000 yard capability than my current PA 2-10 GLX, and lighter than my current 2-10 as well. Only wrinkle is Im not willing to spend $2k on it right now,but we'll see. Originally Posted By lazyengineer: Originally Posted By 45-Seventy: Originally Posted By lazyengineer: FwIW, in my experience as a Bullseye distance shooter, who has tested this wirh a PA Griffen scope, your score will be higher if you dial, rather than just hold. By a good bit. Why would you even buy this optic if your intent is dialing? Because I value multi-function capability. In my experience PA dials are pleasant. I run an SFAR 20" 6.5 Creedmoor. So a rifle the size and weight of an Ar15A2 that i can run 1000 yards and stalk hunt and precision dial and fast acquiire gongs using the drop tree and CQB and and and is valuable to me. This scope finishes the concept, due to light weight and better 1000 yard capability than my current PA 2-10 GLX, and lighter than my current 2-10 as well. Only wrinkle is Im not willing to spend $2k on it right now,but we'll see. I’d probably be looking at the 2-12 NF that’s coming out. I assume it won’t have RDB tech so there’s that but it may be more up that alley. But I use piggyback RDS for anything I’d use RDB illum for anyway so I can give a bit that direction when picking my main optic. Like I don’t mind not having daylight bright or 1X since I’ve got a dot, and that gives me a lot more options than if those were requirements. |
|
Originally Posted By doty_soty: I’d probably be looking at the 2-12 NF that’s coming out. I assume it won’t have RDB tech so there’s that but it may be more up that alley. But I use piggyback RDS for anything I’d use RDB illum for anyway so I can give a bit that direction when picking my main optic. Like I don’t mind not having daylight bright or 1X since I’ve got a dot, and that gives me a lot more options than if those were requirements. NF reticle will be better for thermal work since the stadia are lit up instead of just the chevron. Which is kind of a sad since the PA is sized beter beter for thermal because of its shorter length. The NF should have better low light performance with 42mm objective vs the PA 38mm. Kinda bothers me that they couldn't make my job of choosing one easy.
|
|
Originally Posted By lazyengineer:
Because I value multi-function capability. In my experience PA dials are pleasant. I run an SFAR 20" 6.5 Creedmoor. So a rifle the size and weight of an Ar15A2 that i can run 1000 yards and stalk hunt and precision dial and fast acquiire gongs using the drop tree and CQB and and and.... is valuable to me. This scope finishes the concept, due to light weight and better 1000 yard capability than my current PA 2-10 GLX, and lighter than my current 2-10 as well. Only wrinkle is Im not willing to spend $2k on it right now,but we'll see. |
Point shooting will give you monkeypox. - John_Wayne777
The Emu War could have been won if the Australians used red dots on their handguns.
The Emu War could have been won if the Australians used red dots on their handguns.
They are up on PA as coming soon now. $2,000  I was hoping for $1,750 similar to the RDB 1-8.https://www.primaryarms.com/primary-arms-plxc-1-5-12x36mm-ffp-rdb-rifle-scope-illum-acss-griffin-mil-gen2 https://www.primaryarms.com/primary-arms-plxc-1-5-12x36mm-ffp-rdb-rifle-scope-illum-acss-raptor-yard-556-gen2 |
|
Originally Posted By spyderboy03: They are up on PA as coming soon now. $2,000 I was hoping for $1,750 similar to the RDB 1-8.https://www.primaryarms.com/primary-arms-plxc-1-5-12x36mm-ffp-rdb-rifle-scope-illum-acss-griffin-mil-gen2 https://www.primaryarms.com/primary-arms-plxc-1-5-12x36mm-ffp-rdb-rifle-scope-illum-acss-raptor-yard-556-gen2 It’s probably nice but for 2k I’ll let you all have a run at it and see how it goes. Til then my 2-12 Steiner and 2-10 Credos will just have to work for two grand lol |
Primary Arms PLXc 1.5-12x38mm (Page 1 of 3)
AR Sponsor