You might want to be more specific on this, or check out the multiple threads on SCAR optic. The statement you have right now is just going to get you endless opinions.Which set up is the right optic for the SCAR 17s and why?
They recently did a run of the x24s with Mil-R reticle europtic got their hands on but are currently sold out. I'm sure they'll do another run, however exit pupil in the x24s isn't as good, x32 exit pupil is better and x42 even better exit pupil & low light transmission. If I went 2.5-10 I'd likely opt for the x42, although I will admit I prefer the form factor of the x24.I run a 1.5-8x26, It does everything I want with my 17. I like to keep the 17 light and don't hang a lot off the weapon.
I have a SR25 EMC which is also a carbine running a M3 Aimpoint, since running the 17 1.5-8 on that rifle I'm between going a 1-6 MK6 or if I can swing it a US Optics 1-8.
Higher magnification for those longer ranges are great but add weight and size so I choose to stay light since most of my shooting is under 300yds.
Now if you could find a 2-10x24 Nightforce :shock:
Just my input :mrgreen:
You probably won't need the offset if you are running the VCOG. I personally know of an ACOG that had been through 3 tours in Iraq and the right side of the housing looks like a piece of meat that's been attacked by a tiger but it's 100% functional minus some minor pitting in the objective lens.Mainly paper punching but only out to 500 yards and only occasionally that far (longest range I have access to), occasional hog hunting and all my guns I view as potential SHTF guns. 17s is my only .308 and I have an inbound VCOG for a KAC 14.5 which is my general purpose rifle. I have a DD V1 with T1 as my "training" rifle, an 11.5 KAC with T2 as "CQB" rifle (and an unfinished 16s CQB) for the "CQB/HD" roles.
Part of me wants to put a 2.5-10 on the 17s for something different and because it's a .308 to give it some reach, but if I never shoot past 500 yards and rarely shoot past 300 it almost seems like too much glass to me and having a 1x on top seems like not such a bad idea. The 17s is the last gun I would use for HD outside of some appocalyptic over watch scenario.
if I went Nightforce I would get the mil dot reticle, I've never used mils before but after spending substantial amount of time reading about it, it seems relatively easy to use.
I was dead set on the Mk6, but the VCOG is a little more useable without illumination. I could always cancel my VCOG order and grab the Mk6, I like everything else about the Mk6 better than the VCOG truthfully, reticle, turrets, better glass, better field of view, slightly better eyebox.... It's the SHTF/prepper in me worried about using the scope with no illumination that turns me off. I would have been a little happier if Leupold could have made the thick horizontal lines a little closer to the reticle and the vertical line below the reticle a little thicker and only made the reticle usable to 600-800 yards instead of 1,200. I think the Mk6 would be a little more usable without illumination if they had done that.Leupold's MK6 1-6X w/CMR-W reticle will work fine 0-600 yards.
The illuminated horseshoe reticle at 1X is effectively a both eyes open red dot. Long eye relief allows folding BUIS. QD mount and you're GTG without crap hanging off the side of your rifle. You don't have to learn the funky half homey rifle twist and shout to shoot at close ranges. KISS.
MBUS PRO offsets are out, I 'm waiting until they can be had for $150 or less, so cost isn't a huge concern there.You probably won't need the offset irons if you are running the VCOG. I personally know of an ACOG that had been through 3 tours in Iraq and the right side of the housing looks like a piece of meat that's been attacked by a tiger but it's 100% functional minus some minor pitting in the objective lens.
Buy more ammo and get more range time instead.
I'm not a fan of the Vortex reticle so it gets ruled out immediately and the Mk6 illumination doesn'r really flicker (I've used it), it does start to fade as your head leaves the eyebox. What I've found with the Mk6 is getting the eye relief right is critical to being able to use the illumination in this scope. If you set the scope up right to begin with, it's a non issue. That said, without illumination 1x isn't really usable IMO, which is a dealbreaker because LPVs in generally have sucky battery life. I'd consider the Elcan but it is only 1-4 and the 1.5-6 is not a true 1x. I also don't like that it takes an odd battery and no off/on between settings and I'm stocked up on Amax 168gr which I'm pretty sure the BDC is way off for and with the Elcan due to design you must zero at 100 so you can't even try to compensate by using a different zero. Thank you for the input though, definitely appreciared!I have a Nightforce 2.5-10 x 42 on my 17, and an Elcan 1-4 on my 16. I'd trade the Nightforce all day for another Elcan in 7.62. If you haven't shot with a center dot illuminated scope you need to. They're not paper punchers but will knock down **** at ranges you won't believe. I would personally take the Leupold firedot 3x9 over the mark6 any day and save 1500 . I was really impressed with the fire dot. Unless they have fixed it, the illumination on the mark 6 flickered and sucked worse than my 250$ PA 1-6. I would also take the Vortex 1-6 over the Mark 6, But overall I've become a much bigger fan of the center dot vs whole reticle illumination . Just my opinion.
In reality I don't have any real "need" for a .308 but I believe every gun should be a potential SHTF a gun, HD duty it will not serve. The more I think about it, the more I think the Nightforce is the way to go with the offset T1/2 since I don't have any guns that fit the precision role and I plan to feed it a steady diet of 168gr Amax... I just bought s Super SCAR trigger today too so that will help with the precision role.How do you want to use it is a requirement to answer your question.