Low Power Variable Optics (LPVO) are more than just the "new hotness" in the world of firearms. The development of these versatile optics has been mind boggling. It has been facilitated by a number of factors including interest by the military, various 3 letter government agencies, and the competitive shooting community. The results so far have been optics that are rugged, durable, mission flexible and suitable for a wide variety of uses.
So is it time for the scout rifle community to hop on this bandwagon? Perhaps, but there are a few things to keep in mind. The development of these optics was driven by a lot of things that may not have relevance to the scout and there are costs to that. Let's examine a few trends.
The "true 1X magnification" of the LPVO - This means that the magnification range always starts with zero magnification. This is held to be desirable. A 1.5-5X scope is considered antiquated because it lacks the ability to see an undistorted view of your target in a close quarters situation. But is that really needed? If you want a funny conversation, ask for an explanation of why. Most likely, you'll get a series of beliefs and assumptions but very little in the way of actual experience.
Many years ago, Cooper noticed that your eye could do some remarkable things. A scope that is placed 9 to 10 inches from one's eye could have something close to 3 times magnification and the brain could be fooled into accepting this if one keeps both eyes open. It is a cool trick. With a genuine scout scope, keep both eyes open and look in the general direction of a target. With a 2.5 power scope, your brain allows a full 180 degree field of view and doesn't reject the small portion of your vision that includes the magnified area. It is a seamless field of view with a small portion showing a magnified image. When a decision to shoot is made, a quick shift in focus to the reticle to confirm sight alignment and press the trigger for a VERY rapid snap shot. If the scope is far from the eye and only takes up a small portion of one's total vision, there is no need for a 1X scope.
Now... what happens when the scope isn't 9" from the eye? What if the scope is 3.5" away and the ocular lens is larger than the typical scout scope? Will that image size disparity become an issue? Maybe. I honestly don't know. The point here is that "true 1X magnification" isn't an issue on its own. It may be important, but that has yet to be demonstrated.
Those who have used red dot scopes look at this and argue that the lack of magnification does make it faster. Red dot scopes are indeed very fast, but that isn't a magnification (or lack thereof) issue. The benefit of a red dot is that the emitter takes the place of the reticle. That emitter eliminates parallax effect behind the optic. Your head doesn't have to be perfectly aligned behind a red dot in order to see where your gun is pointed. It can be off by quite a bit and still see where the bullet is going to fly. That isn't the case with a 1X scope. A 1X scope still has an "eye box" meaning your eye must fall within a pretty tight area in order to see the reticle and therefore, where your rifle is pointed. A 1X scope is not like a red dot in that regard.
This is not to say that a "true 1X" scope is a bad thing. It isn't, but it also may not be nearly as critical as many would argue.
Huge magnification range - Right now, one can find 1-6X, 1-8X and even 1-10X scopes. That's some pretty amazing versatility. It was not too long ago that the US military snipers were using fixed 10 power scopes so having that much magnification on a relatively compact scope is pretty cool. In theory, that should extend the range of any rifle because you can only shoot at things you can see and 8 to 10 times magnification will allow a person to see a LONG way. Again though, this is not a benefit without cost. Weight is the obvious problem here but not the only one. Scopes in this adjustment range start at just over 18 ounces and end at just over 2 pounds. Compare that to the 10 ounces that a Leupold 1.5-5X scope weighs and you see what you're sacrificing.
There is another sacrifice as well. That is the length of the ocular housing. For reasons that are beyond me, the ocular housing on the wide ranging variables tends to be much longer than ones with less adjustment range. The Leupold 1.5-5X has a housing that is 3.08" long. The Vortex Strike Eagle 1-6X is 3.9", the Razor Gen II-E is 3.6" and the various Trijicon models vary from 3.3" to 3.6". That complicates scope mounting on a bolt action rifle. It isn't a big deal on a flat top AR15 platform. An AR15 stock is such that the scope has to be mounted quite high anyway so adding a forward offset is not a big deal. Yes, that adds even more weight as well, but at least it can be mounted. A Vortex on a gun like the Steyr Scout might have issues. That ocular housing is so long that it may not allow for the shooter to get enough eye relief when behind the gun.
Front focal plane - Also known as FFP, this is something fairly new for an LPVO. It is something that the long range shooting community has used for a long time and for good reason. A brief description of this is that as the power adjustment ring is turned, the reticle magnifies along with the image the shooter sees. At low power, the reticle and the image are small. At high power, the reticle is magnified at the same scale as the image. The benefit is that ranging reticles and mil dots (or marks... whatever) work at any magnification. That's good, right? Well... only if you're needing to use the reticle for ranging at 1 power, 3 power, 6 power and 8 power. On a second focal plane reticle (SFP), the ranging marks are only valid at full magnification. Think about the realities of that though. We're not talking about a 5-25 power scope where you need to dial back to perhaps 18 power for most shooting. We're talking about an absolute high end magnification of 6 to 10 power. If you're ever shooting at 600 yards, you're not going to dial back to 4 power. You're going to be at max magnification anyway so what does it matter if the reticle is accurate at 4 power or not?
So what is the downside? At 1X, your reticle is pretty small. Didn't you want to use that for CQB ranges? Isn't that where you want the absolute fastest target acquisition? A larger reticle would be a big help here. Besides that, for reasons that are unclear to me, I've been told that SFP scopes are slightly more durable and tend to cost a bit less. For an LPVO, I don't see the point of a FFP but that seems to be the current trend.
Reticles... lots of reticles - A basic duplex reticle is considered old fashioned and it may be. There are more reticle designs out there than I can count. Most will have some sort of ranging system built in. Some will have a bullet drop compensator in the reticle. Those BDC reticles assume the shooter is using a common bullet type and shooting close to a pre-determined velocity. For combat purposes, it really doesn't matter if the actual velocity is off a bit. When shooting at a man sized target in a military context, a hit is a hit so it only needs to be close. The other popular type of reticle will have marks to show either mils or MOA distances. On a SFP scope, these marks will only be valid at the highest magnification setting while a FFP will be valid at all settings.
There are also many reticles that draw your attention for fast target acquisition. They normally have some sort of circle or a portion of a circle. Quite often, these are illuminated which is great for low light situations. It also may help overcome the problem of a FFP at 1 power since the illuminated circle may end up looking like a red dot for very close target encounters.
So what about applications for a scout rifle? The first thing to keep in mind that what works for a 3 gun competitor or a soldier may not be the best for you. The 3 gun shooter needs only hit a steel plate anywhere on the plate. A soldier doesn't have to hit the sternum of an enemy combatant in order to take them out of the fight. You however, need to pick the exact right tuft of fur on a game animal in order to take an ethical shot. Make sure that the reticle you chose is fine enough to accomplish that. If it is illuminated, has a circle, mil ranging and the rest is secondary to having a precise aiming point. Chose accordingly.
Target style turrets - This is a cool development. Older hunting scopes required removal of a cap and then a coin was needed to move the reticle. Today, exposed turrets are common. Even ones that have a cap, the adjustments under the cap don't require any tools. Mil or MOA marks are common on the turret so dialing in for specific ranges is FAR easier than it was in the past. It used to be that riflemen zeroed their rifle for 200 yards and then figured out hold-overs for ranges beyond 250. Now, one can zero the rifle for 100 yards, set the turret and then have a DOPE card so the correct elevation can be dialed in. The only catch is, one must resist the urge to fiddle with the turret. A locking turret or a cap over the turret will prevent mistakes here.
The other thing to consider is whether to go with MOA or mil markings. Most guys who were raised on MOA have a hard time adjusting to mils. It isn't impossible but it is difficult to change one's thinking . Mils does make more sense and the long range shooting community uses that almost exclusively. Just make sure the reticle and the turret use the same system. Some older scopes have mil reticles but MOA turret adjustments and that is obviously silly.
Illuminated reticles - This is a game changing feature in low light. In most of the United States, hunting hours are from 30 minutes before sunrise until 30 minutes after sunset. That first and last 15 minutes are tricky without an illuminated reticle. If one is just making a shot at a silhouette, it isn't so much of a problem but if the shooter really wants to put a precise hit on a specific part of a target, the black of a standard reticle just will not do the trick. You need light.
The downside is weight, bulk, complexity and a reliance on batteries and electronics. Leupold now makes the VX3HD 1.5-5X in two configurations. One is illuminated and the other is not. The non-illuminated uses a 1" tube and weighs 10.1 ounces. The illuminated version weighs 12.5 ounces because it needs a 30mm tube. That isn't a lot, but it isn't nothing either.
So what about an LPVO for a scout rifle? The development of the LPVO over the past few years leaves us in an unusual spot. These scopes have advanced in ways that did not have the scout platform as its base. The base is an infantry rifle or a 3 gun competitor's rifle. That means the features don't always align with the goals of the scout rifleman. What we have are scopes that are feature rich, versatile, rugged and have much better optical qualities than they ever did. They also tend to be heavy, have ocular housings that make proper mounting difficult on a bolt gun and may have features that just don't have any benefit for the scout rifle.
The trick is to figure out which features are important to you. Figure out what you're likely to ever encounter and use that to make a decision. For me, true 1X isn't an issue but a locking turret is. I prefer MOA adjustments and SFP makes more sense. I value low weight and compactness. I would want a reticle that has a fine aiming point and would prefer a reticle with known distance hold-over and windage marks. I would like something that can allow me to be effective from 10 feet out to 800 yards which means probably a top end of 8 power. As of right now, nothing exactly matches that but several come close.
On a final note, I can't help but wonder what would have happened if the scout rifle concept had taken off more than it has. What if we were the ones driving the innovations in scope technology? Would we have seen more work to bring the scout scope into this modern age with things like the Leupold VXR Scout? Imagine that scope with a locking CDS turret and a range finding reticle with a top end magnification of 6 or 8 power.
My Leupold VX-R Scout with custom Kenton turret
