300 BLACKOUT scope poll

[Dr.Phil]

AAC will keep Leupold knobs in stock for 300 Blackout.

Sounds great!

When will they be available for purchase and at what price point?
I already have an optic in route to me...

[Hoop]

Robert,

Since you have been discussing things with Leupold, what are the odds of Leupold producing an M3 knob for the 300 BLK?

I just run std knobs on mine with MOA markings. Non caliber specific. For quick reference, I drill divets at the point of 3,4,5, and 600 yard marks for the specific round I am using.

The M3 will allow precision for the supersonic round of the 300 blk and less knob cranking when subs are used.

Plus you get the wide power range.

[Hoop]

3.5x10x40 Mk4 M3

You will thank me later.

I couldn't disagree more in this application.

Agree Rob, lower power is faster/better in this application. 3x or 5x is plenty.

Not to say you can't setup a longer-end-of-the-range precision setup with a higher-powered scope, but in general use, i think lower would be more useful. (if you were only choosing one scope)

My suggestion was for the dual purpose role of this round. Being able to hit a 300 yd target using the 220 subs while also making the short 60 yard shots.

If you were opting for a sub gun optic, just throw an aimpoint M2 on it or the new 123 batt eotech.

[rob_s]

I don't view this as a 300 yard round. And if you're not shooting at a round bullseye from a bench you don't need 10x to hit at that distance either. and by going 3.5x on the low end you completely miss out on short range ability.

If the point is to shoot paper from a bench at 300+ yards I don't think this is the round, or platform, I'd choose personally.

[Dr.Phil]

My thinking is to have multiple configurations for different roles.
(That is also my approach to a 5.56 platform as well.)
Some would argue that the configuration should always be the same for the purpose of consistency.
For me, that has never been a problem.

My intention for my 300 BLK Upper is to run a Mark 4 3.5-10x40mm LR/T M3 Front Focal (TMR Reticle) with a Leupold Delta Point on top when precision fire / observation is called for.
(Varmint hunting is a good example.)
Majority of the time you are supported, the M3 knobs are particularly appropriate for this caliber, and the magnification range is useful.
When doing CQT, Action Shooting, Three Gun, or Home Defense, the Mark 4 & Bi-Pod comes off and a Trijicon Tri-Power & Weapon Light goes on.

I like to be able to have a weapons system that is as flexible as possible and then have the assortment of accessories to tailor it to the mission.
YMMV

[rob_s]

I've never had that plan pan out well. It's like buying one hammer handle and thinking you're going to change out heads depending on what needs whacking. It just doesn't work out.

Specific tools for specific jobs IMHO. But I also find that people can do a lot more with a lot less if they actually get out there and try it. The first time I shot a 5.56 AR at 200 yards was on 6" steel with a .625" diameter, 11.5" long barrel and a 4 MOA aimpoint shooting XM193 with a stock GI trigger. The internet had clearly told me I needed a heavier, longer barrel with a magnified optic and hand loads not to mention a two-stage trigger for this kind of shooting. Maybe even a bipod. Imagine my surprise when I consistently rang the plate over and over again from prone with nothing but my arms and the magazine (another internet no-no) to hold the gun up. My old competition and training gun was also a .625" barrel, this time 16", wearing a 3x Compact ACOG and I never encountered any close range issues once I learned how to use it properly.

I don't see what a 10x optic is providing with the round in question. 10x optics to me are for 1/8-mile guns and I don't see the 300 BLK as an 1/8-mile round. I'd look to one of the 6.x rounds for that if I was limited to the short mag AR platform and the .308 if I was not. I understand the point about seeing the gun as CQB first and distance secod vs. the reverse, I just don't see the value in the reverse given this round.

[300Blk]

He has a Delta Point on top, so I don't see a 3.5-10 as a bad idea at all. Basically he has 1-10x capability. Also you can use 10x for observation of the target - seeing the bullet holes, and other uses.

[rob_s]

IME RDS, no matter how small, mounted on top is far from ideal, and whatever optic you place in the same line as legacy iron sights should be dictated by the intended primary focus of the rifle. In other words, an RDS on top is a poor subsitute and the 10x in the traditional location puts the obvious emphasis on distance shooting, for which I'm not convinced this round is best suited.

A SCAR 17 with a 10x in the first line and an RDS off-center? that begins to make more sense. Even then the offset mounts are a far cry better suited and better implemented than the RDS on top. RDS on top is a last ditch, o-shit, emergency device at best.

The more I think about the original question of this thread the more I'm convinced that a true 1-4x like the Accumpoint or a TA33-series Compact ACOG with bullet-drop for a specific loading & barrel length is the best solution. Frankly I'd just buy one of these and dope it out for the stock stadia lines.

[Mongo]

I agree with Rob_s, the round is not a long range round so why scope for that role?

[300Blk]

To aim for a smaller target?