1-4 Scope Vs. Magnifier on 300 Pistol

[bushcrafter]

I'm finishing up my 8.5" upper with shockwave brace I'm taking out for this year's deer season. (Have to use "pistol" due to shotgun/pistol zone regs)

I can get comfortable minute of deer lung with my Sparc 2 out to about 150 yards my .223. At the hunting land, we get the occasional 200-250 yarder I know I can hit humanely with a scoped rifle.

So my dilemma, do I go for a 3x Magnifier for the SPARC or a 1-4 Crossfire II, or stick with it as is, and wave to the deer? (Whatever I end up with, I'll be hitting the range to make sure I can humanely make that 200 yard shot)

Thoughts and experiences appreciated.

[ncbowhnter]

1-4 scope. Magnifiers tend to have really short eye relief

[golfindia]

I have a primary arms 3x magnifier, long eye relief version, and actually prefer it to a crossfire 3-9 on the lower magnification. Maybe the 1-4 version is different, but the 3-9 isn't fantastic. It's OK for the money. The eye relief of the crossfire sucks. Very narrow window is no better than the primary arms.

With a magnifier it is also important to use a red dot with a small dot, 3moa or less. Anything bigger gets blooming which covers everything up.

[KimberMike]

I have experience hunting with a 1-4x scope, red dot with 6x and 3x magnifier, and a 3-9x40 scope.

My first hunting experience with one of my 300 blk pistols was with a 10.5 noveske barrel and a 3-9x40 variable scope. This was pleasant and allowed me to harvest a large doe at around 175 yds easily. The magnification was beneficial, as was the light gathering ability of the scope in low light situations. However, it is heavy and nearly as large as the entire upper. Without a stock, I have a SigBrace on my pistol, obtaining the correct eye relief can be somewhat difficult, but it is overall doable.

For the 1-4x, I have a Millet DMS-1. This scope also worked well, but I no longer use it on my BLK pistols. For the weight, I would rather have the 3-9x40 or the red dot/magnifier. This option seemed to have more drawbacks than the other options for me. I either used it at 1x or 4x, so the in between magnification was wasted, with the sacrifice of a heavier weight. If I want to use a variable power scope, then I will use the 3-9x40 or a similar traditional rifle scope.

My current hunting setup is an 8.5" barreled pistol upper with an Aimpoint T-1 and a Primary Arms 6x magnifier in a flip to side mount. This has been the best of both worlds for me. I have a 3x magnifier as well, but I have found that when I want to use the magnifier, the additional magnification is welcomed and I never wish that I was using the 3x. The Primary Arms magnifier is great and is not noticeably heavier than the 3x. The combined weight of the T1 and magnifier still feels lighter than the 1-4 Millet, and I have the magnifier on a quick release flip mount, so I can totally remove it easily if wanted.

In my opinion, go with the red dot and magnifier on your pistol. The eye relief will not be too much different than a scope, whether 1-4 or 3-9, but the weight savings and versatility will pay off. The only thing I wish the magnifier did better was to gather light.

The results of the red dot/magnifier can be seen below.




Picture of the upper with the 3x magnifier on one of my sbr lowers.

[70worm]

The question here is COMFORTABLE eye relief. I recently bought a Samson 3.5x and it is nice, except the eye relief is way to short. The best thing to do is try out a magnifier first(gun show). I have to collapse my stock all the way down for my Samson to have the correct eye relief and it is very uncomfortable for me. If you don't like short eye relief then try a 1-4x or 1-6x dangerous game scope, it will have a longer eye relief.