light or optic next

[muddywings]

Background (because everybody asks):
Building my first AR, a 16 inch middy-
AX556 lower w/ SSA trigger group
BCM upper with VTAC alpha rail
magpul this, magpul that
Troy BUIS sights
(stop me if you have heard this before)
Anyway, this is a general home defense, possible 3 gun rifle, fun to shoot, and SHTF weapon.
(personally, every time I visit Walmart I pray a little bit for the zombie apocalypse...but then again, every time I'm in Walmart I wonder if it has already started)

So I have pretty much everything I need for the build but what is next on the X-mas list? Should I go with a light or a red dot? My two options I'm looking at are a surefire x300 or an Aimpoint PRO.

The gun is to be an ambi based gun because my wife is lefty (and likes to shoot) and I'm a righty. So with the Troy Alpha rail, I'll put a small pic rail on the bottom front and have the light mounted underneath (reason for the X300). As for the PRO-good pricepoint, and all I think I would need for my applications.

One or the other would be the next purchase (a few months down the road).
What would you get?

[Mick-Boy]

If this is being used as a home defense gun I'd go with a light next. An x300 is fine for inside of a room. If you're looking across a field an x300 won't have enough throw to ID a target past about 50M.

I'd go with a minimum of 200 lumens for a rifle light. 500 would be better. The best value on the market today (in my opinion) is the Surefire Fury and the VTAC mount.

[Wiggity]

AR's aren't my favorite for HD. I much prefer a shotgun or a pistol. If it is for HD I'd agree with the post above and get a light. For ALL other intensive purposes, the aimpoint.

For indoors I'd probably get the Streamlight TLR1 as it is way cheaper than the SF and accomplishes the exact same thing while basically giving up nothing.

[muddywings]

AR's aren't my favorite for HD. I much prefer a shotgun or a pistol. If it is for HD I'd agree with the post above and get a light. For ALL other intensive purposes, the aimpoint.

Agree and we have a Mossberg 590 SPX but the problem is my wife and I will get in a fight on who gets it if there is an intruder in the house. Yeah...neither of us are good at sharing so this way she can have one and I'll have the other.
And we have two CCWs handguns nearby so the AR is just icing on the cake.

Thanks for the input so far!

[Wiggity]

Gotcha. Simple solution. Get another Mossberg and make the woman happy! Hell I have a 500 with heatshield and folding stock I'll sell you if you're interested.

[Great-Kazoo]

Agree and we have a Mossberg 590 SPX but the problem is my wife and I will get in a fight on who gets it if there is an intruder in the house. Yeah...neither of us are good at sharing so this way she can have one and I'll have the other.
And we have two CCWs handguns nearby so the AR is just icing on the cake.

Thanks for the input so far!


The wife and i have our own AR, S/guns and pistols for home & office;)
I suggest a good light. Things can happen so fast aiming is not even in the cards.
So, Shotgun would be a 1st suggestion, followed by which ever low light gun you are better with.

[muddywings]

Gotcha. Simple solution. Get another Mossberg and make the woman happy! Hell I have a 500 with heatshield and folding stock I'll sell you if you're interested.

tempting....very tempting. I think the second will be an autoloader for duel use in 3 gun.

[muddywings]

For indoors I'd probably get the Streamlight TLR1 as it is way cheaper than the SF and accomplishes the exact same thing while basically giving up nothing.

oh and thanks for the lead on the TLR1...might go that route.

Obviously leaning towards light now. Light for in the house defense makes sense. I don't see a need to push it out to far. Obviously, in case of zombies you don't want to highlight yourself from 100M away.

[Wiggity]

haha precisely. Aimpoint PRO's arent super expensive so you will probably have one pretty soon anyways. Great optic btw

[Tim K]

Skip the light, you have your home covered. Buy and optic. You'll use that every time you go out. I'm not a big fan of unmagnified optics. Consider a 1-4X variable with an illuminated reticle. At 1X, you get a pretty effective optic for up close stuff, and at 4X you have some help out farther.

Go look at what the 3 gun guys are using, they are typically on the bleeding edge of what works. They may have no interest in low light shooting though, which is why I added the bit about the illuminated reticle.

[MarkCO]

So, as a "3Gun guy" who just happened to shoot the Crimson Trace Midnight match, some of use do like lights and lasers. 8 tough stages in the pitch dark certainly changed some of my perceptions, and resulted in re-configuration of some of my HD gear as well.

The Burris MTAC 1-4 is one of the best deals around and suitable for 3Gun and HD. As for lights, white light ain't all it is cracked up to be, especially bright light. For indoors, house, 80 to 100 lumens max is all you will want. For longer distance, say 100 yards and more, a focused beam is preferable. The Streamlight TLR-1S HP was the best of the bunch (that is currently available). Working the stage that had the longer range rifle targets (130 yards) I turned off a LOT of white lights (or told the shooters to) that just made it worse, especailly when folks had a laser. The hit percentages for most people went up when the white light was off.

The Crimson Trace Railmasters CMR201 (laser) and CMR202 (white light) are awesome low profile units that are right at home on an AR. While some of the mounting options I used were not optimum, I'll be working with Crimson Trace and a better low profile mount system in the future.

Illuminated reticles at night, again, not the best thing in the world once you have actually used them. In dusk, dawn, they help, but in real darkness, they can be a hindrance.

I'd get a 1-4 MTAC first.

[Mick-Boy]

For indoors, house, 80 to 100 lumens max is all you will want.


I'm curious about your thought process here. Care to expand on this statement?

[MarkCO]

I'm curious about your thought process here. Care to expand on this statement?

Sure.

There are two parallel options...

1. FLOOD bright white light everywhere so everything is lit up. When acting as a team with a high probability of multiple advesaries and sufficient redundancy of lights, this is a preferred option. Target ID is paramount but equally important is the redundancy of light and the real possibility of getting light in your eyes. Therefore the tactical advantage of light goes equally to all involved, but you have to light up the entire area, which is difficult, especially multiple rooms with the entries exits, etc.

2. Less light. When you are on your own, you lack redundancy of light and have a very low risk of having light in your eyes. Less light, from a single point, softens shadows and allows better vision in the periphery. If your light goes out, you will still have some vision with lower light levels. Also, less light reflects off of surfaces, well...less and also does not light up multiple opposing or angled planes as well. (meaning your actual position is not telegraphed as well).

I repeatedly saw people with bright lights have more trouble with transitions, turning corners, tripping and getting hits than those using a lesser level of light. When you add lasers to the mix, the need for light is further diminished provided you have enough for target ID. In the 60 to 80 lumen range, turn off the light and in a few seconds you have sufficient visibilty to operate with minimal ambiant light. When you go into the 120 lumen range, the time to acquire an equivalent level of vision increases to 15 seconds.

I've spent a lot of time with a variety of lights, lasers, LEDs in varying levels of light playing hise and seek with the dog and kids in the house and backyard and then took many of the things I learned to the range and match to test them out.

Suffice it to say, some of the general concensus when it comes to light and lasers just does not bear out in actual use. Granted there are some tactics and it depends on the advesary as well. When we leave the house and go outside, things change as well.

The paths to the rooms where we sleep have a plug in emergency light so if the power goes out, the entry is lit. Those lights can also be turned on remotely to provide low level offset light. It is a great tactical advantage to have offset light and there are some techniques useful to deploy such, but as yet, no 100% reliable tactical tool for it...I hope to change that.

[Tim K]

So, as a "3Gun guy" who just happened to shoot the Crimson Trace Midnight match, some of use do like lights and lasers. 8 tough stages in the pitch dark certainly changed some of my perceptions, and resulted in re-configuration of some of my HD gear as well.

The Burris MTAC 1-4 is one of the best deals around and suitable for 3Gun and HD. As for lights, white light ain't all it is cracked up to be, especially bright light. For indoors, house, 80 to 100 lumens max is all you will want. For longer distance, say 100 yards and more, a focused beam is preferable. The Streamlight TLR-1S HP was the best of the bunch (that is currently available). Working the stage that had the longer range rifle targets (130 yards) I turned off a LOT of white lights (or told the shooters to) that just made it worse, especailly when folks had a laser. The hit percentages for most people went up when the white light was off.

The Crimson Trace Railmasters CMR201 (laser) and CMR202 (white light) are awesome low profile units that are right at home on an AR. While some of the mounting options I used were not optimum, I'll be working with Crimson Trace and a better low profile mount system in the future.

Illuminated reticles at night, again, not the best thing in the world once you have actually used them. In dusk, dawn, they help, but in real darkness, they can be a hindrance.

I'd get a 1-4 MTAC first.

Great perspective and experience. Thanks for posting. I'll be considering a laser, something I'd previously disregarded.

[Mick-Boy]

Mark,

Thank you for your response. I've spent a bit of time running around in (shoot and 3rd world) houses with weapons lights on. As part of a team, an individual and as OPfor for people trying out for our program. I have to say, my experience doesn't line up with yours at all. I believe the minimum power you want in a weapon light is 200 lumens. To go less than that is setting yourself up for failure if you have to move outside.


Sure.

There are two parallel options...

1. FLOOD bright white light everywhere so everything is lit up. When acting as a team with a high probability of multiple advesaries and sufficient redundancy of lights, this is a preferred option. Target ID is paramount but equally important is the redundancy of light and the real possibility of getting light in your eyes. Therefore the tactical advantage of light goes equally to all involved, but you have to light up the entire area, which is difficult, especially multiple rooms with the entries exits, etc.

2. Less light. When you are on your own, you lack redundancy of light and have a very low risk of having light in your eyes. Less light, from a single point, softens shadows and allows better vision in the periphery. If your light goes out, you will still have some vision with lower light levels. Also, less light reflects off of surfaces, well...less and also does not light up multiple opposing or angled planes as well. (meaning your actual position is not telegraphed as well).


Target ID is always paramount. Having less light doesn't help with that. The ability to pick up things in your periphery is more about how concentrated your beam is, not how much light you're throwing. Additionally, unless you shine your light into a mirror, light reflecting off the surfaces in a house won't affect your ability to see.

I have a problem with basing tactical decisions on the assumption of gear failure. If you're worried that your light is going to fail, carry a redundant light. Make sure to OP check your gear before you use it.

When I'm home I have a light on my pistol and a light in my pocket. At work you can add a rifle light to that list even though I'm mostly running blacked out with NODS on.



I repeatedly saw people with bright lights have more trouble with transitions, turning corners, tripping and getting hits than those using a lesser level of light. When you add lasers to the mix, the need for light is further diminished provided you have enough for target ID. In the 60 to 80 lumen range, turn off the light and in a few seconds you have sufficient visibilty to operate with minimal ambiant light. When you go into the 120 lumen range, the time to acquire an equivalent level of vision increases to 15 seconds.

The problems you describe are training issues, not gear issues. People unfamiliar with moving in the dark tend to focus on the extreme end of their flashlights throw instead of using the edges of the beam to illuminate see where they're putting their feet.

Like I said earlier, target ID is always paramount. 120 Lumens is about right to target ID at 50M or so. Outside that distance you need to jump up to a 200 lumen (or higher) light. Like you noted, lasers don't eliminate the need to be able to ID your targets. Seeing a shape doesn't qualify. You need to be able to ID what someone is holding. 60-80 lumens just isn't enough to do that at even shorter carbine engagement distances.



I've spent a lot of time with a variety of lights, lasers, LEDs in varying levels of light playing hise and seek with the dog and kids in the house and backyard and then took many of the things I learned to the range and match to test them out.

Suffice it to say, some of the general concensus when it comes to light and lasers just does not bear out in actual use. Granted there are some tactics and it depends on the advesary as well. When we leave the house and go outside, things change as well.

I would suggest that some of what you seem to have learned on the range and matches would not bear out in actual use. Yep, there are some tactics involved. I'd say that the tactics are a good deal more important than the nuances of gear. Gun fighting, especially in a house and even more especially when you are alone, is about understanding angles. Lights and lasers make the proper use (or lack thereof) of angles even more evident because they show up where the muzzle is tracking.



The paths to the rooms where we sleep have a plug in emergency light so if the power goes out, the entry is lit. Those lights can also be turned on remotely to provide low level offset light. It is a great tactical advantage to have offset light and there are some techniques useful to deploy such, but as yet, no 100% reliable tactical tool for it...I hope to change that.

A way to put the badguys in the light while you stay in the dark would be sweet. If you come up with something I'd love to see it. There's not a lot more satisfying in life than zapping badguys who can't figure out where the rounds are coming from.

I put this in another thread but I thought I'd include it here just to sum up my thoughts on rifle lights.


For informational purposes;

I believe the absolute minimum power for a carbine light to be 200 lumens. That should give you enough throw to properly target ID out to 75-100M (depending on the light).

Not all lumens are created equal. What one company calls a 500 lumen light might be just as bright as another company's 200 lumen light.

If I was going to put a white light on a carbine some things I would want;

Single stage - Two stage lights are great for hand held use. On a gun I want the flashlight to come on bright immediately. I don't want to have to click through multiple settings to get the throw that I want. A light on a gun should be simple.

Easy on/off - Something that you can turn on and off with your support side thumb (or index finger, depending on how you have the light mounted). I use clicky tail caps on my lights. Tape switches work too, just make sure you know the pros and cons.

Reliable - This is going on a gun. If you ever need it you're going to need it. Go with a proven performer.

To me, the best bang for the buck on the market right now is a Surefire Fury (500 lumen) mounted in a VTAC mount. It should come in well under $150 and last a good long while without needing an upgrade.

Just my $.02

[Hoser]

When it comes to tactics and shooting bad guys, there is only a handful of people here whose advice I would listen to.

Mick-Boy is at the top of that list.

[MarkCO]

Mick, thanks much for the feedback! I am still on a learning curve in this arena, and the feedback from multiple people with hands-on experience is valuable. FWIW, my "HD Carbine" does have a 200+ lumen light on it as I found that 100 lumens crapped out at about 80 meters for ID purposes (again dependant on beam width). But it also wears a lower powered light now.

Nothing in my post assumed gear failure. The "redundancy" is related to other persons who also have light. Multiple points of light offer significant tactical advantages, which I am sure you appreciate. However, as an individual, controlling and optimizing that light is a different situation. Also why I beleive an offset light solution would also be viable. I am not sure if a 2 or 3 intensity light on a carbine would be better or worse. Increase complexity, decrease utilization.

What I find interesting in the discussion is not the 200+ lumens for outside, but the light levels inside. I spent a good deal of time talking to an optomologist and digesting the various response time and ID levels the human eye is capable of related to actual measured brightness (measured in lux). The response time from light to no light and vice-versa, follows a pretty simple curve. Add more light, and the time to be able to ID changes. Just a fact. How that plays into tactics and response is important.

Try this test and see what you come up with. From total blackout, place 3 people at 7 yards shoulder to shoulder against a white wall, one wearing a parachute cord around their neck. Then light them up with 80 lumens, 120 lumens, 200 lumens and 500 lumens and measure your ID time to the one with the cord. The times went up for older people in general, but the results were telling.

The outside test was also informative, and I'll tell you that there was no significnat difference in ID time until we hit 30 meters.

[MarkCO]

muddywings, sorry to have buggered up your thread with a discussion on lights.

[muddywings]

muddywings, sorry to have buggered up your thread with a discussion on lights.

hell, no worries. good shit here (can I say that?)
I'm just a watchin and a learnin.

I did pick up a nice optic for a great price from a fellow board member even though I was leaning towards a light first.