Leupold FX-II 2.5x28mm IER Scout (Project Complete)

[AlReiter]

After following a few threads on this forum and other forums, I am planning on mounting a Leupold FX-II 2.5x28mm IER Scout scope on one of my M1s using the CMP Scope Mount (Item #830). I have never mounted a scope on a rifle and am not sure what rings to use for this configuration. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Griff Murphey]

You're going to want it so the wound-down rear sight doesn't bother you, so it's going to be on a little higher sighting plane than you are used to; you'll need the Blackhawk lace-on nylon stock comb. You'll probably wind up with medium or high rings in order to clear the actual mount. I hate to be inexact but it will require some playing with to get it right, also, eye relief must be worked out.

[jmoore]

I'm actually of the opposite opinion. Get it as low as possible for speed! The rear sight, if visible will only project into the lowest part of your field of view and will be altogether out of focus as you should focus your scope (especially here, but also in general- which most folk don't) so that both eyes are focused at 110-200yd/m . That way when you bring the rifle up there's no delay on getting on target, and no requirement to (horrors) close or squint w/ the off eye.

If you jack the scope up much, then either your cheek weld will suffer, or the pad on the comb will preclude iron sight usage w/o its removal. Quite the bother.

The whole concept of a scout rifle is a fast, hard hitting rifle that's fairly accurate so that the package is suitable for use from 25m to 300m or so on big things. Sort of a big bore CQB rifle. The package should come up on target about as fast as a good shotgun, but w/ instant target magnification (just enough, not too much!), hence the downrange focus, optimal head placement, and (hopefully) a fairly light, well balanced platform.

[Griff Murphey]

The whole concept of a scout rifle is a fast, hard hitting rifle that's fairly accurate so that the package is suitable for use from 25m to 300m or so on big things. Sort of a big bore CQB rifle. The package should come up on target about as fast as a good shotgun, but w/ instant target magnification (just enough, not too much!), hence the downrange focus, optimal head placement, and (hopefully) a fairly light, well balanced platform.

In my humble opinion, none of this is really possible when taking a 9.5 Lb, 43.6" long, 8-shot, inherently slightly muzzle heavy rifle, and adding to that tendency by adding a massive rail scope mount to the forend, with scope added also slightly forward of the balance of the rifle. You're not going to get it unless you do some sort of BM-59/tanker ground-up rebuild mod! The M-1 rifle is what it is. I have a Burris on my AFPG equivalent rifle built at Lackland in the 70's and it's great for 3-gun but in the final analysis it's hardly the quickest, or best "combat style" alternative for fast and reactive shooting.

You'll figure it out when you try fitting the scope to the Amega/CMP rail.

[jmoore]

Didn't say it was an ideal platform, but HE's the one setting it up scout style. Tried it, too heavy! Ft. Benning was a good place to try out all kinds of stuff.

Basically, it'll either be a heavy CQC rig or a semi-precision scoped rifle w/ a rather limited field of view. Ya at least need to concentrate on one application or the other. The 2.5 power implies more speed than precision, so its a matter of endurance and strength to overcome the weight. Its OK for a while.

[Griff Murphey]

I just like to show the poodle gunners with their unlimited supply of 30 rd. mags that the M-1 can beat them. Of course, the better poodle gunners CAN beat me...

[jmoore]

Oh, yeah, it'll get their attention, esp. after you pull the trigger. It really doesn't sound like an AR and will run about as fast, at least until the reload. Back before the ban ended, we had classifications that limited the shooter to 10 rounds, so the M1 wasn't too handicapped. My best results were with the iron sights (rear peep opened up ~0.015- 0.030" depending on whether or not it was a night shoot) and a Smith Enterprises muzzle brake. Also had a mount on the side of the stock for a light if needed. Don't know if the brake helped, but it made it even more authoritative sounding, so it stayed!

It runs really fast if you can muscle it about on transitions, all that weight keeps the muzzle down. The trick was not to pull the trigger faster than I could "see" on far targets, up close it double taps right well.

BTW I was in the process of making up some 10rd clips by splicing two eight rounders together when the major deployments started, so attention got diverted elsewhere. Dry runs on the prototype looked promising.

[Kirk]

How would a 4 moa red dot sight in a 30 mm tube affect the speed/precision equation?

[jmoore]

Precision w/ the red dots has WAY more to do w/ their design and construction (which varies a good deal between models and mfg.) than the lack of magnification (unless you're looking for sub-MOA groups, then they're inappropriate). Some DO have parallax, often a bunch! Dot definition also varies, if its quite well defined you can use the top or bottom edge of the dot for "fiddly" shots that the dot would otherwise cover.-Slow, but it works if you either hold off 2MOA or zero the rifle to suit- work this out for yourself to see what's best for you.

Buy the best "dot" you can and still expect some dramas- some are more clear, some have better repeatability in their adjustments, etc. even from the same model and mfg.

If the scope will hold zero with the dot ANYWHERE in its field of view, then the big tubes are fine, otherwise, stupidly enough, small tubes are best because you'll tend to center the dot in the middle of the tube better. For raw speed Up Close it really won't matter as long as you see the dot as soon as the weapon is brought up to the firing position. A 30mm tube is generally considered "smallish", but if the metal bits don't obstruct your overall FOV w/both eyes open it doesn't matter much.

Purely opinion here, but as excellent as Aimpoint scopes are, I've never quite taken to them due to the "tinted" FOV. (I still have my ancient Mk2(or 1) externally adjustable Aimpoint, though!) Otherwise, best for the money. I run ACOG TA31RCO models on most all the flattop AR platforms-not really a reddot but can be used in a similar way- and EOTech/Holosights for most reddots even though they aren't w/o their own downsides. On the less expensive end, some of the Tasco Propoints are OK for hobby use, and the ADCO scopes are usually quite servicable-no drama units (Quite popular w/ the IHMSA folk, too). Plenty of absolute *T&%*&$ out there, too!

Speed w/ any reddot is most dependent on getting the weapon ergonomically correct- again, it should come up like a well fitted shotgun- no hunting for whatever sight you're using!

[Griff Murphey]

TACPRO here in Texas runs combat courses with shots as close as 2 yards, all the way out to 350 yards for long range rifle. One of the problems with the red dots is that many of the dots are too many MOA in diameter and will subtend the more difficult small targets. So part of your decision making about this is going to be where you are competing and the COF you will be facing. Some of it is personal preference, too, at my "age and weight" I take a lot of long maybe a bit slow shots with the .45 and when I hit the steels usually go down, while the 9mm boys are going "BUUUDDA-BUUUDA!" so it's a bit like that with .30 cal.s vs. 5.56.