Rifle Scopes Any LEO's using a Leatherwood CMR
- Thread starter hrfunk
- Start date
Re: Any LEO's using a Leatherwood CMR
Never handled one. Why that particular make/model? There are a ton of other options.
Never handled one. Why that particular make/model? There are a ton of other options.
Re: Any LEO's using a Leatherwood CMR
You are going to find that optic is not popular among professional marksmen whether civilian or military.
They are made in China which will have a certain percentage of shooters automatically dismissing them.
Furthermore if you are someone who carries a weapon in harms way, you want an optic that has been proven, which is why aimpoint, eotech, trijicon are so popular.
Im not saying dont buy one, if you like them and want to play around with one go for it, give us a report back.
hope that helps.
You are going to find that optic is not popular among professional marksmen whether civilian or military.
They are made in China which will have a certain percentage of shooters automatically dismissing them.
Furthermore if you are someone who carries a weapon in harms way, you want an optic that has been proven, which is why aimpoint, eotech, trijicon are so popular.
Im not saying dont buy one, if you like them and want to play around with one go for it, give us a report back.
hope that helps.
Re: Any LEO's using a Leatherwood CMR
The concise answer as to why I requested info on that particular model is simply intel gathering. I've read some favorable reviews on it and I was looking for input from fellow officers who might be able to provide some insight as to it's performance. I'm trying to get one for T&E right now. If that happens, I'll report my findings.
As to the whole "chi com" issue, I will state outright I'm not happy about it, but the financial reality of my department dictates that I either tell my officers ( for the fifth year in a row) that they are going to have to stick with iron sights, or I find a suitable optic priced well below the average eotech.
Thanks,
HRF
The concise answer as to why I requested info on that particular model is simply intel gathering. I've read some favorable reviews on it and I was looking for input from fellow officers who might be able to provide some insight as to it's performance. I'm trying to get one for T&E right now. If that happens, I'll report my findings.
As to the whole "chi com" issue, I will state outright I'm not happy about it, but the financial reality of my department dictates that I either tell my officers ( for the fifth year in a row) that they are going to have to stick with iron sights, or I find a suitable optic priced well below the average eotech.
Thanks,
HRF
Re: Any LEO's using a Leatherwood CMR
I'll bite.I had 2 of these on two of my ar's I took on a hog deperdation hunt on the kessler ranch about 60 miles SW of houston.I do not have any resonable complaint about them,killed a pile of hogs,day or nite,10ft.to 200yrds no problems at all.Good glass for the money.My 13yr old son loves his on his daniel defence carbine,dropped a turkey at a hair over 300 with his...... Draegon Codsaque NRA instructor 129478400 gunsmith
I'll bite.I had 2 of these on two of my ar's I took on a hog deperdation hunt on the kessler ranch about 60 miles SW of houston.I do not have any resonable complaint about them,killed a pile of hogs,day or nite,10ft.to 200yrds no problems at all.Good glass for the money.My 13yr old son loves his on his daniel defence carbine,dropped a turkey at a hair over 300 with his...... Draegon Codsaque NRA instructor 129478400 gunsmith
Re: Any LEO's using a Leatherwood CMR
I would recommend an aimpoint "PRO" (patrol rifle optic).
Comes with a mount.
About 400 bucks.
Or a Burris Tac-30 1-4X. About 300, has a good rep for glass and a good reticle.
I would much rather use the burris than the leatherwood.
I would recommend an aimpoint "PRO" (patrol rifle optic).
Comes with a mount.
About 400 bucks.
Or a Burris Tac-30 1-4X. About 300, has a good rep for glass and a good reticle.
I would much rather use the burris than the leatherwood.
Re: Any LEO's using a Leatherwood CMR
Thank you for the response. Did your use of the CMR involve any exposure to rain, temp. extremes, etc.? (I know better than to ask about snow in Texas!). One of my concerns living here in the frozen north is the ability of equipment to endure all four of our seasons. Also, did you notice any wandering of the zero, or tracking issues?
Thanks again,
HRF
Thank you for the response. Did your use of the CMR involve any exposure to rain, temp. extremes, etc.? (I know better than to ask about snow in Texas!). One of my concerns living here in the frozen north is the ability of equipment to endure all four of our seasons. Also, did you notice any wandering of the zero, or tracking issues?
Thanks again,
HRF
Re: Any LEO's using a Leatherwood CMR
No issues was there for 5 days extreamly hot and dusty,rifles were banged around in back of a 4runner, never lost zero.did'nt have to run turrents but they do have zero stops.
No issues was there for 5 days extreamly hot and dusty,rifles were banged around in back of a 4runner, never lost zero.did'nt have to run turrents but they do have zero stops.
Re: Any LEO's using a Leatherwood CMR
Oh yea, when first put on rifles and zeroed,ran box test near perfect,don't like to get techie, KISS, they are what they are.
Oh yea, when first put on rifles and zeroed,ran box test near perfect,don't like to get techie, KISS, they are what they are.
Re: Any LEO's using a Leatherwood CMR
I mounted one for and buddy and shot it a little. Poor glass IMO, and a BDC reticle that was hard to pick up at mid range (300 and beyond) on dark targets - even in excellent light . "You get what you pay for" applies here.
I mounted one for and buddy and shot it a little. Poor glass IMO, and a BDC reticle that was hard to pick up at mid range (300 and beyond) on dark targets - even in excellent light . "You get what you pay for" applies here.
Re: Any LEO's using a Leatherwood CMR
My dept. recently did a study on optics. The only one approved similar to Leatherwood is the the Leupold mark 4 mrt 1.5-5. Outside of that they approved the Mark 4 cqt, various Trijicons and Aimpoints. That being said I use an Aimpoint Comp ML3. The battery life is great. It's a half the price of the Trijicon and the Eye relief is excellent. If you like the Leupold you can get a great LEO price on PROMOTIVE.com (I suggest you register there) !!!I can't really see the use for magnification on a police carbine. Quick target aquisition in CQB and accuracy inside the 0-75 yd range is all I really ask from a carbine optic. I know price is an issue but you have to consider how most LEO's are. The rifle and optic is probably going to get tossed around endlessly in the trunk and be checked for zero once a year during Qualifications.
My dept. recently did a study on optics. The only one approved similar to Leatherwood is the the Leupold mark 4 mrt 1.5-5. Outside of that they approved the Mark 4 cqt, various Trijicons and Aimpoints. That being said I use an Aimpoint Comp ML3. The battery life is great. It's a half the price of the Trijicon and the Eye relief is excellent. If you like the Leupold you can get a great LEO price on PROMOTIVE.com (I suggest you register there) !!!I can't really see the use for magnification on a police carbine. Quick target aquisition in CQB and accuracy inside the 0-75 yd range is all I really ask from a carbine optic. I know price is an issue but you have to consider how most LEO's are. The rifle and optic is probably going to get tossed around endlessly in the trunk and be checked for zero once a year during Qualifications.
Re: Any LEO's using a Leatherwood CMR
Thanks Cuffm. Just so I understand your post correctly, are the approved optics on your list "approved" for officers to individually purchase with their own money, or are they being purchased and issued by the department? If they are a department purchase, you are quite fortunate, and your 2012 appropriations must be radically different than ours.
Probably the greatest criterion I have for a patrol optic is it's ability to hold zero. That is followed very closely by the optic's ability to withstand the elements (rain, snow, dust,Etc). If the thing can't survive life in a patrol car, it is of little benefit. One of the things that caught my attention about the Leatherwood are the company's claims that it is very durable. That seems to be supported by some of the posts above (and not so much by others). Optical quality and reticle design are important, but less so than the characteristics mentioned above, because almost any descent optic is going to give better performance than iron sights which is what we have now (I know, I know, now we have to debate what constitutes "Descent"). Anyway, that's why I'm doing the research, I want to select an optic that WE CAN AFFORD TO ISSUE TO THE ENTIRE DEPARTMENT. I have no doubt that the top of the line optics from the major players are very good. But I'm not looking a buying one, or two. I'm looking at outfitting eight patrol rifles, and three entry carbines. So take the price tag of the optic (and mount) and multiply if by 11, and then factor it into a budget where I was recently told not to order spare magazines due to the cost involved. Once I select an optic, I'm going to have to embark on a major sales initiative to get approval for the purchase. I've done it before (or we wouldn't even have patrol rifles). It's a pain in the ass, but if I don't do those kind of things, my officers and our citizens have to do without.
Thanks Again,
HRF
Thanks Cuffm. Just so I understand your post correctly, are the approved optics on your list "approved" for officers to individually purchase with their own money, or are they being purchased and issued by the department? If they are a department purchase, you are quite fortunate, and your 2012 appropriations must be radically different than ours.
Probably the greatest criterion I have for a patrol optic is it's ability to hold zero. That is followed very closely by the optic's ability to withstand the elements (rain, snow, dust,Etc). If the thing can't survive life in a patrol car, it is of little benefit. One of the things that caught my attention about the Leatherwood are the company's claims that it is very durable. That seems to be supported by some of the posts above (and not so much by others). Optical quality and reticle design are important, but less so than the characteristics mentioned above, because almost any descent optic is going to give better performance than iron sights which is what we have now (I know, I know, now we have to debate what constitutes "Descent"). Anyway, that's why I'm doing the research, I want to select an optic that WE CAN AFFORD TO ISSUE TO THE ENTIRE DEPARTMENT. I have no doubt that the top of the line optics from the major players are very good. But I'm not looking a buying one, or two. I'm looking at outfitting eight patrol rifles, and three entry carbines. So take the price tag of the optic (and mount) and multiply if by 11, and then factor it into a budget where I was recently told not to order spare magazines due to the cost involved. Once I select an optic, I'm going to have to embark on a major sales initiative to get approval for the purchase. I've done it before (or we wouldn't even have patrol rifles). It's a pain in the ass, but if I don't do those kind of things, my officers and our citizens have to do without.
Thanks Again,
HRF
Re: Any LEO's using a Leatherwood CMR
Check out the millett dms, its similar and has some some good reviews before.
Check out the millett dms, its similar and has some some good reviews before.
Re: Any LEO's using a Leatherwood CMR
Why do you need magnified optics and where are you finding your irons to be inadequate?
FWIW every cop I know from big or small dept has irons, eotech or aimpoint (one had ACOG but took it off).
Why do you need magnified optics and where are you finding your irons to be inadequate?
FWIW every cop I know from big or small dept has irons, eotech or aimpoint (one had ACOG but took it off).
Re: Any LEO's using a Leatherwood CMR
HR, I understand the issue about money and how average officers dont shoot enough, or can break things. However you are better to try to get some local donations from businesses and check for grants to purchase items or check D.R.M.O heck I am sure that if you apprached some Hide vendors they may help. Buying cheap when your officers and civillians are dependant upon gear that works equals money lost and vicarious liability. I would look at the Aimpoint , EoTechs or Burris even Vortex over the Leatherwood. The reason being is quality, durability, and the fact that you wont have to worry about bickering with a companies warranty for hard use or ignorance.
HR, I understand the issue about money and how average officers dont shoot enough, or can break things. However you are better to try to get some local donations from businesses and check for grants to purchase items or check D.R.M.O heck I am sure that if you apprached some Hide vendors they may help. Buying cheap when your officers and civillians are dependant upon gear that works equals money lost and vicarious liability. I would look at the Aimpoint , EoTechs or Burris even Vortex over the Leatherwood. The reason being is quality, durability, and the fact that you wont have to worry about bickering with a companies warranty for hard use or ignorance.
Re: Any LEO's using a Leatherwood CMR
I wondered when this question was going to come up. Personally, I like irons. I've been using them (on the AR15 platform) since I joined the Marine Corps in 1985. I also compete in High Power rifle matches with a RRA National Match A2 (obviously with irons). Unfortunately, most of the youngsters on my department are not prior military, and the few who are were trained with and deployed with an optic sight (ACOG, Aimpoint, or Eotech). So, like it or not I have to accept the fact that I'm a member of a vanishing breed of iron sight users.
For those who rarely use irons, and did not receive the benefit of military training, there is a confidence issue born of ignorance. As you know, the iron sights require crisp focus on the front sight; this leaves the rear sight aperture and especially the target slightly out of focus. For those of us familiar with the sights, this is no big deal. For the uninitiated, however, it can create a problem (even though it's only in their mind). The optic sight places everything (more or less) on the same focal plane. Thus a crisp aiming point and a well defined target (keep in mind I'm not talking about sniper level accuracy here. We all know we focus on the crosshairs for the best accuracy). Thus we achieve greater confidence in the system, and greater accuracy at longer distances due to the magnification of the target. Also, for close range engagements we get the added benefit (with the 0-4X optics), of a non-magnified target with a lighted reticle for quicker target acquisition.
Hope that answers the question.
HRF
I wondered when this question was going to come up. Personally, I like irons. I've been using them (on the AR15 platform) since I joined the Marine Corps in 1985. I also compete in High Power rifle matches with a RRA National Match A2 (obviously with irons). Unfortunately, most of the youngsters on my department are not prior military, and the few who are were trained with and deployed with an optic sight (ACOG, Aimpoint, or Eotech). So, like it or not I have to accept the fact that I'm a member of a vanishing breed of iron sight users.
For those who rarely use irons, and did not receive the benefit of military training, there is a confidence issue born of ignorance. As you know, the iron sights require crisp focus on the front sight; this leaves the rear sight aperture and especially the target slightly out of focus. For those of us familiar with the sights, this is no big deal. For the uninitiated, however, it can create a problem (even though it's only in their mind). The optic sight places everything (more or less) on the same focal plane. Thus a crisp aiming point and a well defined target (keep in mind I'm not talking about sniper level accuracy here. We all know we focus on the crosshairs for the best accuracy). Thus we achieve greater confidence in the system, and greater accuracy at longer distances due to the magnification of the target. Also, for close range engagements we get the added benefit (with the 0-4X optics), of a non-magnified target with a lighted reticle for quicker target acquisition.
Hope that answers the question.
HRF
