Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Competition from bench rest to Idpa/3 gun to PRS and ELR has driven most of the innovation for mil shooting IMODoes PRS drive military?? Seems like two WAY different applications.
![]()
Top U.S. Army Marksman Explains Why Gun Nuts Shoot Better
Master Sgt. Scott Satterlee says the military could learn a lot from civiliansmedium.com
Somewhat of an article that poses good points, yet falls short in so many others. Comparing a soldier on the battle field engaging the enemy to shooting competitions is almost an insult.
Ballistics work different depending on the target?
Bullet doesn’t know where it’s heading, only real difference I’d imagine is being able to carry/pack it a ways and being able to take more abuse
Did you EVEN read the article I'm referencing???? Uuummmmm....No you didn't.
So.....where did I mention ballistics????
Yeah that’s itWell...yea....yea you do. Cause you can't comprehend my comment.
Yeah that’s it![]()
At least I was right...you are an idiot admitting it. Good to know.
Bless your heart
Do you always repeat what your mom says to you??? Odd....but not unexpected at this point.
Like with the genesis of serious LPVO usage?Not too sure about PRS, but 3 Gun has influenced the MIL unfortunately.
Like with the genesis of serious LPVO usage?
Whats wrong with light parts and offset dots? Genuinely curious.No, like the use of offset Reflex sights and lightweight rails.
And the MIL started the 1-4 Scope thing..... 3 gun got it from the MIL. The Short Dot was is SOF way before 3 gun.
As a matter of fact 3 gun started the use of cheap LPVOs. So they have that.
Whats wrong with light parts and offset dots? Genuinely curious.
And you should spend some time talking to the people who worked at optics companies during the LPVO explosion. The Short Dot and other big game type scopes were in limited use way back, and they were terrible and fragile according to these scope companies. And the people that used them apparently got so much push back that optics companies didn't feel like developing them. It wasn't until shooting sports made them mainstream that companies felt there was enough momentum to make them with all the ruggedness and reticle options we have now.
Those aren't my words, that's what anyone that works at Vortex will tell you.
I think we're kinda saying the same thing. All I'm adding is that the people in charge of making all those better options have personally told me that the impetus came from sport shooting, because the military wasn't putting any faith or interest in them.FYI .... I used a Short Dot for many years way back when. So I am not sure who you were speaking with, because nothing came close to it for a very long time. That is durability and function. Back in 2003, even 2010, there were not any other valid options other then the S&B.
Are there better options now? Yes there are. I will take a Gen 3 Razor over the 1-8 Short dot every day. The Gen 2 1-6 Razor was good when It came out. The biggest issue was the retical but they fixed that, and that wasn't until way after 2013....... so for 10 plus years they had nothing......
I can see that , as the Gen 1 products were not even close to what we needed in the MIL. So after that there was not very much interest in anything coming out.I think we're kinda saying the same thing. All I'm adding is that the people in charge of making all those better options have personally told me that the impetus came from sport shooting, because the military wasn't putting any faith or interest in them.