Leupold HAMR Multi-Range Scope

DSC_0004

We all know the market is flooded with optics for the AR15 and similar rifles. However, this Leupold does stand out in the crowd for several reasons. I became interested in this optic when I ran into an acquaintance at the range who was running one on his AR.

When I first looked it over I was a bit skeptical of the whole idea of combining two scopes into one unit. After shooting his AR with the HAMR I changed my mind when I realized this was a very effective way of covering the distance from very close to several hundred yards out. With that said I wanted to review this scope for you.

Before getting into the actual use of the scope let me tell you this thing is built like a tank. The body of both the Delta Point (red dot) and lower optic (HAMR) are made from a sturdy aluminum alloy much like that used to manufacture AR’s. The screw on protective caps for windage and elevation adjustment are made of steel with sturdy cable connectors, which are covered in a tough, plastic. You can see from the photo how well they are crimped and attached to the scope. The unit is also capable of withstanding two atmosphere’s of pressure which means you can submerge the scope in water to a fair depth without damage. Rubber “O” rings seal the scope from debris, water etcetera.

In the same photo I mentioned above there is a control on the right side of the HAMR for adjusting the intensity of the “horseshoe” type center of the reticle. Unlike other scopes there is no need for a focus adjustment on the HAMR scope. The objects viewed are very clear regardless of distance to the target. The illumination control has seven intensity settings. One handy feature is the user isn’t required to turn the illumination adjustment back to zero to disable it. You simply turn the knob no more than a quarter of an inch until it rest between intensity numbers, which turns it off. To turn it back on just move it slightly to the previous setting used.

Specs:

Length (in)
5.5
Length (cm)
14.0
Mounting Space (in)
3.73
Mounting Space (cm)
9.47
Actual Magnification
4.0
FOV @ 100 yds (ft)
32.0
FOV @ 100 m (m)
10.6
Eye Relief (in)
2.71
Eye Relief (mm)
69.0
Exit Pupil (mm)
6.0
Obj. Clear Aperture
0.9 in / 24 mm
Weight
13.1 oz / 370 g
Weight with DeltaPoint
14.8 oz / 420 g
Elevation Adj. Range (MOA)
60
Windage Adj. Range (MOA)
60

The HAMR reticle shown below is zeroed at 100 yards and graduated out to 800 yards by using the hold over hash marks next to the etched 400,600 and 800 yard markers. The 1000 yard etched line has no number beside it for obvious reasons. You won’t be shooting a 5.56 out remotely that far.

It goes without saying the Leupold glass is very clear with plenty of light making the sight picture bright. The HAMR is generally for distances from approximately 100 yards and out. Magnification is fixed at 4X.

The Delta Point red dot mounted on top of the HAMR uses a 7.5 sized dot. Now this dot size tends to cover a good bit of the target so trying for very accurate shots at a small target is a bit problematic. Leupold does offer the Delta Point with a different reticle from the red dot using a smaller 3.5 aiming reference.

The laser itself is mounted in the body of the Delta and projects onto the rear of the glass. I’ve also included a photo showing a small adjustment screw on top of the body for vertical adjustment and another screw on the left side for windage. A set of hex wrenches is included in the package. Each scope has it’s own battery for illumination. They use the flat camera type batteries.

One feature of the Delta you won’t see anywhere else I’m aware of is an automatic on switch. When the rifle is moved the movement is detected and the Delta is activated. Laying the rifle down or otherwise not moving it the same switch turns the unit off to conserve battery life. There is no delay in activation whatsoever. By the time you move the rifle a small amount it’s on.

The HAMR and Delta Point can be purchased in several combinations. The type I’m reviewing as well as the other I mentioned with the 3.5 reference triangle. The HAMR can be purchased alone or with the Delta. I did check Gunbroker and Guns America for actual prices and found the unit I’m testing selling for between $1300 and $1500. The HAMR alone is running between $900 and $1100. These prices are considerably lower than the MSRP of right at $2000 for the reviewed scope.

My first range trip was getting used to this configuration and switching back and forth between the two. After an hour or so I found it very easy to make the transition. Of course both scopes had to be sighted in. I set the Delta Point at 50 yards, which is a good distance when you’re shooting between 10 and 100 yards. The HAMR was naturally sighted at the recommended 100 yards so accurate use of the etched reference points would be correct at longer distances.

My second range session was at distance using the HAMR alone. I fired strings from 100 yards back to the max distance available where I was shooting this time, which is 316 yards. Shooting from 100 yards it was very easy to shoot MOA groups using the military version Grip Pod as a bipod. I used our shooting bench at this distance.

Moving back to 200 yards I had no problem seeing the target clearly and shooting groups of around 3 inches with Hornady match 71 grain .223. These groups were fired prone again using the Grip Pod. Finally at 316 yards I was able to fire fairly quickly and still keep my shots within the lungs and upper chest of the anatomical targets I was using. Of course these groups are part rifle part scope part shooter but the rifle as well as the shooter can’t do the job effectively without decent glass to put rounds on target.


Conclusion:

Given the choice,in all likelihood, I would choose this leupold as my go to scope for the AR. As I said earlier it’s a sturdy build with premium glass, bright sight picture for use at dawn or dusk plus the built in illumination ability. This gives the user an effective scope for use in average daylight or low light conditions.Of course weather conditions aren’t a consideration.

The ability to shoot from very close with the red dot to the longer more precise targeting with the HAMR reticle covers any distance most of us would ever shoot from.

The HAMR is in use not only by civilians but is widely used in law enforcement and is an issued scope for various military units. By all subjective observations I found this scope to be a great choice and certainly worth consideration for use on an AR.

Links:
http://www.leupold.com/tactical/scopes/mark-4-hamr-riflescopes/

http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/products_id/79340/Leupold+114488+MK4+4x+24mm+Obj+32+ft+@+100+yds+FOV+Tube+Dia+

Related

Phil White

Retired police officer with 30 years of service. Firearms instructor and SRU team member. I still instruct with local agencies. My daily carry pistol is the tried and true 1911. I’m the senior writer and moderator at TFB as well as the review manager. I really enjoy answering readers questions and comments. We can all learn from each other about our favorite hobby!


More In: Optics, Reviews, Rifles


Advertisement

  • Marc

    G36 did it 15 years ago.

    • Noodles

      Yep, not as clear, less reliable, not as tough.limited availability is the only reason those hogs are sought after in the US market.

    • Leonard

      The G36 scope is also much easier to be found on the European gun market (international audience of this blog, remember?), and costs less. But I think it would look somewhat silly if mounted on an AR-15.

      Btw. the Bundeswehr is actually replacing the combined reddot/scope of the G36 with EOTech optics and the like for its frontline units, afaik. So maybe the combination of two kinds of optics isn’t what the military needs (then again they went with an even sillier combination for the G28)

      • Phil White

        Leonard,

        The EoTech is a very good choice. Every countries military has a different idea of what they need in the way of optics etc.

  • Paul

    Glad to hear it works so well, as it certainly look amazing!

    • Phil White

      Paul,

      Nice isn’t it—but then it’s a Leupold :-)

  • D

    For when your rifle just isn’t *quite* tall enough: stick a red-dot on top of a regular scope.

    And for the low, low price of only 1600$, no less.

    • Phil White

      D,

      It does make it tall no doubt about that. Surprisingly it doesn’t get in the way though. Hey it is what it is as far as price. Some people don’t seem to mind the price.

  • Aj

    For that much money I’d rather buy an ACOG

    • Phil White

      Aj,

      They each surely do have their own strong points. Pretty much a matter of choice between the two.

    • Phil White

      Aj,

      Same thing I replied to AJ: “They each surely do have their own strong points. Pretty much a matter of choice between the two”

    • Phil White

      Aj,

      As Jeff Foxworthy and company say “and here’s your price”. http://www.trijicon.com/na_en/products/product2.php?mid=ACOG%20/%20RMR%20Combo

    • W

      for a equivalent ACOG, youll be spending more money…i promise.

      The Leupold HAMR is actually decently priced for what you get.

  • John

    $1300 to $1500? At that price point you might as well go with an ACOG or a Elcan specterdr.

  • Alex-mac

    For a second there i thought they mounted a red dot on the side of the gun, a better place when it comes to a more consistent and comfortable cheekweld.

    • Phil White

      Alex-mac,

      It actually is easy to use for both the red dot and scope.

  • JM

    I will never, EVER pay more money for an optic mount than I did for the rifle.

    • Daniel R

      Which is exactly why you need a more expensive rifle:
      “But Honey, I *need* a rifle this expensive…otherwise the scope would be more expensive than the rifle!”

      • Phil White

        Daniel,

        Hum good tactic I’ll have to remember that one:-)

    • Phil White

      JM,

      Agreed it’s hard thing to pay for the scope than gun but for a top of the line scope it’s just that way these days.

    • D

      I’d be absolutely terrified of damaging something that expensive. Every time i see a really expensive (1000$+) scope, i think “man, one fall on the way outta the woods, and it’s a wall decoration”.

    • http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/ Steve (The Firearm Blog)

      My policy is to only buy optics worth more than my guns.

      • Phil White

        Steve,

        You get what you pay for:-)

  • gunslinger

    hey, NC star has a scope with a red dot.. and it’s only like 80 bucks…

    oh wait. it’s ncstar :D

    I thougth there were ACOGs with this already. and $1500 price tag? sorry, i’ll take the ACOG (if i ever have that much coin to drop on a scope)

  • http://www.tv-presspass.com TV-PressPass

    I wasn’t a fan of my HAMR when I had it. I wound up selling it and buying a Vortex Razor 1-6 instead!

    • Phil White

      TV-PressPass,

      Vortex makes a good scope also.The one caveat I have is the red dot Vortex has a narrow field of view. Otherwise they are well built with good warranty coverage.

  • http://www.tenpoundmonkey.com JasonM

    Might be nice if you corrected some details-

    The DeltaPoint’s housing is a magnesium alloy (not aluminum)

    The 3.5MOA reticle IS a dot (circle)

    The available triangle (delta) reticle is 7.5MOA

    The illumination is from an LED (not laser)

    It uses Torx wrenches for attachment and zeroing (not hex)

    Shooting with the “chin-weld” needed to use a top-mount red dot sucks.

    An advantage this has over the 4X ACOGs is MUCH more forgiving eye relief.

    And finally-
    “widely used in law enforcement” – “widely”?

    “…and is an issued scope for various military units” – really?

    • Noodles

      Pretty much a fluff piece written to make the sub-acog hammer look better than it is. Someone has to justify their T&E sample!

      He eye relief of some of the acogs sucks but the 31 line is alright, I’d take the lower cost, lower weight, actual mil use, no batteries, etc over the better eye relief of the Trijicon models. This thing seems like a winner at $600-800 street.

      • Phil White

        Noodles,

        A factual piece and the ACOG didn’t even come to mind as far as competition between products. I request the products I review so there is no need to justify anything.

        The ACOG is a fine optic as well. I know I like my personal one which I purchased a good while ago at $800.Mine is a TA33-8 with red triangle reticle.

        Everyone has a preference for one scope type or another which is fine and as it should be.

    • JoeBob

      It has been adopted by the Marine Air Wing and is a part of SOPMOD Block II, so yes it has been adopted by various military units.

      • Phil White

        JoeBob,

        Thank you for the information and yes they were mentioned by the technical department among others.

      • Alex

        Who told you that it was part of the SOPMOD block II program?

        I don’t know where everyone is getting this information from.

        • Phil White

          Alex,

          Mine is from Leupold and a friend who is retired S/F and works in the industry as well as contract work for federal agencies.

    • Phil White

      JasonM,

      Yes really and that came from direct from Leupold as did the information on the material used to make the HAMR.Both torx and hex are included.

      The metal used is 6061-T6 Aircraft Quality Aluminum—this from the Leupold tech department. As I said I spoke to the tech folks at Leupold and that’s the information given to me. I was referring to the material for the HAMR. The website has the dot and triangle sizes reversed. The technical folks confirmed the sizes I stated.

      I never mentioned the material for the Delta which yes it is magnesium.

      I had no trouble with the cheek weld for either sight but I can see where some people would.

      There is a bit of difference in the eye relief between the two. Eye relief on the ACOG is 1.5 inches with the leupold having 2.7

      Leupold stated the military does use them widely as do police departments.

      I won’t change information given directly from the manufacturer unless I have 100% knowledge to the contrary..

  • Esh325

    Maybe I’m missing something, but how would you get a good cheekweld with the redot being so high up?

    • http://www.tenpoundmonkey.com JasonM

      You don’t, you use a “chin weld” / head’s up position

      • Esh325

        I suppose if you had a rifle like a SCAR with an adjustable cheek riser, you could solve that problem. I don’t think people in combat have the luxary to fiddle with cheek risers though.

        • Phil White

          Esh325,

          You really don’t have the time and really a cheek weld for a red dot isn’t needed. Yes your cheek will rest on the stock but you’ll be using more of heads up method to shoot from. If you do a search for pictures or video for “soldiers in combat” or whatever search term you choose you can see this method used over and over again.

          It’s a non existent problem generally.

      • Lance

        get a M-4 style butstock cheek piece.

      • Phil White

        JasonM,

        Very true and it’s no problem at all using it effectively.

    • http://www.tv-presspass.com TV-PressPass

      That was exactly my problem with it (see the video below)

    • Phil White

      Esh325,

      You don’t— see Jasons comment and my answer to him.

  • JD

    I like the HAMR as a 4x optic. It has MUCH better eye relief than an ACOG and a more forgiving eye box. In 10 years you don’t have to worry about paying $300-$600 to have the reticle recharged either. Granted batteries can be a hassle, but I’ve learned illumination isn’t needed much during the day anyways.

    As appealing as it is, the model with the dot is definitely not. Granted this option is still significantly lighter than a 1 to 4 variable after you add a mount, but this method is still not optimal. Offset red dots are much faster and much more comfortable.

    • Phil White

      JD,

      Thanks for your objective comment JD!

  • TangledThorns

    The HAMR looks great but damn its too expensive for broke civvies like :)

    • Phil White

      TangledThorns,

      It would take a lot of saving huh! Don’t feel bad a lot of people can’t afford them.

  • NightEye

    Heard new news? 6 November AK-12 will be going through test procedures at TSNII “TochMash” (who created VSS “Vintorez” sniper rifle). If everything will be alright then AK-12 will be accepted by Russian Army. Tests include dust, mud, moisture, water reliability tests, accuracy and maintenance tests, max pressure in the barrel and gas tube tests.

    • Esh325

      The 6th, the day of my birthday :) Those are just factory tests though, not state acceptance tests. The state tests for possible Russian army start some time in 2013 and will be completed in some time in June or July 2013.

    • Lance

      Not true there was a article here that said th Russian army will buy no more AKs of any type for 5 years +. Just hype.

      • Esh325

        Nothing is final yet. The Ministry of defense also said one time that AK-74 upgrades weren’t in their budget plan once, but they changed that opinion later on. The state tests in June or July will determine whether or not they will adopt the AK-12 for general use. I would say it’s not likely they adopt it, but anything is possible. Nothing is written in stone.

      • Lance

        I agree anything is possible but recent blogs from here even state upgrades to the AK-74M where being pushed by influential generals, so it may also happen Just cant give into HYPE. like others guess watch and see.

  • MrSatyre

    I spent $150 at a gun show recently for an airsoft version of exactly the same thing. Aren’t you jealous?!? (joking, of course) *sigh* I need to figure out how to lobby my boss for a significant raise…

  • mac66

    I have a scope on my AR15 that is 1-4x variable. It has a 4 moa dot that is either black or illuminated. At 1x (no magnification) it is a red dot. At 4x it can reach out to 400 meters and easily hit a 20″ “D” target. All you have to do it put the dot on the target and pull the trigger. I used it on the Army’s pop up qualification course and had a rifle class I was teaching last weekend banging steel at 200 meters with it. I am not saying that my Mueller Speed Shot is as a good as a Leupold, but it will do what the HAMR does (and more) at a fraction of the cost.

  • Lance

    Im with AJ and gunslinger, just get a mil spec AOCG since the HAMR is so expensive a TA-31 RCO A4 or M-4 is cheaper than is. the AR and KAC rail system is still cheaper than is.

    It is a good alternative if you must have a none ACOG tactical scope the SOPMOD 2 package now has the HAMR included. Overall they are the same as a ACOG ECOS but far better than the Specter scope. Overall they would be awesome just to make a $500 HAMR and they dominate the Civilian AR scope industry then.

    • W

      The Trijicon is not that much more cheaper, if at all.

      • Phil White

        W,

        Like I posted earlier the ACOG with the RMR is more expensive. They have one on the website that runs $3000! They do range from the same price as the HAMR up to the $3300.

  • John Doe

    Since many of the other Firearm Blog readers are far more knowledgable than me, can I get an unbiased opinion on this question?

    HAMR, SpecterDR 1-4x or ACOG with RMR, and why is one better than the others?

    • Lance

      You hit it on the head, good point. Personal preference my answer. I like the ACOG TA-31 RCO series. Some may like Leopold alot more. Thats why there so many scopes for SOCOM user preference is wanted.

      • Phil White

        Lance,

        You’re 100% on with that observation.

      • Lance

        I agree but some price hikes are less with manufacturing and more of the company ripping gun owners off. A TA-01NSN was $800 a few years ago there is no logical way to say the extra $400 is added for production its a rip off. Time to hold gun and scope maker accountable.

        And not all good scopes are over $1000 I had a few that are good and cheap its all about your brand you want.

      • W

        I like Trijicon optics too.

        • Phil White

          W,

          Another tough scope! Mine has gone through some very tough use. I was in a local gun shop about a year ago and the owner told me about a soldier who was there also and was looking for an ACOG for use in Afghanistan . He found out he would not be issued one (another story) and felt he really needed one. The reason is obvious— the distances there are on average much further then in Iraq.

          I asked the owner about his background, honesty etc to which he replied with what I hoped he would say. I asked to be introduced to this soldier. W e hit it off well and talked for an hour or so. He explained futher about needing an ACOG and why. He was having a hard time finding a used one. To cut this short I went out to my car popped the trunk and took my ACOG off my AR and gave it to him making it clear I wanted it back when he returned! He was beside himself and had reservations about it. Bottom line he took it and as promised gave it back to me about 14 months later. He apologized for the shape of the finish and one small dent. He related that it got. Lot of use in the mountains. We talked a bit longer and I took the ACOG to the range and it worked just fine after a full deployment.

          The reason for going into this long story is simply this. This ACOG went through a year of heavy use in foul weather, terribly rough mountain terrain and all the other conditions of combat use and it still works fine to this day. The finish is a bit worse for wear but who cares—it helped one of our soldiers!.

      • W

        The ACOG is not only durable, but also very versatile.

        Im really not sure what I like better: the ACOG or Elcan Spectre.

        Of course, im still waiting for the Zeiss ZO 4x30i.

        • Phil White

          W,

          I’d have to go with the ACOG but then I have more time with them. I’ve tried the Elsa but saw no advantage over the ACOG.

    • John

      You should also consider the Aimpoint + 3x magnifier and EOTech + 3x magnifier combo.

      It really depends on your intended application.

      • Phil White

        John,

        I like the Aimpoint as well for close in work. I have used the 3X magnifier and I just never got used to it. It felt cumbersome and a bit oversized for my taste. It’s certainly a viable option for those who like the way it’s setup. Most any Aimpoint will stand up to a lot of use.

      • Phil White

        John,

        I kinda like the EoTech better since it sits lower which means the entire combination of EoTech red dot and EoTech 3X sits lower. It’s not a huge amount but it just feels better to me.

    • Phil White

      John,

      John in all honesty almost all of these top of the line scopes will get the job done and done well. As Lance said it really is no more complicated than personal preference based on the features and the build quality of the product. Other factors are what your needs and or desires are. Some scopes do better than others in low light while others excel at a combination of distances like this Leupold.
      Research the scopes that interest you and read as much about them as you can find ditching the “never used one but heard from a guy” comments. Like I’ve said in reply to others I have an ACOG without the RMR and enjoy using it. I also like but don’t own a HAMR. I do like the ability to use it at very close range as well as at longer distances. So, I buy a HAMR with Delta and cover most any distance I shoot or I buy an ACOG with no RMR and an EoTech red dot and switch as needed. Then add the cost of single unit or two sights as I listed above.Which purchase makes the most sense for you?
      In the end it needs to be an informed decision based on your preferences and finances.Now that being said I’ll repeat what I have said many times here and that is I get nothing from a company for my opinions positive or negative on a product. My reviews are solely based on my use and observations of whichever product I review. I’ll not be bought off by anyone for any reason.
      I hope this helps and answers some of your questions.

    • noob

      Has anyone tried the 4×32 browe combat optic?

      It says that it has a vibration switch power on, which extends the 2000 hour constant battery life out to 10 years with typical use.

      I wish the HAMR part of this HAMR deltapoint combo had that too, then you could just pickup the rifle and go instead of having to click the knob when you enter the dark interior of a building.

      • Phil White

        noob,

        The red dot does have an auto on function when it senses movement. The HAMR does not and has to be manually set for intensity.

        I haven’t had a chance to get hands on with the Browe

  • Sian

    For the money I’d probably want to go with the Kruger DTS Gen2 instead, and get a variable 2-8×40 scope and a really slick integrated reflex mode.

    • Phil White

      Sian,

      I haven’t had a chance to take a good look at the Kruger but on paper it looks fine. I know a person who has one and it’s held up well for him over the almost two years he’s owned it.

  • Jeff M

    Fifteen hundred dollas!!!!??? Yeah I’ll go trijicon for that price. I was really hoping it’d be in the $700-$800 range.

    • Phil White

      Jeff,

      I know it’s an expensive scope Jeff but it is a very good one. The ACOG’s have gone up a lot in the last year and are now very close to the same price and more with the RMR red dot.

    • Phil White

      Jeff,

      Jeff if you mean the ACOG the prices are very close together compared with the Leupold. ACOGs have really gone up in price.When I bought my TA-33 two years ago it was $800 without a red dot, now they are right at $1100 most places.Add the RMR to the ACOG and they actually cost more. If you look hard you might find some old new stock for less.

  • W

    yes, i get it. its expensive.

    you cannot expect a optic of this quality to be under 1000 bucks. you do realize the highly technical labor and precision engineering that these tools of war require right?

    • Phil White

      W,

      It takes a heck of a lot of money to develop and make scopes like these.The glass alone makes up a huge amount of the cost. If you want any scope to hold up under hard use it will be expensive.

      I don’t enjoy spending a ton of money on a scope but if I want a scope that will last through years of real world use I won’t go cheap.

      Thanks W

      • W

        I agree 100%.

        I just get bent out of shape over accusations of “price gouging” when it comes to high quality optics such as these…which in fact have TWO optical sights in one package.

        • Phil White

          W,

          I know people don’t like high prices (I don’t either) but the difference between a so-so optic and a superior scope isn’t something you can see as far as the internal mechanism and glass. Of course you can immediately see the difference when you look through one. It just doesn’t seem to make as much of an impression as you would think.

          I’ve tested so many optics I’ve lost count. I’ve seen the inside of cheaper ones and ones like this Leupold and it’s very obvious then.Just one example is the very inexpensive types have the glass glued in place so it’s no wonder lens come loose and the scope is trashed.In fact I just had a $100 red dot scope break. I used my dremel and opened it up. The glass was glued in with some of the electronic wiring not even secured just hanging inside. The small unit containing the small red dot diode which was also loose but still in place for the most part.

          You’re right on the price of two units in one. They cover a much larger area of use without buying two scopes. Of course you don’t have to carry around that extra sight either.

          A good basic explaination of the various sight types can be found here Sight Type

    • Nicks87

      Im waiting for Leupold to make a budget reflex sight under the Redfield name brand. ;)

      Call me cheap but I’d rather spend my money on ammo. The most expensive optics in the world wont make a difference if you cant afford to practice with them and spying on your neighbors doesnt count.

      • Phil White

        Nicks87,

        Hey guy—– yes and plenty of practice can save your life. In reality a lot of people can afford a top of the line scope and many can’t. In an ideal world a person could practice as much as they wanted and afford excellent optics and guns (like a 1911)(sorry man I had to).
        All of us have to make decisions based on finances so we try to balance things out for the best outcome.

          I’m going to use your comment to let everyone know I got in late on answering others but I was gone all day. When Steve told me it was posted I got home as soon as possible to answer everyone.
  • Nicks87

    I can see the height over bore being a problem for using the delta point. I very much prefer mounting a reflex sight on a 45 degree offset as opposed to piggy back.

    I guess it boils down to personnal preference but there are many options out there that dont break the bank. Most people buy leupold just for the name but I’ve used Nikons that look just as good and for the money the german made optics are better yet.

    • Mark

      You come to a lot of conclusions having zero experience with this scope.

      • Nicks87

        This isnt the only optic that offers a piggy back set-up, tough guy.

        More than a few scope mounts have rails machined on to them so your reflex sight can sit on top.

        The price alone for what it offers turned me away.

  • RickH

    Cheap optics are just cheap, good optics are pricey, great optics are expensive, and I have no problem with that. But for the money I’d just buy another high quality AR.

    • Phil White

      RickH,

      I was using a cheaper red dot this last week on a shotgun. I pulled the trigger and the intensity adjustment knob went flying off the scope. I’ll never buy another inexpensive scope again even if is for knock around use!

    • W

      indeed. and you could always just stick to irons…i mean what did we do before the age of the red dot optic?

      • Nicks87

        Iron sights work just fine for me.

        Red dots are nice but none of them are 100% reliable.

        Anything that uses electronics or delicate internal hardware is susceptable to failure.

        • Phil White

          Nicks87,

          Like the red dot I mentioned on the shotgun last week that destructed. At some time any electronic sight will fail. It may be a long time but eventually it will. That and you need to make sure you have extra batteries.

      • Phil White

        W,

        Very true and we all really need to maintain our proficiency with iron sights! I do make it a point to use my BUIS almost every trip to the range. Folks need to check them now and then anyway to ensure they are still zeroed.

  • Michael

    When are we going to see digital scopes?

  • http://www.SinistralRifleman.com Russell Phagan
    • Phil White

      Russell,

      At least you save $400 by not buying the Delta :-) I like the Delta OK but much prefer using the HAMR!

    • Phil White

      Russell,
      I like the looks of that red dot. It seems to take up less space than the Delta.

  • Partizan1942

    I will never get western people. Some of them buy battle mugs and bulletproof iphones and others are bitching about the relatively high price of a higher end but perfectly functional scope.

    • Phil White

      Partizan1942,

      If you want a quality anything you have to pay the price. Nothing new about it it’s always been that way. I assume prices in Hungary are even higher?