I am an avid shooter. 10yrs as a Corrections Deputy with the local Sheriffs Dept; Gunsmithing and shooting are two of my primary hobbies. I grew up in WY with an avid hunter/shooter as a father who started us very young.
I first mounted this AR536 on a FAL rifle, but was unable to get a full field of view due to the eye relief unless I held the rifle improperly against my shoulder in order to get my eye closer to the optic. This completely destroyed my stance and natural point of aim.
I then mounted it on an AR, but was unable to get a full field of view (FOV) until I removed the Magpul flip-up rear sight from the flat top so I could get the AR536 mounted back far enough. Even then, I could not get proper FOV without collapsing the stock at least half way or more to get my eye close enough.
On both the FAL and the AR, I could not get a full FOV unless my eye was off-center from behind the optic slightly. If I centered my eye behind the optic, there was a half-moon of black on the right side of the FOV. This made positioning the rifle even more awkward, again, further destroying my positioning and natural point of aim, making the rifle feel awkward in my hand and not allowing muscle memory to maintain proper accuracy.
I realize this optic is under $500, so it is inappropriate to compare it to a Leupold or Trijicon. But it is not anywhere near worth the $400 price tag that is on it. My $250 Millett DMS doesn't require that I destroy my natural point of aim to use it on either a FAL or an AR.
For $400 you should at least be able to purchase a usable optic that doesn't require you to destroy your stance and natural point of aim to even get a sight picture and full FOV.
Pros: Price, reticle
Cons: Eye relief,
This review was written in the old system and had content requirements that are different than reviews written today.