Arken LH 6 LPVO

Okay, I bought this low priced scope and mount a couple of weeks ago. I received it, got it home, then mounted to a spare AR upper with a 16” barrel. I then took it to my shooting range and had a heck of a time getting this scope on target at 100 yards even though I was absolutely zeroed at 25 yards. Was very frustrating to say the least. So I went back home and reread the instruction manual and was able to chat with Arken’s customer service which I believe was AI. Here was my problem-

See where my little red arrow is pointing too? Butting the rings up against the turret housing which is almost SOP for other LPVO’s is a big NO-NO. Why this is not highlighted in the instruction manual is any body’s guess. So I remounted it with the rings well away from the turret housing, then went back to the range last week, re-zeroed at 25 yards and was spot on target at 100 yards but was called away for personal business and was not able to do a comprehensive ladder test to check to see if the elevation adjustments were spot on at 5-MOA adjustments. Believe me, I was very close to sending this back to Amazon and getting a refund, but after today’s successful ladder test, I will be keeping it and will do a comprehensive review for a LPVO that cost $169 and it’s mount that cost $74.

 

Here are some pictures of unboxing, and mounting the scope,


The rings were dead on so no lapping was required, a testament to modern day machining technology.
The scope is a1-6x24 with a 30mm main tube.



The reticle has taken some getting used to especially the alien hieroglyphics which was supposedly designed by a former SEAL/sniper from Team 1. What I have had learned from reading the manual,ARKEN OPTICS LH-6 Product Manual this reticle can be used with either 5.56 or 7.62 with some fine tuning with the elevation and windage turrets in combination with the BDC.
The reticle is a second focal plane which mean the reticle stay the same size regardless of the scopes magnification.
While on the range, the glass was very clear and smooth, but my Trijicon ACOG still rules for optical clarity.
Now then, back to the reticle, it is illuminated by a battery which turns some fellow Monkeys here off because of supposed dependence on technology on the battlefield. Well, without modern technology, you will simply not survive today’s battlefield regardless of what type of battlefield you are on. How many deaths on both sides of the Russo-Ukraine conflict were and are happening because of cheap drones made of cardboard. Besides your car has a battery, yet do you depend on it daily? How many people are kept alive because of implanted pacemakers and defibrillators, which are powered by batteries. If this still turns you off, then please stop reading this thread and go read elsewhere on this forum with out derailing this thread.
I am only doing this for those that simply cannot afford the modern LPVO’s on the market that cost thousands of dollars.

 

So I assume the numbers 4,5,6 are 400, 500, 600 yards. Pretty strange reticle indeed. Have to wonder at my age if I would even remember what those symbols mean. At least the BDC would be useful if you could figure out where the 300 yard aim point is.

Maybe it's close enough to the 200 yd zero. Don't recall what the drop from 200 - 300 yards is for a 55-60 grainer right off the bat.

Still looks interesting.

Your problem (saw your red arrow) was the fact that the ring was clamped near the reticle, I assume.

 

I’d guess the horizontal lines are shoulder width at the different ranges. Vertical lines are maybe height to the shoulder?

 

Yes, there is a lot about this reticle that is confusing, one being no aim point for 300 yards.
The rings cannot be butted up against the turret body.

 

Will post about the ladder test tomorrow. Was only able to test at 50 yards and not at 100, but the elevation turret was dead on for using plain Jane 55gr M193 ammo.

 

Well, the price is definitely right and if it holds up after getting bounced around a bit then I would say you got a deal. Personally, I have never heard of such a thing as not butting rings against the turret body and the only thing I can think of is that the tightening of the rings must throw it off...which is why I say, after you bounce it around a bit, see if it still holds zero. Good job for figuring this out. I wouldn't have and it amazes me they didn't specifically state this as for sure they will get a lot of returns.

 

To me the reticle is very similar to the ACSS reticle I use on my prismatics. Basically it auto ranges for you very quickly and isn't hard to get used to.

Does the red illuminated portion appear as black when the power it turned off?

First focal plane would be nice, but then $$$, weight, complexity...

 

The one thing very clear in the mounting directions and they are even stamped on the rings is do not exceed 18 inch-pounds of torque on the ring screws, I kept the torque numbers at 15 inch-pounds.

 

This is something else I just came across with Google AI.

 

Here are the results of the Elevation ladder test. This was done at 50 yards due to the 100 yard lane being occupied. I was able to just test 0 MOA, 5 MOA, 10 MOA, and 15 MOA.
Now how I performed this test was using Federal 55gr. fmj ammo and starting at 0 MOA, I would fire just one round, add 5 MOA, fire one round, go to 10MOA, fire one round, then to 15 MOA, fire one round, then set the elevation knob back to 0 then repeat till I had shot five rounds at each setting.

 

Here is how I set everything up for the test.

 

I've always instinctively avoided doing that because any junction like that will be mechanically weaker than other parts of the tube, so it's best to choose a spot that allows stresses to dissipate instead to pushing against a stronger structure. My dad was a master fabricator so we were taught to look at things as though we had x-ray vision. This is the first I've heard of an issue, though.

 

Yeah, I noticed that immediately also. I guess there is no patent on it because this one is damn near an exact copy or there is just enough difference to keep them out of patent trouble. BTW I really like the ACSS reticle and prefer it over anything else.

 

Vortex and a few others have developed ACSS like reticles that are just enough different to avoid legalities as well, but IMO PA's are still the best.

 

I was going to say , look up online for the instructions,, that's something all these people are doing these days ,, they're saving money by not printing to instruction manuals,,I called about and auto OBD scanner the other day,, the lady said go online and I could print it off. All that does is , piss me off .

 

I prefer to download them myself. Everything goes on the NAS and when the font is so small you need a microscope it's easy to enlarge.