Help me decide TA31RCO-M4 or T-1/Magnifier

[firefighter37]

I've used the search function, read all I can read but I still need help deciding. I have a 6920 with irons and I want to put some glass on it, and those are the two I have come up with. My SBR has a T-1 on it, so I am familiar, but I would like the 6920 to have the ability to get out a little farther, thats where the magnifier would come into play. I've always wanted an ACOG, but my reasons are "taboo" (because they are clear, durable, and plain look cool). What should I do. I know both optics are quality pieces, but I'm leaning towards the ACOG, if just because I don't have one. Talk me into, or out of it. Push me over the ledge. Thanks.

[SpankMonkey]

OP it really depends on what you want the optic to do. Since you already have the T1 I would get the Acog. The 3x mag is a good solution for guys who know the limitations of the T1.

The Acog gives you some legs. It's a great optic for longer targets, it also has its limitations, you just need to know what they are. Only way to find out is to buy one.

[firefighter37]

That is a lot of money to spend to find the limitations. I understand what you are saying, but I would like to see if those limitations should preclude me from buying it in the first place. Do you have any specific examples?

I read about the Bindon Aiming Concept, how well does that work?

Thank you

[firefighter37]

Also, when you put the magnifier behind the T-1, that effectively makes the 2 MOA original dot 6 MOA right?

[SpankMonkey]

That is a lot of money to spend to find the limitations. I understand what you are saying, but I would like to see if those limitations should preclude me from buying it in the first place. Do you have any specific examples?

I read about the Bindon Aiming Concept, how well does that work?

Thank you

The T1 is king from 1 to 300 yards. The Acog rocks from 100 out to 600 or further. BAC is great for making under 50 yard shots but is slower than the T1 but not by much. Using either system you give up some qualities. You just have to decide what you need it for.

Both my go to rifles sport T1s. I have a 3x which I switch back and worth. Most of my shooting is under 300yds. No reason to use a slope for longer ranges. I have owed many Acogs and used them for many years, but my needs require a RDS.

[SpankMonkey]

Also, when you put the magnifier behind the T-1, that effectively makes the 2 MOA original dot 6 MOA right?

Yes the dot is increased in size along with everything else in the picture. Your dot gets bigger but so does your target.

[VIP3R 237]

Why not look at a 1-4/6x? It will provide you the best of both worlds. On 1x with a illuminated reticule it acts like a rds, but you have the ability to enhance the magnification and reach out, not to mention more forgiving eye relief than the acogs. The only downside IMO is weight.

[firefighter37]

Why not look at a 1-4/6x? It will provide you the best of both worlds. On 1x with a illuminated reticule it acts like a rds, but you have the ability to enhance the magnification and reach out, not to mention more forgiving eye relief than the acogs. The only downside IMO is weight.

I considered an Elcan Specter, if thats what you are referring to, but its more than I'm willing to spend, unless its that much better. If so, I may be saving my pennies.

[VIP3R 237]

I considered an Elcan Specter, if thats what you are referring to, but its more than I'm willing to spend, unless its that much better. If so, I may be saving my pennies.

Well for half or less look at the Vortex Viper PST 1-4x, the Trijicon TR24 1-4x, or if you want to spend a little more look at the Leupold MK-6 1-6x or the Vortex Razor Gen2 1-6x. The Elcan's are incredible but not needed for most.

[Kain]

If you are wanting to stretch the rifle's legs an ACOG is a nice piece of glass and will do it easily. That said, would definitely consider looking at a 1-4X or 1-6X optic before going hard for the ACOG. Personally have a TA01NSN and I do love the optic, upgraded it with a Larue mount and have been very pleased.

[firefighter37]

Thinking back now, I guess I should have put in my original post that I have no intention of shooting anything past 300 yards. Does that change anything?

[jaxman7]

Thinking back now, I guess I should have put in my original post that I have no intention of shooting anything past 300 yards. Does that change anything?

Take VIP3R's advice. A Vortex PST, TR24, or Leupold VX-R Patrol may fit you well. All can be found for around $600. The TR24 may cost a little bit more.

-Jax

[firefighter37]

How do they compare in the durability department, to the ACOG?

[cop1211]

You only live once, if you've always wanted the ACOG go for it. It can be used at short distance just takes more training than an rds or 1-4 scope.
Worst that can happen is you decide it's not for you. ACOG'S usually have a pretty good resale value. You could then go for the magnifier-rds, or a variable.

[Txbadge]

I currently own a 1-4 PST which I have on a S&W MP15-22, two Gen II Vortex 1x6 which I have on my two 308s and an Aimpoint M4 on my SBR. I like all of these but recently have considered getting an ACOG 1x4 for my SBR as my eyes are aging. If I do this I may try the T1 on a DD 1o'clock mount up front so I have the best of both. While the PST 1x4 is good glass it is no where near the Gen II 1x6 in clearity or illumination. Just what I am thinking. Your milage may vary.

[Failure2Stop]

If you want a COG I recommend the TA33 and TA11 over the TA31 by a wide margin. The 11 is a bit heavier and larger, but gives a better eye box, more eye relief, and a wider field of view. The 33 is closer to 31 specs, but has better eye-relief and exit pupil with a better form-factor.

All that being said, I would rather spend the $ on a decent 1-4x/1-6x.


Also, when you put the magnifier behind the T-1, that effectively makes the 2 MOA original dot 6 MOA right?

No.
The magnifier will magnify everything in front of the lens in equal proportion. The 2 MOA dot will still be 2 MOA, but will also still demonstrate distortion if your eyes are susceptible. The real value in the magnifier is target detection, discrimination, and enhanced situation awareness of whatever is captured within the field of view.

[Boba Fett v2]

Thinking back now, I guess I should have put in my original post that I have no intention of shooting anything past 300 yards. Does that change anything?

I'm not a fan of flipping magnifiers. Just go with an unmagnified RDS or fixed power scope if those are the only choices you're considering. With that said I think your best option is a 1-4x or 1-6x offering. As someone already mentioned, the only real con is the weight, but unless you've got the upper body strength of a 5 year old the weight is negligble and you get used to it. You could also add 45 off-set irons for close targets while you're zoomed in for longer engagements. FWIW I went through a similar decision matrix when deciding on the best solution for my intended use and ultimately decided to get the GRSC 1-6x24 CRS, which adds just a little over 1 lbs to the total weight of the rifle. But the benefit of having such a versatile optic far outweighs any perceived negatives. You're not married to any optic, so you could always change it out later on. YMMV

[NCHornet]

I have the same model ACOG TA31 and the eye relief has never been a issue and to be honest think most of it is repeated hype from folks that have never looked through a ACOG TA31 let alone ever shot a rifle with one mounted. See if it works for you, I have used most of the most popular optics, Eotech, Aimpoint and ACOG and several models of each. While the EOTECH is still my personal choice for CQB, the ACOG is probably the best quality and the chevron reticle is by far the most useful once you truly understand how to use it. But buy what works for you, not me.

[Zane1844]

I have both of the T1 and the TA31F.

At 300 yards I can hit like a 10" plate no problem, with the T1. Better shooters than me can do it very easily with no misses I am sure.

The ACOG is great for shooting steel targets at range. I like it for 400+ If I was in combat maybe my choice would be different. I, however, love the ACOG so far, and am learning how to use it at close ranges.

Remember, shooting with both eyes open with the ACOG *may* result in POI shift, it does with me. Only when I have both eyes open and try not to see the magnification, just the cheveron.

[firefighter37]

I have the same model ACOG TA31 and the eye relief has never been a issue and to be honest think most of it is repeated hype from folks that have never looked through a ACOG TA31 let alone ever shot a rifle with one mounted. See if it works for you, I have used most of the most popular optics, Eotech, Aimpoint and ACOG and several models of each. While the EOTECH is still my personal choice for CQB, the ACOG is probably the best quality and the chevron reticle is by far the most useful once you truly understand how to use it. But buy what works for you, not me.

I have found for ME, that the eye relief of the TA31 is not a big deal, because I am a small framed person and I shoot with the stock fully collapsed or 1 click out. I can see how larger people would have the issue though. If I ran my gun the way Larry Vickers suggests (Stock fully extended) I may have the issue also.

I appreciate everyones suggestions so far. My plan is to get the TA31RCO-M4. Like others have said, if I absolutely can't stand it, I can always sell it and a take the loss as a life lesson. The main reason why I am going with the ACOG is because of durability. The moving parts in a 1-4x 1-6x make me nervous. I haven't heard many reports of broken ACOGs (not that they are not out there). I'm also sure that the variable power scopes that are produced by quality manufactures are durable, but one lesson i've learned in life is stuff with less moving parts are usually less likely to break.

Thanks again to everyone who offered insight. I am still open to opinions, right up until I hit "PAY"

[Failure2Stop]

I have found for ME, that the eye relief of the TA31 is not a big deal, because I am a small framed person and I shoot with the stock fully collapsed or 1 click out. I can see how larger people would have the issue though. If I ran my gun the way Larry Vickers suggests (Stock fully extended) I may have the issue also.

I appreciate everyones suggestions so far. My plan is to get the TA31RCO-M4. Like others have said, if I absolutely can't stand it, I can always sell it and a take the loss as a life lesson. The main reason why I am going with the ACOG is because of durability. The moving parts in a 1-4x 1-6x make me nervous. I haven't heard many reports of broken ACOGs (not that they are not out there). I'm also sure that the variable power scopes that are produced by quality manufactures are durable, but one lesson i've learned in life is stuff with less moving parts are usually less likely to break.

Thanks again to everyone who offered insight. I am still open to opinions, right up until I hit "PAY"

1- The issue with eye-relief is uniform for everyone, as the issue is not with shooting the gun in normal conditions, but rather in conditions that tend to be common in gunfights and competition. More generous eye-relief makes it easier to get the eye into a usable position behind the optic.

2- Stature has little to do with the stock position. Good buddy of mine is about 5'6" and runs his stock all the way extended, and is a beast of a shooter. I'm not criticizing your technique, but rather pointing out that stature is not the deciding factor, but rather is a conscious choice by you on how you believe the rifle should be shot.

3- Durability of the ACOG line is good, but that durability over a decent 1-4/1-6 is irrelevant unless you are throwing the carbine out of helicopters onto concrete. There are significant numbers of low-powered variables fielded in nasty places by dudes that expect their gear to work.

Buy what you want, my buddies at Trijicon will appreciate it, but there is a reason that pretty much everyone that does this for a living goes with either a T1, EXPS, or good 1-4x/1-6x.

[firefighter37]

1- The issue with eye-relief is uniform for everyone, as the issue is not with shooting the gun in normal conditions, but rather in conditions that tend to be common in gunfights and competition. More generous eye-relief makes it easier to get the eye into a usable position behind the optic.

2- Stature has little to do with the stock position. Good buddy of mine is about 5'6" and runs his stock all the way extended, and is a beast of a shooter. I'm not criticizing your technique, but rather pointing out that stature is not the deciding factor, but rather is a conscious choice by you on how you believe the rifle should be shot.

3- Durability of the ACOG line is good, but that durability over a decent 1-4/1-6 is irrelevant unless you are throwing the carbine out of helicopters onto concrete. There are significant numbers of low-powered variables fielded in nasty places by dudes that expect their gear to work.

Buy what you want, my buddies at Trijicon will appreciate it, but there is a reason that pretty much everyone that does this for a living goes with either a T1, EXPS, or good 1-4x/1-6x.

1. I agree, a longer eye relief makes an optic more practical.

2. I know that I should be running the stock further out, and am trying to change my technique. I can shoot it both ways, but I am more comfortable using it fully collapsed or one click out.

3. I got it. Stop yelling at me! If you were in my shoes, which Optic would you buy? Similarly priced to the ACOG. Specifically?

[Failure2Stop]

3. I got it. Stop yelling at me! If you were in my shoes, which Optic would you buy? Similarly priced to the ACOG. Specifically?

Haha, hopefully I am not coming across that poorly!

1-4 and 1-6 optics that I have been happy with:

SWFA 1-4x. Probably the best value on the market. The 1-6 seems like it is decent, but I don't have any time with it.

Bushnell SMRS 1-6.5. I have and like the BTR-2 in the 2nd focal plane.

US Optics 1-4 DFP. Very usable, however, they were discontinued. I am hoping that they come back into production, especially if they can do a 1-6x. There are still some floating around out there.

Trijicon TR24. Not my favorite reticle, but the triangle aiming point is usable for most GP 5.56 tasks. The new VCOG seems decent, but it hasn't been released and I have no time with it on an actual gun. I'm not a fan of BDC reticles, but I can get over myself if the other aspects of the optic are good enough.

Vortex 1-6 Razor HD Gen 2. Not a huge fan of the reticle, but a pretty neat package overall.

If you are willing to step up in price, the Leupold 1-6 is a great optic, though I will like it significantly more if the reticle is re-worked a little, and the Swarovski 1-6 Z6i with BRT is an outstanding (if not quite as robust as the Leupy) option.

I might have forgotten a few, but those will give you a good idea of price-point for capability.

[firefighter37]

Haha, hopefully I am not coming across that poorly!

1-4 and 1-6 optics that I have been happy with:

SWFA 1-4x. Probably the best value on the market. The 1-6 seems like it is decent, but I don't have any time with it.

Bushnell SMRS 1-6.5. I have and like the BTR-2 in the 2nd focal plane.

US Optics 1-4 DFP. Very usable, however, they were discontinued. I am hoping that they come back into production, especially if they can do a 1-6x. There are still some floating around out there.

Trijicon TR24. Not my favorite reticle, but the triangle aiming point is usable for most GP 5.56 tasks. The new VCOG seems decent, but it hasn't been released and I have no time with it on an actual gun. I'm not a fan of BDC reticles, but I can get over myself if the other aspects of the optic are good enough.

Vortex 1-6 Razor HD Gen 2. Not a huge fan of the reticle, but a pretty neat package overall.

If you are willing to step up in price, the Leupold 1-6 is a great optic, though I will like it significantly more if the reticle is re-worked a little, and the Swarovski 1-6 Z6i with BRT is an outstanding (if not quite as robust as the Leupy) option.

I might have forgotten a few, but those will give you a good idea of price-point for capability.

I appreciate your suggestions. I will definitely field them. I realize that you have probably forgotten more about ARs and the related fields than I will ever know. Thank you for your time.

[Failure2Stop]

I appreciate your suggestions. I will definitely field them. I realize that you have probably forgotten more about ARs and the related fields than I will ever know. Thank you for your time.

Just to add, if you really have a hankering for a COG, the TA11 and TA33 will give you "more" than the TA31 will, unless you absolutely must have 4x magnification (3.5x and 3x, respectively).

[Boba Fett v2]

I have found for ME, that the eye relief of the TA31 is not a big deal, because I am a small framed person and I shoot with the stock fully collapsed or 1 click out. I can see how larger people would have the issue though. If I ran my gun the way Larry Vickers suggests (Stock fully extended) I may have the issue also.

I appreciate everyones suggestions so far. My plan is to get the TA31RCO-M4. Like others have said, if I absolutely can't stand it, I can always sell it and a take the loss as a life lesson. The main reason why I am going with the ACOG is because of durability. The moving parts in a 1-4x 1-6x make me nervous. I haven't heard many reports of broken ACOGs (not that they are not out there). I'm also sure that the variable power scopes that are produced by quality manufactures are durable, but one lesson i've learned in life is stuff with less moving parts are usually less likely to break.

Thanks again to everyone who offered insight. I am still open to opinions, right up until I hit "PAY"

I've got no beef with the ACOG. I've used them during my overseas combat tours and pop-up targets on the qual range don't stand a chance when properly zeroed. They are durable and you can most certainly kill live and simulated targets effectively with it. If the ACOG was a hot chick I most certainly wouldn't kick her out of bed in the morning. Just throwing other options out there for you to consider. In the real-world I've used Eotechs, Aimpoints, Trijicon and just plain old A2 irons. Out of everything I've used the low power variable optic, along with a quality set of BUIS, encompasses everything you'll need for almost every imagineable scenario.

[firefighter37]

Just to add, if you really have a hankering for a COG, the TA11 and TA33 will give you "more" than the TA31 will, unless you absolutely must have 4x magnification (3.5x and 3x, respectively).

Now I think you are trying to toy with my emotions. Out of the 33 and the 11 which one would you go with.

[Failure2Stop]

Now I think you are trying to toy with my emotions. Out of the 33 and the 11 which one would you go with.

Ha, fair enough.

The 11 is the easiest to use, due to field of view and eye relief.
The 33 is the best size package.

If 1.9 inches of length and 2.36 oz were not deal-breakers, I would opt for the 11.
If I was going to piggy-back an RMR or other mini-red dot, I would go with the 33.

[Txbadge]

Just out of curiousity, Failure2Stop, since you mentioned the RMR, how do you rate that type of system? Would the RMR be a little better option than the T1 at one o'clock? Or, would the 1x6 with illumination be the best of all worlds. Just trying to make some good decisions myself. Thanks

[firefighter37]

Ok just to summarize this thread, I've gathered that the TA31 is junk.

[Boba Fett v2]

Just out of curiousity, Failure2Stop, since you mentioned the RMR, how do you rate that type of system? Would the RMR be a little better option than the T1 at one o'clock? Or, would the 1x6 with illumination be the best of all worlds. Just trying to make some good decisions myself. Thanks

I know you're not asking me, but personally, WRT an off-set RDS, I'd go with the RMR. Best of all worlds would probably be a 1-6x and an off-set micro RDS.

[Txbadge]

No, I appreciate the input. As I said before, I have two Gen II Vortex 1x6 on my 308s. They are built like tanks and I could get another for my SBR but had thought of an ACOG and RMR or T1 to compliment it. I am certainly very familar with the reticle and operation of the 1x6 was just thinking this may be overkill on the SBR, however, the SBR (along with suppessor) is my go everywhere carbine.

[Failure2Stop]

Just out of curiousity, Failure2Stop, since you mentioned the RMR, how do you rate that type of system? Would the RMR be a little better option than the T1 at one o'clock? Or, would the 1x6 with illumination be the best of all worlds. Just trying to make some good decisions myself. Thanks

Piggy-Back and Offset both have advantages and disadvantages.
Biggest issue with piggyback is the "chin-weld" requirement in standard positions. However, this con is a pro when it comes to alternate/expedient/improvised positions and when using equipment that can make cheek weld difficult (ridiculous body armor, face shields, gas-masks, etc).

The draw-back of the offset sights is that support-side use and close to ground positions (think roll-over prone, turkish bath-house and the like) are more difficult.

Whichever one you choose, you need to spend enough time doing presentations that habitually the gun snaps up with the dot on target, not the COG. Lots of people leave this out of their training regiment with the alternate line of sight optics and wind up trying to fight someone at close range through their COG, which sucks in conditions that frequently exist in actual violent confrontations.

[Txbadge]

Of course I understand what your saying and intend to spend much time training with the system I choose. I also understand both systems have pros and cons. I suppose, since I am not concerned any longer with gas masks etc, my question is more of which system would you prefer? I was thinking the T1 may be a more robust set up. There is the DD one o'clock mount for it as well as a LaRue offset mount for it. I am getting older and retired federal law enforcement and realize the red dot is only good for me as a close range option as I need a magnified option for 100 hundred out. The COG would be used in this role probably not past a couple of hundred yards. If I need distance I have other systems for that. I appreciate your thoughts and patience.

[Failure2Stop]

Of course I understand what your saying and intend to spend much time training with the system I choose. I also understand both systems have pros and cons. I suppose, since I am not concerned any longer with gas masks etc, my question is more of which system would you prefer? I was thinking the T1 may be a more robust set up. There is the DD one o'clock mount for it as well as a LaRue offset mount for it. I am getting older and retired federal law enforcement and realize the red dot is only good for me as a close range option as I need a magnified option for 100 hundred out. The COG would be used in this role probably not past a couple of hundred yards. If I need distance I have other systems for that. I appreciate your thoughts and patience.

For an SBR I'd probably prefer a T1 with a magnifier if a low-powered variable was out of the question.

Pretty much the only time that I recommend a piggy-backed or offset mini-red dot is when the user is issued the optic and they are stuck with what they are given.

[Txbadge]

I appreciate the input. Got it.

[cop1211]

I've talked to several Marine grunts who have served in Iraq, and Afghanistan and asked them about the 4x ACOG. They all said they were happy with it and didn't think it was a hinderence.

I asked them if they would rather have an Aimpoint or Eotech and they all said they would rather have the ACOG.

If they 4x ACOG has so many issues why after it being fielded for so long by the USMC-Army would they continue to buy them?

They've certainly had enough time to evaluate them in combat.

Why haven't they gone to Aimpoint-EOTECH , or a variable scope?

I've got 7 rifles and have been through more optics then I care to admit. Currently I have 6 Aimpoints and 1 ACOG TA31 RCO 150 G.

While I like the Aimpoints more for 50 and under, the ACOG doesn't present any issues at that distance.

And for anything over 75 yards I like the ACOG.

The choice of an optic is the most personal piece of gear you can purchase.

Just seems the ACOG 4x is getting slammed a little to hard.

Again your mileage my vary, and it takes more time to get proficient up close with the ACOG 4x it can be done with a little work.

Every optic has its pluses and minuses, just depends on what you want the optic to do for you and your requirements with the rifle.

Again for me and my use, if I had to grab one of my rifles it would be one with an Aimpoint, but if the only one available would be the one with the ACOG I would be fine with that.

[Failure2Stop]

I've talked to several Marine grunts who have served in Iraq, and Afghanistan and asked them about the 4x ACOG. They all said they were happy with it and didn't think it was a hinderence.

I asked them if they would rather have an Aimpoint or Eotech and they all said they would rather have the ACOG.

If they 4x ACOG has so many issues why after it being fielded for so long by the USMC-Army would they continue to buy them?

They've certainly had enough time to evaluate them in combat.

Why haven't they gone to Aimpoint-EOTECH , or a variable scope?

I've got 7 rifles and have been through more optics then I care to admit. Currently I have 6 Aimpoints and 1 ACOG TA31 RCO 150 G.

While I like the Aimpoints more for 50 and under, the ACOG doesn't present any issues at that distance.

And for anything over 75 yards I like the ACOG.

The choice of an optic is the most personal piece of gear you can purchase.

Just seems the ACOG 4x is getting slammed a little to hard.

Again your mileage my vary, and it takes more time to get proficient up close with the ACOG 4x it can be done with a little work.

Every optic has its pluses and minuses, just depends on what you want the optic to do for you and your requirements with the rifle.

Again for me and my use, if I had to grab one of my rifles it would be one with an Aimpoint, but if the only one available would be the one with the ACOG I would be fine with that.

I was one of those guys you are mentioning in the first sentence. I also trained a few thousand of their instructors and was one of the first USMC certified instructors through Trijicon.

Frankly, most dudes issued them have limited exposure to anything else, and most are using them as rifle-attached binos.

I could go on for some time on the topic, but it's all been said before and I don't want to come across as attacking you, so at this point, unless I am specifically addressed, I'm out.



Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.

[cop1211]

Hopefully my post didn't come across as argumentative .

Again just a question if the 4x ACOG wasn't viewed as a good optic for military use or there was wide spread dislike or wide spread call for a different optic why would they continue to purchase them ?
Why not the TA33 or TA11, a variable scope?

[NCHornet]

You see this same argument on all the forums, folks putting down this model for this one, and this color reticle for that one and on and on and on. Then the whole eye relief argument always comes up, and I am sorry but most of it is repeated hype they read on some other forum. I will admit the TA31 and a more limited eye relief than other models. But the truth is it doesn't pose a issue to many folks, especially if nobody tells them about it, lol!!!!! IIRC when I bought my TA31RCO a couple years ago the TA31 was their most popular model. That may have changed by now, I don't know, but I know there are countless out there mounted on rifles ready to go. Not everyone shoots NTCH, some prefer their stocks all the way closed, some all the way open and then you have those that are in between some where. There is no right or wrong, shoot the way it works best for you, let the others watch their Magpul DVD's and do their couch commando drills in the living room. Not claiming this is anyone who replied in this thread, just speaking in general here. The rest of us will be busy shooting our rifles. Let's not even get started on which color reticle is best, lol!!!! To each their own, that is why I normally don't recommend a particular optic over another. I will tell them what works for me, but my final recommendation is to always try your best to try the optic out prior to buying. Better yet, buy it on the EE and you should get a good enough deal where if you had to sell it you wouldn't be out much, if anything at all. Good Luck!!!

[Boba Fett v2]

I've talked to several Marine grunts who have served in Iraq, and Afghanistan and asked them about the 4x ACOG. They all said they were happy with it and didn't think it was a hinderence.

I asked them if they would rather have an Aimpoint or Eotech and they all said they would rather have the ACOG.

If they 4x ACOG has so many issues why after it being fielded for so long by the USMC-Army would they continue to buy them?

They've certainly had enough time to evaluate them in combat.

Why haven't they gone to Aimpoint-EOTECH , or a variable scope?

I've got 7 rifles and have been through more optics then I care to admit. Currently I have 6 Aimpoints and 1 ACOG TA31 RCO 150 G.

While I like the Aimpoints more for 50 and under, the ACOG doesn't present any issues at that distance.

And for anything over 75 yards I like the ACOG.

The choice of an optic is the most personal piece of gear you can purchase.

Just seems the ACOG 4x is getting slammed a little to hard.

Again your mileage my vary, and it takes more time to get proficient up close with the ACOG 4x it can be done with a little work.

Every optic has its pluses and minuses, just depends on what you want the optic to do for you and your requirements with the rifle.

Again for me and my use, if I had to grab one of my rifles it would be one with an Aimpoint, but if the only one available would be the one with the ACOG I would be fine with that.


Hopefully my post didn't come across as argumentative .

Again just a question if the 4x ACOG wasn't viewed as a good optic for military use or there was wide spread dislike or wide spread call for a different optic why would they continue to purchase them ?
Why not the TA33 or TA11, a variable scope?

What was it that Rumsfeld said? You go to war with what you have, not what you want... or something along those lines. With that said, I don't recall anyone ever asking for ACOGs, or even knew what it was for that matter, after our first tour in Iraq. One day they just showed up, and we gladly accepted them. The ACOG is a great service optic and has proven its worth in combat, but that doesn't necessarily mean that people can't have a passive attitude towards it. We received them, we trained with them and we got proficient with them, just like every other piece of equipment that's been fielded throughout history. Some love it. Some hate it. Some are impartial towards it. Most GPF units either have Aimpoints or ACOGs, and some Eotechs. Select special mission units have even more options to choose from. Bottom line is we train with what we're given and become proficient at it. Most of the younger Soldiers don't have the experience or knowledge to compare their issued equipment to anything else. Some are given the choice. Some don't have a choice. Either way a metric ass ton of tax payer money got spent procuring any of the mentioned optics. And regardless of positive, neutral or negative feedback from end-users, it's not a simple matter of saying "You know, we don't really like this. We want to try something else." to get things changed. It's a slow process. The military has always been slow to change. Back in the days it took years of testing and evaluation before any new system was fielded. It was just a damn slow process. Then there was the rapid fielding initiative, which helped get things into the hands of Soldiers much quicker. Units like the Asymmetric Warfare Group made great strides in identifying capability gaps and getting material and non-material solutions out to field quickly. I remember the days of being issued an M16A2 with just plain old iron sights. The Aimpoint RDSs were a godsend, Eotechs were great for CQB and the ACOGs gave us some extra reach with added accuracy. I'm just glad to see we at least have several options currently in service!