View Full Version : Is the 4x ACOG dead?
Eurodriver
02-13-19, 20:39
Disclaimer: I am a huge TA31 ACOG fan. I've bought no fewer than 3 of them. See here (https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?166040-ACOG-TA31RCO-M4) and here (https://www.m4carbine.net/archive/index.php/t-162126.html).
I don't really like it anymore, for reasons posted in one of the links above years ago...
...the eye relief is garbage. You have to be perfectly in the eye box for proper eye relief, and this requires adjusting the stock all the time. Standing? Needs to be shorter. At the bench? Needs to be longer. Prone? Shorter. Armor? Shorter. Kneeling? Longer. Total garbage and if Trijicon could fix the TA31 series by giving it more generous eye relief they would still have a real winner...sort of.
You still suffer from wash out if in a dark area and sighting into a bright area. Take an ACOG outside with you at night and aim it inside a house with blinds open (preferably your own, and not attached to a rifle). You'll notice the reticle is now completely black and difficult to pick up.
Weight? Come on bro, the TA31RCOM4 is what? 1lb? On a fixed 4x optic? That's ridiculous. The only thing more ridiculous than the weight is the cost. $1500 can buy you three used Aimpoint T1s...
I've got a new AR that needs an optic and I think it's just too slow within 50 yards to be practical on a rifle outside of the Kajakai Dam. The ACOG is older than I am. On the flipside, I like its simplicity and ruggedness and there's yet to be a serious challenger in a fixed 4x optic. The fixed 4x is annoying up close, but an Aimpoint is annoying beyond 300 yards. What's a guy to do?
Just thinking out loud, I guess...
Unfortunately, it is still alive and well. I think with the more modern LPVO offerings they are all but obsolete, but the military still loves to issue them, and they just were selected as the new optic for the M4A1 for USAF Security Forces.
I have become a huge fan of 1-6 and 1-8x optics with either offset irons or offset RDS. It gives the best of both worlds for fast, CQB style shooting as well as the magnification to ID and engage targets at moderate distances to about 600 yards on a 5.56 platform. Most of my newer ARs all wear LPVOs of soe variety, and while I do still have and heavily use the Aimpoint RDS, I have become just as fast and accurate with the LPVO, so it has no downsides for me.
The 3.5x is far more forgiving.
I grew up on pre-fiber optic ACOGs, and they were awesome back then. Dudes essentially had a choice between ACOG’s and Comp M’s for their M4’s and Mk46’s. Very durable, and had the stubby iron sights on top in case of failure. Most guys were reasonably fast with them even up close. The reticle is one of my favorites, because the hash marks represent 18” width at the distance they are marked for, so range estimation and sight picture are a single operation.
I always liked the lack of a need for batteries, because when the Comp M was a little newer, Unit SOP had you changing batteries rather frequently. I also broke some early Comp M’s on machine guns, so it took years to convince me that battery powered things can be trusted. That’s right, dear users of M4c, at one time I did not trust Aimpoints. Speaking of broken optics, the one thing that I always hated was worn out adjustment knobs on ACOGs. Very frustrating zero experience.
When the Dr red dot was a thing, the utility of the ACOG went up exponentially. And still pretty light for a rugged, military optic.
Note that every positive thing I have said so far is centered on military use. For a civilian? “Wait, you want how many hard earned dollars for an ancient fixed 4x that I nearly have to touch my eyeball to? No, thanks.”
Even for SOF, low power variables are a better option at this point. And for my personal weapons, if I’m going to spend that much, it will be a modern variable power.
For regular Joes, issued a beater gun that they won’t have enough respect for, perhaps the ACOG is still a good option due to its simplicity and ruggedness.
Just my rambling 2 cents on the ACOG’s proper place.
mebiuspower
02-14-19, 07:55
If ACOGs are dead then red dots are dead first since it's an even older tech...
The 3.5x is far more forgiving.. I have one 4X and two 3.5X and very much prefer the 3.5X for eye relief reasons alone. I too think the LPVO are putting a beatdown to the ACOG line. I have a Burris 1-8 with RDS on the cant which is pretty nice. I really like the NXS 1-8 and is more than an ACOG but not by a huge margin. I even bought some cheap holiday sale 1-6 from primary arms that dont suck for plinking.
I really liked my 4X ACOG with RDS on top even though many feel is way too much offset, but makes hitting center shots inside 50 yards a breeze. I regret pulling it and selling it.
PB
I've never been inconvenienced by any eye relief issues on any COG I've ever shot. ACOG has no place inside a house, so any of those complaints make no sense to me. Durability is critical to me. I've knocked my aimpoint out of zero before, and LGBTQPVOS are too fragile for serious use.... with the possible exception of this little nightforce that Pappabear is running.
Acogs are half the weight of almost all lpvo if thats a consideration.
Until LPVO, (er, LGBTQPVOS lol markm) prove to be as durable as an ACOG, ACOGs will remains in the fight. I don’t much care for the eye relief on my TA31 but it will continue to be an option for me to consider along with my other RDS and LPVO.
I do like my two Vortex LPVO (Razor and PST GEN2 1x6). Learning to shoot them great but I’m not loving the weight.
Always a trade off.
I've never been inconvenienced by any eye relief issues on any COG I've ever shot. ACOG has no place inside a house, so any of those complaints make no sense to me. Durability is critical to me. I've knocked my aimpoint out of zero before, and LGBTQPVOS are too fragile for serious use.... with the possible exception of this little nightforce that Pappabear is running.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It is to me.
A 4x ACOG was my first site purchased in 2008. I had always thought they were so cool and had always wanted one. I don't use it much now, it sits on a rifle I don't really shoot. I still own it because its cool and a piece of history. I like it for its retro qualities.
The Aimpoint T1 came out and I picked one up. It was cool, but through owning I found I had astigmatism. I also missed the magnification.
I eventually picked up a Nightforce nxs 1-4x24. This was the ticket. I've been an all real 1x-4,6,8x guy since then. It is to me truly best of both worlds, and added bonus of no astigmatism issue.
I have a couple Leupold VX6 1-6, they are light with great glass.
I am waiting for a Trijicon 1-8 to be delivered today. Its going to be pig heavy, but I want to get into a 1-8 and found a deal on it.
I really want Nightforce NX8 but with mixed reviews I'm holding off for now due to price. I'm going try the trijicon here a little to see if I find 8x that much more useful than 6x
Always a trade off.
Definitely. When you get out to 600-800 yards, the Variable is nice... but then you're wanting to reach for a 3.5-15 full size scope.
The LVPO doesn't really fill any niche well FOR ME personally. RDS/Irons, then the COG, then the NSX covers everything form Zero to 1000 plus. Any time I'm shooting a variable, it's spun all the way up anyway. Just thinking out loud... sorry. :p
. I have one 4X and two 3.5X and very much prefer the 3.5X for eye relief reasons alone. I too think the LPVO are putting a beatdown to the ACOG line. I have a Burris 1-8 with RDS on the cant which is pretty nice. I really like the NXS 1-8 and is more than an ACOG but not by a huge margin. I even bought some cheap holiday sale 1-6 from primary arms that dont suck for plinking.
I really liked my 4X ACOG with RDS on top even though many feel is way too much offset, but makes hitting center shots inside 50 yards a breeze. I regret pulling it and selling it.
PB
Note that you can get the same FOV as the 3.5x ACOG by moving your eye back from a 4x ACOG... :)
The 4x ACOGs trade eye relief for a wide FOV.
I really like using a 4x ACOG with an offset RDS. Very fast transitions, not too heavy. The only thing I wouldn't do is put a 4x ACOG on an AR308 or any other firearm with enough recoil to put an ACOG onto your eyepro...
55977
Cav Scouts at Benning get trained with CompM4s, units get issued ACOGs chevron style whatever that model is. My kid won't care, and might get my NX8 if he wants it, we'll see...
SeriousStudent
02-14-19, 20:43
and LGBTQPVOS are too fragile for serious use.... with the possible exception of this little nightforce that Pappabear is running.
Hey, what your optics do in the privacy of your gun safe is your business.......
MountainRaven
02-14-19, 20:48
LPVOs have taught me the value of magnification. But the weight is ridiculous - they turn a lightweight handy rifle into a pig by themselves (to say nothing of the rings).
Considering the recent "fad" for extremely high-mounted RDSs, I don't see a piggy-backed RDS as a problem on either an ACOG or an LPVO.
As someone for whom weight is a consideration, I don't think the ACOG is obsolete, yet, especially in conjunction with an RDS.
Haven't used them extensively but I buy LPVOs for my rifles needing magnification.
Just bought an NX8 a couple of weeks ago and through 2 range sessions and 250 rounds, I like it A LOT.
Hey, what your optics do in the privacy of your gun safe is your business.......
Hey now that shit was funny!! Well done.
BrigandTwoFour
02-15-19, 10:29
I actually just contemplated this a bit regarding my LED 3.5x ACOG.
The short answer for me is that the low lower fixed magnification optic still holds a valuable place on a field rifle and weight is a premium. The ACOG was never meant for CQB, the purview of RDS optics. It’s a field optic meant for 50-300 meters that helps with target identification. It does that while staying relatively light weight.
LPVO is the king of versatility, but there’s a weight penalty.
Whichever one is more important to you is how you’ll end up making this decision.
Doc Safari
02-15-19, 15:07
The only ACOG I've ever been able to like is the TA33 3x30 one. I really wanted to actually love it and not simply like it, but I just can't. The magnification is a little too much for shooting within say 50 yards. I think the reticle is a little too "busy" although I get it that you have to have that for range estimation and longer range shooting.
For a non-powered sight I prefer the 1x Meprolight M21 with triangle reticle, but ultimately my "druthers" have gravitated back to a miniature red dot.
I just like the crisp, small, non-busy reticle and the lighter weight of the optic.
I email Trijicon every few months telling them they need to make a fiber optic/Tritium red dot with unlimited eye relief in 1x the size of an MRO or Aimpoint T1. We'll see if I eventually get it.
thegreyman
02-15-19, 15:30
The fact that we have the freedom to use a variety of firearms that can host a variety of optics makes me very happy (and poor).
Eurodriver
02-24-19, 06:25
Ok. I think I spoke a little too soon, and because I was trying to justify the purchase of a LPVO despite having a few ACOGs in the safe without homes.
I think the ACOG really shines as an outdoor general purpose optic. I took it from 50 to 625 and it blew away the Aimpoints. The passing of time has been kind to the acog thanks to it’s clear glass and wide FOV. I also like the integrated mount and compact size. Weight is not bad compared to most LPVOs either when factoring in an additional mount and even the eye relied isn’t terrible unless you are in an unconventional shooting position.
I take it all back and continue to love the cog. I will keep using them for all rifles that won’t be what is first up to be grabbed during a home invasion.
Euro, what about the wash out problem you mentioned in the first post? Not so bad compared to the pluses, or just don’t encounter that situation much?
Eurodriver
02-24-19, 10:20
Euro, what about the wash out problem you mentioned in the first post? Not so bad compared to the pluses, or just don’t encounter that situation much?
Yeah I’ve just never encountered a situation in America where I’ve been outside in the dark and needed to shoot someone with an AR15 while they were inside a well lit building lol
To be frank you could have ended that thought at “AR15” and it would have been just as accurate.
Hammer_Man
02-24-19, 10:46
My TA31 is my least favorite optic. That being said, I know it will survive the next zombie apocalypse so I'm not in a hurry to get rid of it. Last week I did come very close to bringing home a brand new Steiner T5x 1-5. The pluses (glass clarity, reticle, true 1x red dot capability, value for money) outweighed the minuses (weight), so I think a low power scope is definitely in my future.
The 3.5x is far more forgiving.
There is also a 3.2x version I saw and looked at just last week at my local fun store.
Mount an RMR stop it and maintain your cheek weld and roll the carbine to place the red dot into your opposite eye.
Expensive once you’re done, however.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
. I have one 4X and two 3.5X and very much prefer the 3.5X for eye relief reasons alone. I too think the LPVO are putting a beatdown to the ACOG line. I have a Burris 1-8 with RDS on the cant which is pretty nice. I really like the NXS 1-8 and is more than an ACOG but not by a huge margin. I even bought some cheap holiday sale 1-6 from primary arms that dont suck for plinking.
I really liked my 4X ACOG with RDS on top even though many feel is way too much offset, but makes hitting center shots inside 50 yards a breeze. I regret pulling it and selling it.
PB
Just roll the carbine and place the RMR into your opposite/non-dominant eye. Keep your cheek weld.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ACOGs are 95% dead, they were good while they lasted but it’s time to move on.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My 19D kid just took my TA01NSN. The infantry guy he's training with sights down the rifle/handguard while room clearing so he wasn't concerned with 4x and my son doesn't care for the chevron reticle. We'll see how that works out...
I think they are dead mainly die to the eye relief. I can't imagine a scenario where a 3.5x ACOG wouldn't be better. The FOV is still big, and the eye relief is so much better.
I also have a TR-24 with the green triangle, and while it lacks ranging capability, is amazingly capable as a CQB optic despite also having magnification for further out. The eyebox is HUGE and I have run CQB drills with it and it is just as fast as a red-dot.
vicious_cb
03-21-19, 18:03
ACOGs are obsolescent not obsolete. This isnt hard to figure out, put both on the clock and see what shakes out. Just looking back at my objective data from the late 2000's early 2010's, I came to some conclusions. Even the early LPVOs like the accupoint outperformed even the most forgiving ACOG, the TA11, in transition fire variable distance shooting from 7-300 yards. Also the TA31 was absolute dog shit for anything but static position shooting. Accupoint > TA11 > TA33 > TA31 in terms of speed at all ranges. With the new gen LVPOs I bet the disparity is even bigger.
In case you didnt know the difference between obsolescent and obsolete.
"Obsolescence is the state of being which occurs when an object, service, or practice is no longer wanted even though it may still be in good working order. Obsolescence frequently occurs because a replacement has become available that has, in sum, more advantages compared to the disadvantages. obsolescence is typically preceded by a gradual decline in popularity.
Obsolete refers to something that is already disused or discarded, or antiquated."
The only ACOG I've ever been able to like is the TA33 3x30 one. I really wanted to actually love it and not simply like it, but I just can't. The magnification is a little too much for shooting within say 50 yards. I think the reticle is a little too "busy" although I get it that you have to have that for range estimation and longer range shooting.
For a non-powered sight I prefer the 1x Meprolight M21 with triangle reticle, but ultimately my "druthers" have gravitated back to a miniature red dot.
I just like the crisp, small, non-busy reticle and the lighter weight of the optic.
I email Trijicon every few months telling them they need to make a fiber optic/Tritium red dot with unlimited eye relief in 1x the size of an MRO or Aimpoint T1. We'll see if I eventually get it.
They tried it, it was called the Tripower and it sucked ass. Im sure you can find one on the used market if you looked hard enough.
http://www.trijicon.com/na_en/assets/image/TriPower.jpg
Wondering:
I bought a TAO1 after my first rifle class circa late 1990s. Never got any use for it as all the distances we shot were under 50 yards.
The illumination is fading, the sight picture is crisp.
Any thoughts on mounting it on a SW-22 and working on learning to shoot precision?
I still love me some acog. I prefer them to LPVO.
Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk
The ACOG can be viewed as soundly outclassed by LPVOs for combat arms specialties. Perhaps an argument can be made that it will remain a good choice as a general purpose optic for non combat arms types. Simplicity, ruggedness, ease of training, and limited CQB requirements.
Doc Safari
03-22-19, 09:01
They tried it, it was called the Tripower and it sucked ass.
I'm thinking more like a solar powered Holosun, except it would be Trijicon quality powered by fiber optics and tritium. I still say it's doable. If Meprolight can make something the size of an Eotech with fiber optic and tritium, surely the engineers at Trijicon can make something the size of an MRO in that flavor. It can be done.
I am from Generation Iron Sights, and know < 0 about optics, to include but not limited to, ACOGs.
Until I read this thread I thought “I need to get with the times and get up to speed on ACOGs,” but now I am reminded (and not for the first time,) of how little I know/need to learn.
Excellent thread, OP.
Any thoughts on this thing? Fairly new to the market:
https://www.crimsontrace.com/01-8430
Dr. Bullseye
03-23-19, 17:19
I am from Generation Iron Sights, and know < 0 about optics, to include but not limited to, ACOGs.
Until I read this thread I thought “I need to get with the times and get up to speed on ACOGs,” but now I am reminded (and not for the first time,) of how little I know/need to learn.
Excellent thread, OP.
Watch this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sunE2XsJVVA
Maybe irons are enough.
Eurodriver
03-23-19, 20:54
The ACOG can be viewed as soundly outclassed by LPVOs for combat arms specialties. Perhaps an argument can be made that it will remain a good choice as a general purpose optic for non combat arms types. Simplicity, ruggedness, ease of training, and limited CQB requirements.
I agree with this, but not at a $1,100+ price point.
I agree with this, but not at a $1,100+ price point.
The price tag is the reason I've never picked one up. I'd love to have one.
I’ve had TA01, TA31, TA44, Browe BCO and several LPVOs. I still have the LPVOs and the Browe.
I can not understand why the BCO is not more popular, as the automatic reticle illumination works very well. The only time I need to manually adjust it is when I’m shooting in very low light - I prefer one or two steps dimmer setting. During daytime the reticle is so bright that it allows taking fast CQB range shots without having a proper sight picture: I can have longer than optimal eye relief and slightly miss the eyebox, which radically reduces the FOV, but I can still see the bright reticle and use it like I’d be using a red dot.
Back in the 80's, some of the better high power shooters would be shooting 12" groups at 600 yds with iron sights.
Back in the 80's, some of the better high power shooters would be shooting 12" groups at 600 yds with iron sights.
With rack grade rifles?
There may still be a place for ACOG's. I have an old TA01NSN that had dead tritium for about 5-6 years. I finally sent it back to Trijicon for new gas. I sort of fell back in like with it after that. I have it mounted to an old 6920. It is really good at dusk or lower light situations. But it fills the roll of a back up, to a backup, to a back up. I have been using LPVO's for a few years and the ACOG just does not hold a candle to one of my Kahles K16i LPVO's.
I used a personal ACOG through two infantry deployments that included engagements from 50-400m and room clearing. It’s a fantastic optic (as in still is), with durability and ease of use for range estimation and bullet drop holds that hadn’t been implemented so elegantly before. It also wasn’t that bad for the CQB distances. You could easily engage targets with both eyes open. It wasn’t quite as fast as an Aimpoint or Eotech, but it worked fine. I also never had any eye relief issues in combat, but it could be improved. All that said, there is better out there. LPVOs offer nice flexibility and also have great, easily useable reticles now for normal combat shooters. ACSS, Leupold Mk6, Nightforce ATACR, all improvements to the innovative ACOG reticles. And the LPVOs are getting more durable too. If I were about to deploy again, I’d be looking to buy the Mk6 or ATACR(I don’t care if I might get issued it. I like to keep the memories).
The ACOG is still worthwhile though, for certain roles. For the military, its simplicity, functionality, and durability make it fantastic for general use in conventional units. Though, I hope they switch to the ACSS reticle version. For civilian use, I’m not sure I see much purpose anymore. As a power-grid is destroyed and society collapses scope? Sure, get the ACSS version and enjoy the lightweight, durable functionality. But normal uses, nope. Hunters are often going to want to make windage/elevation adjustments on the fly. The ACOG isn’t repeatable enough with adjustments. It’s meant to be a set it and forget it scope. I don’t think I need to mention why there are better options for a home defense gun.
Back in the 80's, some of the better high power shooters would be shooting 12" groups at 600 yds with iron sights.
And? Until the recent optics inclusion, the “better” high power/service rifle shooters get most of their shots in the 6” X with ironsights. And with the inclusion of optics, scores are going up, across the board.
thegreyman
03-30-19, 15:48
For a 5.56, I think a Trijicon with ACSS is a wonder to behold; even grandma can make some great shots at many different ranges. People buy detachable mounts and never use them. Want to clear a house, use a red dot. Want to cover the perimeter attach the Trijicon with ACSS. Aimpoint T 2 and Trijicon with ACSS are not heavy. both can be carried.
For long range, use a rifle designed for really long range, and start dialing.
Hammered_Pair
04-08-19, 17:27
Red dots in general are of no use to me, with an astigmatism the dot looks like a retarded starfish.
The Chevron in the ACOG isn't much better for me so I never wasted time or money on them.
My issued guns and now personal guns wear lvpo or mostly irons.
I got my hands on a couple of the different prototype optics that were tested from before the ACOG was adopted as the standard issue optic for the Marine Corps. One in particular was really nice, and I ended up buying it. It was made by US Optics, it was 4x fixed with great glass. it did not have a BDC though, it was just a chevron in a circle reticle with windage and elevation knobs. I still have it somewhere, it's never used but it's kind of neat. Anyway, where I was going with this was that that particular optic was finally nixed from the acquisition because the usage of windage and elevation adjustments on the fly was deemed too complicated for most rifleman. Now this is what I was told about the decision to adopt the ACOG, but I was told second or third hand, so I'm not swearing on the bible that's how it went. However, knowing the infantry, it's pretty easy to believe.
Brings me to my point; I'm not sure anything beats the ACOG's combination of usefulness, ruggedness, and simplicity. No batteries, adjustments only made through BDC, etc. I mean yeah, they weren't great at CQB, but sufficient training in the use of the BAC made the reticle usable up close. Only thing I ever really wished about the ACOG was that they had issues the cross reticle instead of the chevron, but it got the job done for certain. Newer hotness has come along in the form of the LPVO, which seems to offer much more in the way of capability, but as capability increases so too does complexity. Everything is a trade-off.
All that being said, I don't own one personally. I do have a Leupold HAMR, which is basically the same, but never really seemed to catch on as a popular optic. I love it though. I don't beat the shit out of it like my old issued ACOGs would take, but it's plenty durable, and the eye relief is more forgiving. I'm not sure it's better than my Razor Gen 2, but they both have upsides and downsides. I'd love the get an ACOG with the ACSS reticle they have now...as soon as they aren't $1300 or whatever they are these days.
Not dead to me.i have a ta31-hg(green horseshoe dot),and primary arms 1-6,4-14 and 1x cyclops (primary arms fanboy).
I use them all for different scenarios,I do have quite a bit of fun with the acog mounted on top of a 14.5” colt at 300ish yards,it’s probably my favorite.
Ta01nsn..
Love it
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
RKB Armory
04-12-19, 15:23
The 4x ACOG is not dead, yet. The compact size and low weight are still very appealing. However, the LPVO is taking over the spot once held by the ACOG. IMHO.
Just ran across this today - even though it’s mentioned here.
I’ve seen 4x and 1.5X with this reticle. I think I’d like the 1.5X to replace an M4 as it requires no batteries.
Maybe the 3.5x with this reticle would be even better as it has longer eye relief than the 4X and the reticle could be used a lot better than a 1.5X.
https://youtu.be/nkzmh-xP_ks
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Another video.
https://youtu.be/MVwQDUpPMAI
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And the 1.5X version.
https://youtu.be/dj62iiFs7ec
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.