PDA

View Full Version : Thinking of getting an ACOG, interested in your thoughts



BushmasterFanBoy
07-26-07, 18:56
Right now I have two carbines, 14.5 with perm phantoms. One has an EoTech 552, and the other an Aimpoint Comp ML2 with 4 MOA dot. I don't have any experience using a magnified optic on a handy carbine like these, only on bolt action rifles. By having some extra money I started thinking about wasting it on an ACOG. Right now my range trips are reflex type drills anywhere from ten yards out to fifty, and then I throw in some rested shooting at targets at 200 yards.

I guess what I wanted to know from people who have used ACOGS and Aimpoints are your thoughts on both. All I have to compare them to are cheap Wal-Mart scopes and my Aimpoint and EoTech, that's it. Is the ACOG really that much slower than the Aimpoint and for shooting out to 200 yards, do I need the ACOG? I was wondering if for most situations would a person be better served with a red dot or an ACOG? Thanks for your thoughts!

Alpha Sierra
07-26-07, 19:09
If the object is hitting man-size targets at 200 yards in the vitals, a non-magnified optical sight will do the job nicely.

Hitting such target with irons at that distance is not that hard, and it's easier when you don't have to focus on the front sight.

If the bulk of the shooting is inside of 100, and occasional longer distances, Aimpoint is the answer.

Rmplstlskn
07-26-07, 19:26
The biggest plus for the ACOG, IMO and from what I have heard from those in the sandboxes, is TARGET IDENTIFICATION and OBSERVATION (when binos or spotters are not quickly available).

Also, the glass is top notch and they are extremely durable...

But for non-military/LEO, I think the ACOG has less going for it than other options you already have, as I doubt, at this present time, that we will have much need for long distance target identification before the trigger is pulled. Legally, our trigger pulls are going to be much closer...

But I'm never giving up my ACOG TA11-D... It is now nestled snuggly on top of my FAL Carbine. I'd like a TA55 but I will admit they look a bit goofy...

Rmpl

edwin907
07-26-07, 22:17
GOOFY?
GOOFY?

Well I guess the TA55A does look a little goofy on my 14.5".

http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z238/edwin907/BILOCK.jpg

But on this 16" Kreiger Recon, it just looks damn mean.

http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z238/edwin907/recon12.jpg

Currently the Recon has a TA11C mounted, it's just the perfect combat sight for a 16" firing 75/77gr ammo.

http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z238/edwin907/OPS1.jpg


And the TA55A is back on the 14.5" Scout, goofy, but great fun.

C4IGrant
07-27-07, 09:03
Right now I have two carbines, 14.5 with perm phantoms. One has an EoTech 552, and the other an Aimpoint Comp ML2 with 4 MOA dot. I don't have any experience using a magnified optic on a handy carbine like these, only on bolt action rifles. By having some extra money I started thinking about wasting it on an ACOG. Right now my range trips are reflex type drills anywhere from ten yards out to fifty, and then I throw in some rested shooting at targets at 200 yards.

I guess what I wanted to know from people who have used ACOGS and Aimpoints are your thoughts on both. All I have to compare them to are cheap Wal-Mart scopes and my Aimpoint and EoTech, that's it. Is the ACOG really that much slower than the Aimpoint and for shooting out to 200 yards, do I need the ACOG? I was wondering if for most situations would a person be better served with a red dot or an ACOG? Thanks for your thoughts!

ACOG's will do well in the "mid-ranges." My personal favorite ACOG is the TA33R-8. It has the most eye relief of any of the magnified ACOG's, is small and cheaper than the big boys.


C4

RHR
07-27-07, 11:11
Have you thought about getting an Aimpoint or EOTech magnifier?

Bat Guano
08-09-07, 22:50
Years ago I had a Colt CAR-15, shot it with irons and the stock trigger. Recently got back into an M4gery. I can still shoot M1 and M1A irons, but no longer have the eyes of the eagle and knew I was going to have trouble with irons on a shorty AR. Did some homework and was inclined towards the ACOG compact 1.5X, amber triangle. It looked to have very good eye relief, decent FOV, and so on. Ran across on in Colorado Springs; the salesman kindly put it on an in-stock carbine like mine (integral carry handle) and I was sold right there.

I have been running it for a year and 1000 plus rounds, and it has been worth every penny ($700 OTD at the time). It is zeroed for 50/200 yards, and any misses are all my fault--no vision alibis with that setup. It suffices out to 300 from a solid position. As for speed, I am used to close and fast pistol practice. This is faster and easier. My 25 yard drill is an E target and a 1.0 second par time for a single shot from low ready. Last time out I was slightly under that most of the time. The carbine and optic are plenty fast--it's me that's a little behind sometimes.

The Eotech was the only other alternative I considered. I like this better. If it has a down side (other than cost!) I have yet to discover it. Best money I ever spent. If it was twice the price I'd find a way to get one.

The only other mod I dropped money on was a match trigger.

thmpr
08-09-07, 23:53
Get the TA31-F which comes with the doctor's red dot. Magnification with CQB capabilities!

rob_s
08-10-07, 05:19
I agree with everyone else. You can make hits out to 200 at least with an Aimpoint as I have done it on a Colt 6933 hitting a 10" steel with no problem.

With that said, I like the Compact ACOGs. I don't have much use for the fullsize personally.

As Grant said, if you're looking for a lower magnification, the 3x TA33R-8 is hard to beat, and despite the eye relief distance published on the Trijicon website, I find that it has almost the identical eye relief as my 1.5x Compact ACOG.

Top gun is the 1.5x and bottom is the 3x
http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q111/rob_s/gun%20stuff/DSC_1762-Small.jpg

M4 Colt
08-10-07, 08:53
Edwin,

good choice in the bipod, i have one and want 3 more !!

the TA-31 with donut is my favorite, i make my own targets and size the "bullseye" to fit inside the donut @ 100yd. also for 200 yd.

M4Guru
08-10-07, 10:52
I like the 3X Compacts like Rob said, but for the money they cost I'd pony up a little more for a variable power scope. Nightforce, Leupold, and Trijicon make variable power scopes that come in +/- $150 of the average ACOG. For the same price as a TA31F you can get the S&B Zenith 1.1-4x24, which I found out today is the same thing as the new Short Dot but without NV settings or locking BDC turrets. I like the versatility of the variable power scopes. I have used ACOGs for nearly 8 years now, and if you have your heart set on one they are great scopes. I used a DR/TAO1NSN combo on ol' "Tank" here until a got a Short Dot from Uncle Sam.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v317/M4Guru/DSC00697.jpg

militarymoron
08-10-07, 12:35
larue 'poorboy' special - 2.5x hensoldt magnifier behind the aimpoint in the LT pivot mount - damn good value for the price - less than $200 for magnifier and mount:
http://stores.homestead.com/Laruetactical/Detail.bok?no=131

rob_s
08-10-07, 12:58
The one thing to bear in mind both with the variables and the various magnifiers is the significant increase in weight over a Compact ACOG. It's one of the reasons I've never branched off into those realms.

M4Guru
08-10-07, 16:36
Some of them are not too bad, IE the Leupold, but the S&B and USO (which I think is a PoS anyway) is a beast for sure. The mini-ACOG definitely has the upper hand in weight and real estate, and if you put a mini-red dot on it it's a pretty good compromise.

Colt6920
08-10-07, 16:55
For the same price as a TA31F you can get the S&B Zenith 1.1-4x24, which I found out today is the same thing as the new Short Dot but without NV settings or locking BDC turrets.

May want to make sure the brightness levels are as high as the CQB model, the 2 #7 reticle models I went through[one was marked short dot the other was not but they were ordered as short dots] did not have daylight visible red dots.There seems to be a difference in brightness levels between certain models.

M4Guru
08-10-07, 18:15
The whole concept of the Zenith with the Flash Dot is to have 11 usable daylight settings, so I'd imagine it would be at least as bright as the settings on my Short Dot with only 6 visible settings and 6 NV settings.

SGB
08-11-07, 14:27
I just recently switched over from an Aimpoint ML2 to a TA01B ACOG on my AR10 but haven't got any trigger time on it yet.

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-4/989537/other001.jpg

CPR
08-13-07, 10:45
I'm using a TA01 with the Trijicon Red Dot and winged Trijicon mount. It seems like a decent compromise if you're dead-set on an ACOG. I'm a little concerned about the durability of the ring mounted to the ACOG (my TA01 isn't an NSN with the built in holes). Anyone else running this setup?

toddackerman
08-17-07, 19:29
I had a compact ACOG for 2 years and liked it very much for situations that required magnification out ot 300 yds. It was bullet proof and I had zero issues with it.

I later started tinkering with Red Dot scopes and settled on an EOTech (Rev. F) 552 for speed and easier target acquisition at CQB distances out to 50 yds or so. It definitiely is a little quicker than any magnified optic I've tried including Leupold and S&B.

If you can have both, I would opt for the ACOG (either compact or full size depending on your preference) and a Red Dot (either Aimpoint or EOTech) and use what the mission calls for.

That being said, I have no problems placing shots at 200 yds. with my EOTech, and my eyes are too old to try anything farther these days. I also have a Leupold Scout Scope on a Remington 700 Scout Rifle that is pretty darn quick, and great for 200 yard shots, but I don't think it would be appropriate for an AR15 application.

Hope this helps, and it's just ,my opinion.

olds442tyguy
08-18-07, 14:15
I haven't tried the compact lower magnification models, but I've tried the 3.5X and 4X full sizes.

I personally couldn't think of any scenario where I would want an ACOG. They're slow and awkward at close ranges, and for mid and long ranges there are much more efficient options. I'd even go as far as to call the TA01 the most worthless "tactical" optic I've ever laid my hands on.

A lot of people claim the ACOG is a good do all optic. I'd throw 100 ACOG's in the trash for a TR21-R Accupoint. I think 1-4X variable optics blow the ACOG's out of the water for both short range and long range shots.

Their quality is great, they're tougher than I'll ever know, but that's just my opinion on their practicality (with my limited experience).

tinman44
08-18-07, 20:21
i hope this is not considered highjacking, but i know the power options for the aimpoints are basically batteries. but for the acog, they have trijicon right? and a fiber optic? are either of these replaceable should they fail?

Don Robison
08-18-07, 20:24
i hope this is not considered highjacking, but i know the power options for the aimpoints are basically batteries. but for the acog, they have trijicon right? and a fiber optic? are either of these replaceable should they fail?


Yes, Trijicon will replace the tritium and rebuild your scope.

JoshNC
08-19-07, 19:18
I had a mini ACOG 2x with red Chevron reticle and an ACOG-NSN on my first AR carbine. I sold the 2x when I got the NSN. I sold the NSN about a year ago to help fund an NFA purchase and now solely run Aimpoints.

The eye relief on the 4x fullsize ACOGs sucks for me. I found that on auto with my M16 I kept bumping my eyebrow on the ACOG; not enjoyable. Also, the fixed 4x power is limiting for anything other than 50m and out. A Docter or other small red dot mounted on the NSN would be a useful mod. But the pricetag on that setup would make me jump up to a Short Dot instead.

In hindsight, I should not have sold the 2x ACOG; I found it to be much more utilitarian than the 4x NSN.

Hootiewho
08-26-07, 09:36
i hope this is not considered highjacking, but i know the power options for the aimpoints are basically batteries. but for the acog, they have trijicon right? and a fiber optic? are either of these replaceable should they fail?


Something else to consider, the ACOG has tritium which over time dims. I think it is 10-15 years and then you have to send it back in to Trijicon to have the tritium replaced, which I think cost around $75.00, maybe more? The new M4 Aimpoint would only cost you 2 AA batteries for that same time period..with Lithiums that'd be $5.99 plus tax. I am starting to look at the M4 real hard.

C4IGrant
08-26-07, 12:59
Something else to consider, the ACOG has tritium which over time dims. I think it is 10-15 years and then you have to send it back in to Trijicon to have the tritium replaced, which I think cost around $75.00, maybe more? The new M4 Aimpoint would only cost you 2 AA batteries for that same time period..with Lithiums that'd be $5.99 plus tax. I am starting to look at the M4 real hard.



The average is about 12 years. The think to remember is that technology changes so greatly in that time frame that you will most likely sell the optic LONG before you would ever need to change out the tritium.



C4

toddackerman
08-27-07, 00:58
Something else to consider, the ACOG has tritium which over time dims. I think it is 10-15 years and then you have to send it back in to Trijicon to have the tritium replaced, which I think cost around $75.00, maybe more? The new M4 Aimpoint would only cost you 2 AA batteries for that same time period..with Lithiums that'd be $5.99 plus tax. I am starting to look at the M4 real hard.


I'm getting old, but 6 years agos I think ACOG wanted $250 to recharge the tritium....ouch!