Anyone who has ditched the 1-4 trend?

[BrigandTwoFour]

Just curious about anyone who has switched out of a variable and to a red dot or dedicated magnification (i.e. an ACOG)

I put a TR24G on my rifle after quite a bit of saving and using the iron sights. I really like it, and am using it for it's first 3-gun competition tomorrow (it's been mounted since January, but haven't really gotten to test it outside of some drills and target shooting), but I keep finding myself drawn back to the TA33, which was it's main competition when I first made the order.

I find issues with the overall weight of the unit when compared to a small RDS or compact ACOG. Has anyone made this switch before? What were your findings?

[BooneGA]

I ditched my S&B Short dot for a TA11 when my mission set changed. I had orginally been operating intermittently between wide open areas and then in villages with no warning in between. That is where the S&B shined.

When we shifted both AOs and missions I swapped to the TA11 (and TA31 however not by choice) as I much prefer it to the S&B if the CQB abilities of the S&B arent needed. I did do a bit of room to room stuff with the ACOG however I typically used the laser on my PEQ-15 to fill in the gap.

Ive since gone back to the 1-4x with an ELCAN, but I really cant get away from how much I liked a TA11 with docter on top.

Rick

[Failure2Stop]

I never "ditched" the 1-4, but I don't put them on every gun either.
The low powered variable excels in GP use, IMO, which marries up with the 16" AR in purpose.
My HD gun wears a T-1, and I have no intention to change that.

[d90king]

I have gone the other way... I run T1's on a few rifles but have gone to a 1-4 for my magnified needs instead of using a T1 and 3X on a swivel.

If I want magnification I prefer a different ret. for more precise shots if needed. I found the T1 and 3X simply cover to much on SMALL targets at distance. YMMV

[DWood]

Just curious about anyone who has switched out of a variable and to a red dot or dedicated magnification (i.e. an ACOG)



I won't "ditch" one for the other, I keep both and choose the appropriate tool for the task at hand. They each have a purpose.

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h264/DWood13/AR-15%20SBR/DSC_0309.jpg

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h264/DWood13/DSC_0645.jpg

[BrigandTwoFour]

As this is currently my only AR, I built it up for to be a GP gun (using a lot of advice around here, hence the TR24). I find it serves just about everything I want it to do so far, I just can't help the feeling of "but maybe that one would work better."

Though that might go away once the new build is finished, as it is going to be a pretty barebones lightweight with either a H1 or XPS 2 on it, and that may get rid of my back and forth.

Thanks for the replies, everyone. Much appreciated.

[DWood]

You will find some good info here:

http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=84485

[BrigandTwoFour]

Oh I've been up and down that thread quite a bit. My real question wasn't the 1-4 vs a red dot so much as the 1-4 vs a compact ACOG.

[Failure2Stop]

Oh I've been up and down that thread quite a bit. My real question wasn't the 1-4 vs a red dot so much as the 1-4 vs a compact ACOG.

I think it's more about the specific option rather than the genre as a whole. Different designs do different stuff. To me, the TR24 has more in common with an RDS and magnifier than a Short Dot.

[glockshooter]

IMO going with a fixed power ACOG or a RDS is very limiting. Can you learn to shoot either short range and long range sure, but it wont be as efficient. They will obviously accel at one or the other. A low power variable gived you the best of both worlds.

I guess if you had prior knowledge of your AO and it was never going to change then maybe you could pick a ACOG or RDS. I have and use an Aimpoint on my SBR, but that has more to do with its effective lethal range than anything else.

Try each at short range and long range, and go with whatever works for you.

Matt

[BrigandTwoFour]

Ultimately, I think the best route is going to be just building up a second rifle. My current one serves as a general purpose kind of rifle, which is why I went with the 1-4. But I live in central Montana, where the magnification really is handy. The only real use I have for an RDS is up close and personal home defense, which is just not a likely scenario where I live (very low crime). Topping that, I am active duty .mil, so in the unlikely event of total breakdown, I would probably be called into base anyway and issued whatever I needed- at least I hope I would, my career field deals more with really really big sticks (nukes) rather than small arms.

Thanks for the input, all. I think I'll be sticking with the 1-4 for now and worry about an RDS for the next build, which should be nice and lightweight.

An ACOG might be better suited to some future DMR-ish build just for fun. I wish I had the funds to just buy up all kinds of optics to play with, but financial reality is financial reality. It's one at a time and choosing carefully.

[armakraut]

I won't get another higher dollar 1-4x unless trijicon can provide a useable bracketed reticle with a dot larger than 1/4 MOA, or someone comes out with a flash dot that has battery life approaching that of an aimpoint. In most situations the 1-4x scopes I've used didn't provide a significant long term advantage over an aimpoint, or a less expensive 1-4x with a german #4 reticle.

If aimpoint or trijicon came out with something like an Elcan Specter, but without the drawbacks, that would be something I'd buy.

If you've got the cash and the battery stash, short dot 1-4x or 1-8x all the way.

[christcorp]

Many years ago, I considered a magnified scope for my AR. But I don't use my AR for sport or competition. I use my AR and my AK for it's designed purpose. "If needed; to shoot a person at the UP-TO 100+/- yards distances". At that range, I have no need for magnified optics. Even for practicing on paper or prairie dogs, 100-125 is fine without optics. Can an AR15/M16 be used at farther distances? Yes, but that's why there are weapons like the M14 and similar.

So while I considered a magnified scope; because "It's better to have the magnification and not need it and set it to 1X, than to need it and not have it......."; I chose instead to go with speed. I figure I have a much greater chance of using one of my AR's in self defense against a person, than I have of using it as a sniper to shoot a person or target or compete with, at 200+ yards. I'd rather have the speed of a red-dot no mag type of optic.

Now; for the person who likes shooting targets, prairie dogs, or to compete at much farther distances, there's absolutely nothing wrong with a 1-4 scope. But it's all up to what you plan on doing with the weapon. I chose the red-dot because the PRACTICAL purpose "For Me" using an AR, would be on targets at 100+/- yards or less. If I need further, I have garands and 7mm mags that will reach out to those 300-600 yard shots.

[BrigandTwoFour]

I'm not faulting your thinking. But when I first built up this rig with a 1-4 I was thinking a long different lines. Sure, I've got my M14, and other toys that would be great for taking that 300-400 yard shot. And it's great to say, "Hold on, I've got a better gun for this." Then go to my Jeep and grab it. But what if the AR is the only one you have with you? That's why I built this one up the way I did, so I could use for just about anything I needed it to.

Generally, it sits beside my bed loaded with 30 rounds of 75gr TAP. But today I shot a 3 gun match with it between 50 and 250 yards, I did great, but the red dot guys not so much.

All of that, of course, becomes irrelevant when I get around to building another AR dedicated for a RDS. My original question was NOT about 1-4x vs RDS. It was really 1-4x vs fixed low magnification (ACOG) when it comes to versatility versus weight.

[masakari]

I've always had a special place for ACOGs, ever since we adopted them. Im used to them, and definitely know how to use them at both close and long range. I tried out the whole variable optic thing, but simply didn't see the advantage. No real usable BDC, they have silly batteries, and are large and heavy... while my TA31 and TA33 both remedy that. People say that they aren't good up close, but I disagree... shooting both eyes open, I can definitely engage targets at any range. But I do have a Trijicon Reflex RX30-23 currently waiting for me to buy another rifle for it... when I did have it mounted, it performed its task superbly.
for me, its Trijicon ACOG all the way, bar none. Now im just waiting for them to release a scout optic for my M1A, That burris needs to go!

[christcorp]

Brigand: Actually, I was responding to your primary post, which did say a Red-Dot OR an ACOG. You wanting an "All in one" rifle is nice, but it's not very practical. While an AR is definitely not my 2am someone broke into my house gun; for those who do use it for this, it would be pretty difficult looking through a scope. Even if you had it decked out with lights and lasers. 20-30 feet is the average shot in a house. Scopes, especially variable, were meant for situations where you had some more time and had distance to help you with field of view. The eye relief on a scope for home defense, simply isn't practical.

But for someone who shoots their AR's for fun; like you do in 3 gun matches, a scope can come in quite handy. But like I said in my previous post, I only use my AR's for what they were originally designed for. Shooting people at under 100+/- yards. Including CQB. I prefer speed of acquiring the target. But again; that's just me. And again; I was simply replying to your original post where you did ask about changing out a 1-4 for a Red Dot or a ACOG.

[vicious_cb]

Got rid of my TR24 and moved back to just using aimpoints. The biggest drawback was the reticle. A simple red dot is much easier to hold over with than a huge triangle with 2 black strips blocking the entire 6 o'clock view. Also other 1-4x's dont offer daylight illumination which pretty much kills it as an up close fast optic at 1x.

IMO the only 1-4x worth looking at is the short dot which truly blends the RDS and magnified scope.

[Eurodriver]

I've always had a special place for ACOGs, ever since we adopted them. Im used to them, and definitely know how to use them at both close and long range. I tried out the whole variable optic thing, but simply didn't see the advantage. No real usable BDC, they have silly batteries, and are large and heavy... while my TA31 and TA33 both remedy that. People say that they aren't good up close, but I disagree... shooting both eyes open, I can definitely engage targets at any range. But I do have a Trijicon Reflex RX30-23 currently waiting for me to buy another rifle for it... when I did have it mounted, it performed its task superbly.
for me, its Trijicon ACOG all the way, bar none. Now im just waiting for them to release a scout optic for my M1A, That burris needs to go!


I agree. We trained consistently with ACOGs and I have no trouble making shots as close as 5 yards. Even 25 yards with multiple targets using the BAC is cake. To reach out and really get those precise 500 yard shots you just close your non-shooting eye and you have a quality 4x optic thats light, with no batteries, and an illuminated reticle. So for a civilian if this rifle is what you're using to clear a threat from your house, at night maybe a RDS is better. Outside of that the 4x ACOG beats almost everything as far as I'm concerned.

The only place I've found that the ACOG itself isn't excellent is in dark hallways aiming into lighted rooms or room to room movements in pitch black (which NVGs and IR lasers would be better than a RDS anyway).

I have 3 ACOGs, 1 T1, and 1 Vortex 1-4x for what its worth OP.

[CageFighter]

im looking to part w/ my Vortex Viper PST 1-4x24 to go back to an Eotech. The red dot seems to fit my needs better. Ranges in my area only go to 300yds, but I only shoot 100yd @ the range closest to me.

[Failure2Stop]

I use my AR and my AK for it's designed purpose. "If needed; to shoot a person at the UP-TO 100+/- yards distances". At that range, I have no need for magnified optics. Even for practicing on paper or prairie dogs, 100-125 is fine without optics. Can an AR15/M16 be used at farther distances? Yes, but that's why there are weapons like the M14 and similar.

You are confusing personal employment and design intent. The AR and AK series of weapons were most assuredly designed with intended use past 300 meters. The AR specifically has performance requirements past 500 yards. They have been, currently are, and will continue to be used to turn booger eaters into fertilizer at distances past 600 meters.

Now, with M855, terminal performance and barrier penetration at 500 meters is less than you will get out of 7.62, but it will not suffer from under-penetration if you put it into somebody's squishy bits. Good ammo gets performance that approaches that of 7.62, and when it comes to combat worthiness, the AR is light-years ahead of the M14/M1A, regardless of nostalgia.

I'm not saying that you have to use your AR at any specific range, and an RDS might fully meet your needs at the max distance you need to shoot, and that is a great reason to only use an RDS, but it is most certainly not because the platform is limited to that performance envelope.


I agree. We trained consistently with ACOGs and I have no trouble making shots as close as 5 yards. Even 25 yards with multiple targets using the BAC is cake. To reach out and really get those precise 500 yard shots you just close your non-shooting eye and you have a quality 4x optic thats light, with no batteries, and an illuminated reticle. So for a civilian if this rifle is what you're using to clear a threat from your house, at night maybe a RDS is better. Outside of that the 4x ACOG beats almost everything as far as I'm concerned.

The only place I've found that the ACOG itself isn't excellent is in dark hallways aiming into lighted rooms or room to room movements in pitch black (which NVGs and IR lasers would be better than a

There is a lot more to a fighting optic than simply whether or no you can shoot cardboard at 5 meters in daylight.
Eye-box (eye relief and lateral allowance) is a huge factor, and frankly few people understand it. Having an optic with long eye-relief and forgiving lateral allowances will let the shooter use the optic faster in every situation, but will be particularly useful when the gun is held at an angle other than upright. Good tests for this are the VTac wall, rollover prone (try doing it through a port about 8-12" off the deck/without elbows on the deck), urban prone, reverse prone, and support side from cover.

I know guys that can outshoot most others at under 15 meters with 10x magnification, against RDSs, 4xs, and irons. They are even better with 1x. Simply because something can be used to solve a problem does not mean that it is the only, or best solution.

If one owns and likes TA31s, great, more power to 'ya, but even when compared against other models in the ACOG line (such as the 11 and 33) it falls short in every category except .5 to 1 power of magnification. Even reps at trijicon tried to talk them out of the 31. The process through which the RCO was procured had a predetermined winner.

This is a bit of a tangent, I know, but I want people to be able to make an informed and intelligent decision when it comes to optics that cost a significant amount of money and to let them know what that money should get them, and why not all optics are the same.

[rob_s]

There ain't no free lunch.

Everything comes with trade-offs, and you need to be aware of them and train to them or make gear choices/changes to accommodate or eliminate them.

This is where range time, varied range time, comes in to play for the non-LE civilian (and even a lot of LE). You are unlikely to have the opportunity to test your guns & gear in an actual engagement to see what works and what doesn't (and there are a lot of people that survived such engagements due as much to luck as to guns/gear/training/skills). Therefore you need to find a reasonable facsimile and test yourself and your equipment and training.

As mentioned here, there is no reason beyond budget why you need to have only one AR to do everything. But, you need to be aware of what you are doing and how you are training yourself. If you legitimately think that you own a carbine for self-defense use but then start making gear choices based on the games, hunting, or even plinking that you do casually, you may be making choices counter to your master intent.

[Dennis]

I solved this debate by having a RDS, a flip 3x mag, and a magnified optic for each carbine mounted in QD mounts that pretty much return to zero. I have trained with all and appreciate their individual pros and cons. Each carbine bag always travels with all associated optics. I run T1, EXPS3, M3, TR24G, ACOG TA01, and NSX 1-4x.

However, my default optic is the RDS with the 3x mag on a chest rig.

Dennis.

[DWood]

My 10.5" LMT with Comp M4 is great at CQB distances and is also accurate at 200, although it takes some work with old eyes.

My 16.5" with Short Dot on 4X is stellar at 200 and does very well on 1X for CQB.

If I could only have one, it would be the 16" with the S & B. I'm glad I can have both.