BUIS - Absolutely necessary?

[Luke_Y]

So, not counting: Falling off, dropping in a lake, getting shot, smashing it into something...

I am willing to bet that the instance of an ACOG failing (not counting getting shot) would be almost zero.

But... Your original question was;

Have you ever, even once, seen or heard of an ACOG become non-functional in the field?

All of those sound non-functional to me.

Just pokin fun.

[Luke_Y]

Ref the photo above, whats to say the round could not have gone thru the rear iron sight, the receiver extension, or any other part of the rifle?

BUIS for the most part, are fairly transparent, so its no big deal, but with today's, modern quality combat type optics, to say a buis is mandatory, is a bit of a reach.

Some of these broad based. blanket cliches need to be put to rest.

Bob

Absolutely could have. Hell, could have went through him...

Interesting to note, it doesn't appear that he had a back up sighting system, but he did stay in the fight after the hit.

[glockkid88]

I think the better question is why not a buis?? a good folding buis is around $150 and is out of the way if you dont need it. Am I missing something? If you can afford an acog with a larue mount then surely it isnt the price of a buis thats putting you off.

[Semizal0311]

If that picture is accurate then he indeed did have a backup sighting system. His carrying handle (never actually used to carry) with his iron sights. These would have already been had a good BZO cause every Marine has a good BZO I even would occasionally take my detachable carrying handle out of my patrol pack and reconfirm my BZO. All that outstanding Marine would have to do is unscrew the ACOG and continue to gain fire superiority.

I have never seen an ACOG fail, and we had them on all our M-4s, M-16s, and M-249s. However Murphy always wins. Two is one, one is none.

[Luke_Y]

If that picture is accurate then he indeed did have a backup sighting system. His carrying handle (never actually used to carry) with his iron sights. These would have already been had a good BZO cause every Marine has a good BZO I even would occasionally take my detachable carrying handle out of my patrol pack and reconfirm my BZO. All that outstanding Marine would have to do is unscrew the ACOG and continue to gain fire superiority.

I have never seen an ACOG fail, and we had them on all our M-4s, M-16s, and M-249s. However Murphy always wins. Two is one, one is none.

Yeah, I kind of assumed (you know what they say) that he didn't dick arround trying to take it off. Didn't look like a thumb screw.

But I did forget about that little channel under the acog.

OP, sorry about the drift.

[R Moran]

Why not? as stated in the other thread, sometimes you run into certain combos that won't work.

I believe one of the common ones, is an ACOG, that needs to be pushed back, due to its eye relief, leaving no room for a buis. Or another magnified optic, with large occular housing, that make fitting a buis difficult. making room for a pvs-14 or magnifier, behind red dot sight.

If i ran into an issue like above, I wouldn't loose any sleep over not having a buis.

Bob

[Luke_Y]

Why not? as stated in the other thread, sometimes you run into certain combos that won't work.

...

If i ran into an issue like above, I wouldn't loose any sleep over not having a buis.

Bob

I agree with that. I would personally prefer tool free mounts and carry handle handy though.

[jmart]

If you're going to get a BUIS, you'll also need to get a QR mount for the ACOG. Very little sense in going with the stock mount.

[JSantoro]

I've always felt that that was key.

If you put BU irons on while maintaining an optic mount that requires a tool to remove, one would be wise to find a way to mount that tool to the gun, as well.

[rocketman]

Unless something has changed and for what it's worth the Marine Corps doesn't issue a BUIS for ACOG equiped weapons. That doesn't mean they never fail in combat but it must not happen very often.....