Help me think through this - RDS vs ACOG

[RogueElephant]

I used the legacy 1.5x and then the TA33One of our shooters is currently using one of the 1.5x, sub-compact, green circle/dot reticule, ACOGs. Of all the ACOGs, this is the one I'm most anxious to try for myself as I think it's the most likely to offer the widest flexibility, and the green should be the most visible of all the colors in low-light (an area where ACOGs of all varieties suffer IME).

You don't think there is any benefit to the 1.5X24's 50% larger objective?

I notice that Trijicon mentions "carry handle mount" with these sights. Are they generally mounted that way? Is that really satisfactory?

[5pins]

You could also take a look at the tripower.

[BrigandTwoFour]

I'm a big fan of my TR24. However, depending on your uses, realize that the 1.5 ACOG will be significantly lighter, as light as an EOTECH XPS (if not lighter). I've heard a lot of great things about them. If you're not shooting anywhere where you think you'll need the 4x capability of the TR24, then I would just save the weight.

I, however, don't like the idea that you can't adjust the intensity of the reticle on the ACOGs without resorting to electrical tape or one of those neoprene zipper contraptions I've seen.

I think this is another case of let your intended use drive your decision.

[rob_s]

The carryhandle mount is what you want they make a base that will mount it to the flattop or you can get the Larue or ADM.

[Singlestack Wonder]

How did you mount it?

American Defense AD-B2 mount.

http://www.americandefensemanufactur...ew/product/14/

[SteveL]

This is an interesting discussion, as I too have astigmatism. I'm building a rifle and was planning to put a RDS on it, most likely a T1. However, I know I'll get the blooming effect many others experience with it. I just don't know how bad it will be or how much it will bother me. On the BM I used to have I had a 1.5x ACOG, just like the one Rob S linked to above. I thought it was a nice optic, but I didn't want to spend that kind of money on one again if I could find a suitable alternative.

Rob S, IIRC you posted somewhere a while back that you prefer a RDS with a 2 MOA dot instead of 4 due to your astigmatism. Could you post what kind of benefits you gained with the smaller dot? Is it as simple as less blooming?

[Singlestack Wonder]

I, however, don't like the idea that you can't adjust the intensity of the reticle on the ACOGs without resorting to electrical tape or one of those neoprene zipper contraptions I've seen.

With the small circle line width and 2moa dot, the TA44SR-10 doesn't seem to bloom like other ACOG reticules. YMMV

[Skang]

With a T1 and no astigmatism, life is good!

I is jealous.

I had T1 with astigmatism, life is bad. lol

[seb5]

My wife had a bad astigmatism. When I built her her carbine I mounted a T-1, no go. She said she saw bunch of grapes! I spoke with Grant and had a TA44 sent my way with a Larue mount. She went from horrendous with the carbine to a credible shooter. As a benefit I get to play with it and discovered I really like it. I still prefer my T-1's but also bought a TA33 for one of my carbines. The TA44SG10 is a great optic. If I remember it's only a couple of ounces heavier than the T-1.

[Vinh]

The specific weakness of the 1.5x ACOG is indoors in low light, with or without a flashlight.

Without a flashlight, there isn't quite enough visual reference to aim through the scope, so you end up defaulting to using it as an OEG, especially when you and/or the target is moving. Depending on your eyes, the point of impact disparity may be significant. For example, for me, the POI is off by 4 inches at 7 yards, which is unacceptable.

With a flashlight, the reticle gets washed out. If the target has light colored clothing, then it's merely akin to using iron sights. Dark colored clothing, the reticle blends in a bit much.