[SnakeEater]

I have no experience whatsoever with any of the ACOGS. That being said, I am really leaning towards buying one for my next rifle project. I'm currently leaning towards the LRB reciever with the forged scope rail, along with the SAGE EBR stock. I've also considered the DSA Tactical Carbine or the PTR91KP. Basically I need to figure out if the ACOG sight works well with any of these rifles and which is best suited for it. I have my eye on the 5.5x50 BAC and I wanna build a rifle around the sight.

Any relative comments or advice would be greatly appreciated.

[NMshooter]

Your first concern is eye relief.

Second is how you plan to mount the optic.

A rail across the top of the receiver like on a flat top AR is easy to mount stuff on, the M-14 type rifles are among the most difficult.

My last M1A had an ARMS #18 with ARMS low throw lever rings and a Leupold scope. A previous rifle had the factory scout mount, and that worked well for dot type optics.

If you want something to put that top end ACOG on you might look at the AR-10T, or that DPMS rifle, those will be easier to mount it on.

With the FAL or G-3 the optic will be high, and may require a cheek piece on the stock.

[SnakeEater]

With the FAL or G-3 the optic will be high, and may require a cheek piece on the stock.

Yeah, that's my main concern. I really hate to settle for an AR platform, although the Bushmaster BAR-10 is really interesting.

[boofus]

There are only 2 things ACOG owners gripe about:

1) Price
2) Eye-relief

On the TA-01 and TA-31 models the eye relief is a mere 1"-1.5" from the eyepiece. They work fine on an AR-15 but on just about any other rifle it is too short. I decided to go with the Trijicon Accupoint scope rather than ACOG because of it. It has the same features like fiber optic reticle and Bindon Aiming Concept, but 4.5" eye relief and variable magnification. Costing half as much as an ACOG helps too.

I've heard our troops over in the sandpit have started using the Accupoint scopes on their rifles as well.

[SnakeEater]

Wow, I learn something new everyday. I guess it's obvious I haven't done my homework because I was not aware of the Accupoint. My interest in the ACOG is mainly because of its night fighting capability, but I'll definately look into the Accupoint if it has the same features. Thanks.

[NMshooter]

Since the Accupoint is a "normal" scope it will mount to the LRB 1913 receiver easily. If you simply want a glow in the dark reticule without batteries that would fit your needs, it is a good scope.

[dmftoy1]

I've got a TA-31F and I love it. The only thing I'd change would be a bit more magnification, but I think that the limiting factor in my use of it is primarily the crappy accessory attached to the buttstock and trigger. :) (I'm not a good shot!) When I concentrate on the basics it definately puts the shots where they should go though. The BAC is really cool too.

Regards,
Dave

[SamlautRanger]

I used a ACOG Reflex sight in Iraq. Worked great.

[Zak Smith]

The TA11 has 2.4" eye relief (at 3.5x magnification). Besides that, it is considerably more flexible in terms of what wierd head positions it tolerates than the TA31 or TA01.

The TA55 is pretty large and heavy, and there are better choices for that kind of medium-range optic (like the 3-9 M/RT)

[artherd]

TA11 for .308s, it's got 2.4" of eye relief. (but a NARROWER FOV than the TA31, hey, nothing's free :)

I don't think you'll need the 5.5x50mm, even on an AR-10T/KAC SR-25 type gun. It's pretty big & heavy too, and you're right at say the lowest zoom on a Nightforce that can go to 22x. Then again, be different!

[Zak Smith]

The TA11 is no more "for" 308 than the TA31-- in fact, both base models (no suffix) have the same BDC calibration (M193 from a 20", on carry handle). But you're right that I wouldn't want to shoot a 308 with a TA01/TA31!

re: field of view. The field of view THROUGH the TA31 is wider, but it also takes up more of your non-magnified vision because it sits much closer to your face/eyes. In other words, you can maintain a higher level of situational awareness with the TA11 because you can see around it better.

Notice that basically nobody uses the TA31 in 3Gun, while the TA11 is one of the most common. This is not for no reason...

If you need to make hits on smallish targets out to 400-600 yards, the 3-9 M/RT is an excellent choice.

-z

[beerslurpy]

Used both the reflex and the magnifying ACOG and I didnt think they were worth the extra price. Very nice, but you pay for all that extra niceness.

PKAS and Kobra are far cheaper and just as good. I prefer the PK-AS. It fills all the same needs and has no eye relief or cheek weld issues.

[GunGoBoom]

Unfortunately, I'm soured on Trijicon products since my Accupoint TR21 broke after less than 30 rounds of .45-70, even though they did repair it under warranty for me. I don't trust trijicons on anything but rimfires now. Maybe I just got a lemon, but I'm not risking (a LOT of) my hard-earned money again for an apparently fragile scope. I'd bet the ACOGs are tougher than the accupoint however.

[Zak Smith]

The ACOGs are solid-- gazillions of them are issued to the military.

The TR21 is a hunting scope, not a mil-hardened optic.

As for the PKAS/Cobra vs the ACOG, well.. :scrutiny:

-z

[beerslurpy]

I was serious. There is nothing that justifies the 3-4 times higher price of the american units. At least not anything that I am aware of.

The tritium illumination is great if you think you will not have resupply of camera batteries for several months and dont mind replacing the scope when the tritium fails after a few years. I have owned my PKAS for about a year already and am still using the original batteries. The lowest setting is plenty bright for any situation in which it is too dark to see the black dot.

One thing I admit to not liking about the kobra is that it doesnt work unless you turn it on. But this isnt a problem with the PKAS.

I'd really like to hear why you think the ACOGs are so superior.

[Zak Smith]

According to the info on kalishnikov.guns.ru, both the PKAS and Cobra as 1x red dots. Is this incorrect?

If it is correct, then it does not even make sense to compare them to an ACOG, which is a magnified optic (full size 3.5 or 4x, extra size 5.5x, or mini 1.5, 2, or 3x). A relevant comparison would be the EOTech and Aimpoint M3.

[beerslurpy]

There is an ACOG reflex which is basically just a tritium version of the Kobra. The Kobra is an unmagnified red dot (like the eotech) that only works when turned on.

The PKAS is an unmagnified black/red dot. Without power it is just a 1x black dot with a circle. With power, the dot is illuminated. It is a good low-light scope without the usual problems due to crude reticles that red-dots have.

The magnified ACOGs are magnified but otherwise the functionality is the same as the PKAS. They are a sturdy 24/7 sight that can be accurate during daytime and still visible at night. It didnt look especially different than any other low magnification scope I have ever used. I couldnt see body heat or the insides of people's bodies. It magnified the view and painted a reticle over where the bullets would go. I dont see the magic.

About the worth of magnification, I guess it depends on what kind of target you are trying to hit and how accurate your gun is. I have yet to encounter a person with a 1/2 moa head, at least not at any ranges that a non-precision assault rifle can hit.

[Zak Smith]

All the Trijicon ACOGs are magnified. The Trijicon Reflex / Reflex II is not an ACOG. Here is the Trijicon web-page: http://www.trijicon-inc.com/user/parts/parts_new.cfm?categoryID=8

Note that "ACOG" is not mentioned anywhere. It's the "Trijicon Reflex", not an ACOG.

The magnified ACOGs are magnified but otherwise the functionality is the same as the PKAS.
This is like saying sets of Leica binoculars and reading glasses are functionally the same. They're not. A 3.5x or 4x magnified rifle scope is pretty much entirely different functionally than a 1x red dot, and those differences are reflected in their capabilities and what they are used for.

About the worth of magnification, I guess it depends on what kind of target you are trying to hit and how accurate your gun is. I have yet to encounter a person with a 1/2 moa head, at least not at any ranges that a non-precision assault rifle can hit.
Since this entire thread is about ACOGs which are all magnified, and the thread author started talking about the 5.5x version (the TA55), this question ought to be moot.

The ACOG (or any other 3-5x magnified optic with some BDC features) will have superior capability to hit far and/or small targets. It's realistic to make first-round hits on 600 yard silhouettes, or 400-yard first-round hits on 10" squares, by just using the reticle for holdover. Furthermore, they provide superior ability to ID targets at longer range. Forget 1/2 MOA-- can you SEE a 1 MOA target, say a black disk in the terrain, at 400 yards?

If you don't believe me, get a 1x red dot and a TA11 ACOG and shoot any long-range practicle rifle course of fire (ie, out to 300-400 yards).

-z

[Zak Smith]

I have yet to encounter a person with a 1/2 moa head, at least not at any ranges that a non-precision assault rifle can hit.
So then you can hit the head of an IPSC target (6" square) at 400 yards all day, with a 1x red dot? That's almost 1.5 MOA. Where exactly do you hold over?

[beerslurpy]

I was under the silly impression that he actually had some sort of meaningful use in mind, but now that I reread the original post, I guess not.

If this is about building a "combat" rifle for 600 yard shooting, then I will have to recuse myself, as that is something I would save a bolt action with real glass for.

I will concede defeat and not turn this into an AR15 vs X argument.

So then you can hit the head of an IPSC target (6" square) at 400 yards all day, with a 1x red dot? That's almost 1.5 MOA. Where exactly do you hold over?

With my 7mm rem tikka and leupold scope, easily, but that isnt 1x or even close.

With my AK, it cant even reach that far, so who cares?

[Zak Smith]

The US Military seems to think there is some "meaningful use" for the SR25 and SPR. Not to mention that the Army and USMC are issuing gazillions of TA31s for use on regular M16A4s because they dramatically increase the probability of first-round hits.

With my AK, it cant even reach that far, so who cares?
However an AR15 in 556 or 68SPC or 65 Grendel, or an M14 or PTR91 or BAR-10 in 308 definitely can, so why limit yourself to a deficient sighting system?

[SamlautRanger]

The Tritium Reflex sight i had in Iraq, that is made by trijicon, says ACOG on the sight. So that is why many refer to it as the ACOG reflex sight.

[Zak Smith]

Thanks. Didn't know that.

[Jeff White]

Beerslurpy said;

The tritium illumination is great if you think you will not have resupply of camera batteries for several months and dont mind replacing the scope when the tritium fails after a few years.

I own TAO-1 serial number 818. I bought it new direct from Trijicon in 1989. The red tritium illumination is still glowing brightly. I think that 16 is a bit more then a few years.

The ACOGs are pretty much bombproof. Yes there are less expensive options. But in rifle scopes like in so many other things, you get what you pay for. If you don't need the heavy duty construction, don't pay for it. If you are going to use the optic on a rifle that potentially will be dropped, kicked around on the floorboard of a vehicle, immersered in water and muck or otherwise abused, then spend the money and get equipment that will stand up to that kind of abuse.

Jeff

[Bartholomew Roberts]

PKAS and Kobra are far cheaper and just as good.

Let's try to be a little more precise in our statements. Saying that the PKAS and Kobra are just as good for your uses and then letting us know in what context you use it is a helpful statement that we can all learn a bit from.It can be especially unclear since there are dozens of different ACOGs (as the Reflex/ACOG discussion in this thread illustrates) so that a casual reader wouldn't even know which ACOG you are comparing it to.

Stating that the PKAS or Kobra is just as good as an ACOG with no further qualification is simply not true with regard to optics, clarity, light transmission, ruggedness or ability to identify small/distant targets.

[SnakeEater]

Holy Cow, this thread is growing fast. I failed to mention my intended purpose for the optic. I'm basically trying to build the ultimate SHTF rifle that's capable of many different objectives, hence going with a shorter than normal barrel for better CQB performance. The optic needs to perform well, not be the best, but perform well in everything from CQB, night fighting, to engaging PEOPLE at 600m. Durability is a must. Price is not a consideration. Keep'em coming.

[Zak Smith]

The S&B Short Dot is supposed to be good at both short range and long range. Its downsides are size, weight, and price (about $2k).

The short but accurate barrel has become popular recently, as the "RECCE" format (16" with FF rail and optic) or the same in 14.5". These setups are designed to be light, compact, but accurate and competent (but not optimized) at long range. They generally have match barrels of heavier profile than M4/Gov't, but lighter than Hbar, with a flat-top receiver and a FF railed fore-end of Mid (9.0) or rifle length (12.0).

The price paid vs a 18" or 20" barrel is velocity. For example, Black Hills 75gr shoots at about 2640-2680fps from my 17-20" barrels (different barrels are "slow" or "fast" in addition to length difference), while a 14.5" barrel shoots the same ammo at 2500fps. With XM193, the velocity difference is about 300fps from 20" to 14.5".. but M193 is not optimal for long range shooting mainly due to wind drift on the light bullet.




-z

[SnakeEater]

I appreciate the info Zak but this rifle will be in .308

[Zak Smith]

How short are you wanting to go in 308?

Velocity losses are considerable when you go below 18"

[SnakeEater]

I'm leaning towards the 18.5" bush barrel, coupled with a LRB M14SA reciever. If I went the FAL route it would be 18" even.

[beerslurpy]

Holy cow, a short barreled 308 cqb gun. That is a new one. It will work, but your ears might not afterwards. Are you planning on getting a suppressor for it?

One idea I saw once (which may be good or bad) is to get a magnified sight (like your magnified ACOG) for long range but also put one of those laser sights on the gun for short range cqb type work. But this leaves a gap between 10 and 50 yards where neither sight is optimal.

[SnakeEater]

If it ever got bad enough to use it in CQB I doubt my hearing would be a priority. Besides, it's the M4 is the standard CQB arm nowdays and I know from experience that it ain't quiet. ;)

[Jeff White]

If price isn't a factor, the S&B Short Dot is the optic you want.

Just curious as to what type of scenario you envision employing this rifle as a CQB tool. Law enforcement tactical team or just repelling borders in your home?

Jeff

[MTMilitiaman]

Well we all know that the Russians are famous for making stuff that is less expensive than their Western competitors, but I had no idea anyone ever viewed it as less durable or reliable. If the Russians make their optics like they make their rifles, then function, durability, and reliablility are all bases pretty well covered. All that is left to explain is why American units can't claim much more of anything except price and Green Berets. But then, I didn't think Spetznaz was a bunch of slackers either.

[Oleg Volk]

I had two Cobras, neither worked right. In backlight, they also flared badly. I gave up on Russian optics from then on. Their camera lenses tended to be iffy as well.

[ssr]

Can night vision be used with the Reflex (not ACOG) without damaging the night vision device?

[NMshooter]

In theory.

That is why the amber color.

Never had any NV handy at the same time as a reflex though, so I do not know how well it works in practice.

[Zak Smith]

There is always the option of a magnified optic (fixed or variable) and a small 1x red dot such as the DocterSight or JPoint for closer targets.

http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/DrSight/small/A100_0242_img.jpg (http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/DrSight/?medium=A100_0242_img.jpg) [ link to LARGER image ] (http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/DrSight/?medium=A100_0242_img.jpg)

[Nimitz]

so what happens when you use an ACOG at night? or near night condtions...it works off the surronding light by the sun correct?...

Chad

[boofus]

The reticle is lit by tritium if there is no other light.

[Zak Smith]

The BAC-equipped ACOG models (everything except the TA01*) are dual illuminated with both the fiber optic and built-in tritium. They are clearly visible at night.

[SpookyPistolero]

I think Zak has nailed it if you can't live with the inevitable compromise of a single optic.

I have been thinking of the same type of all-purpose rifle for myself. I have not really decided on the .308 or 7.62x39 as it's caliber, but it will be an AK based action. Basically, though, I am hoping to put a DocterSight on an Ultimak rail and also a 4x PSOP optic on the siderail. I believe that there will be enough sideclearance to allow the use of both. Weight should also still be pretty light since the front dot is pretty teeny.

I think a setup like Zak has, on something like a .308 AR (or a FAL with an angled rail) where you could put a lightweight dot on for close range and keep your solid optic up top, would be top notch.

I have not been able to think of any setup that would really allow you to 'do it all'. There are so many compromises. With the single optic, you either aren't as effective up close, or can't see what you're trying to hit at long ranges. In the combo setup as above, you pretty much only have to deal with a little extra weight, and running your rifle on a cant when in close.

I suppose if it came down to it, I would want to settle for a rifle that was a little less effective at a longer range, since you're more likely to be in dire need of a greatly efficient rifle when things are close and ugly. Distance at least implies time and a chance at survival if you get to movin'.

My thoughts, humbly submitted. :)

[Nimitz]

thanks...

now what happens when the tritium's half life is reached? supposedly 12 years?...the sight is then worthless at night? or in low light condtions?...thats not so great for $1,000+

or am I misguided? (hey it happens...)

now I guess I need to go debate the TA11 vs the TA31.... :p

Chad

[Zak Smith]

No, it'll just be 50% as bright as it was 12 years ago... Trijicon can recharge your tritium for a fee.. Also note that you can tape on a glow-stick or keychain LED to the fiber optic if you need more brightness.

[artherd]

Guys, trust me, you could do worse than to just buy one of everything Zak owns :)

Zak- I keep going back and forth between TA11 and TA31. I've held 'em both up to my eyes (though sadly not mounted to a rifle) and just can't make up my mind.

[Zak Smith]

I have 3 TA11's. I bought a TA31 at a great price, but ended up selling it and going back to the TA11.

The TA11 will allow much more flexibility in terms of head placement. You don't have to be so close to the optic, and you have more lattitude side/side/up/down, which is useful when acquiring a sight picture FAST, shooting while moving, or shooting from wierd positions like rollover prone, etc.

A nice thing about the ACOG is that you can buy one, try it out, and sell it without losing much $$.

I doubt if an extra 0.5x magnification makes much difference. The TA31 is a little smaller and lighter weight.

-z

[Bottom Gun]

I agree with Zak.
It’s the old story of getting what you pay for. Yes, the ACOG’s are pricey, but they are fantastic sights. One look through the lenses will tell you why they are so costly. The optics are incredible.

I’ve been using them for about 4 years. I have two TA-11’s. I mounted one on a 16” AR15, the other sits on top of my 20” AR10. They are crisp, clear and really gather light well in low light situations. My AR15 gets used a LOT and since my home is very close to the border, it goes on all my trail and ATV rides. That TA-11 has held up very well. It's a very quick sight since head position isn't critical. So long as you can see through the tube, you'll hit with it.

The TA-11 on my AR10 took quite a few lumps and bumps when I used it to hunt elk two years ago. It worked fine and I took my elk using it. After I filled my tag, I let my buddy’s teenage son use it to fill his tag.
The only problem I had was that I discovered looking through my camo head net caused the red donut to appear slightly difused. I haven’t tried any other red dot sights with this head net so I don’t know if the same problem would occur. It was no big deal though and easily overcome. Otherwise these scopes are crystal clear and images seen through them are outstanding.
My lady friend has asked if she can use the AR10/TA-11 setup when we hunt elk next month so we’ll put it to the test again.

I have not used any better optics than these lenses on these TA-11’s. I’ve compared the optics with Leupold Vari-X III, Zeiss Conquest and Nikon Monarch and pre-Monarch. The ACOG optics appear to be better.
I have used and tried a variety of other types of red dot sights and short scopes and so far none have compared to these ACOG’s. I don’t want to knock anyone’s favorite red dot or short scope, but they simply aren’t the same caliber as these ACOG’s.

Pricey? Yes, they are indeed. Would I buy another? Yes, without hesitation. They are worth the money.

[mpthole]

Can ACOG's be setup to co-witness with iron sights - like an Aimpoint?

[Zak Smith]

It doesn't make sense to co-witness magnified optics and BUIS, because you cannot see the front sight through the optic.

On a 1x red dot, you can deploy the rear BUIS and shoot iron sights through the "dead" Aimpoint - assuming the lenses are not broken.

Otherwise in the case of opaque 1x optics or a broken magnified optic, you need to quick release the optic to use the irons.

[mpthole]

Thanks Zak - that makes sense.

[trbon8r]

Would an ACOG work on one of the new Amega Ranges scope mounts or would an Aimpoint M3 be a better choice? I'm not sure if the eye relief on any of the ACOG models is compatible with a forward scout type mount?

http://www.amegaranges.com/cgi-bin/shop.pl/SID=1127447859.23727/page=miniM14.html

These new mounts are due out in a couple months and look like a good setup for my M1A. I just need to decide what would be the best compromise for up close fast type shooting but also allowing some precision out to 300-400 yards or so.

[Zak Smith]

The eye relief is totally incompatible.

Look at the Aimpoint M2/M3, EOTech, or DocterSight.

-z

[zahc]

Zak Smith

Interesting setup. Do you fire from the left or right shoulder?

[trbon8r]

Thanks Zak.

What is your opinion of the Aimpoint M3?

[artherd]

Zak- Dohnut or Cheveron? ;)

[Barrelmaker]

Doughnut of death! :neener: