[Oleg Volk]

I have an EOTech red dot on one of my AR15s. I am thinking of putting a 3.5x full-size ACOG or a lower-magnification compact ACOG on the other (A2) AR rifle. However, I've had no personal experience with ACOGs and have yet to see one in person. At $600-900, I am not eager to buy one sight unseen. My shots would almost always be under 300m, using 55gr ball ammo from a 20" barrel.

Have questions:

1. Sully said a while ago that he wouldn't use optics for general issue in Minnesota due to frost, fogging and other practical problems connected to temperature extremes. Would that hold true for rain, exposure to direct sunlight, frost or not?

2. Does ACOG with illuminated reticle (tritium or tritium AND fiber optic) offer any advantages over EOTech 552
at 300m or closer?

3. Do ACOG scopes have any direct competition of similar ruggedness and clarity?

4. Has anyone used them for hunting or combat, and with what results?

[SodaPop]

The first time I looked threw one I was utterly unimpressed. The optics aren't much better than any 4x Leupold shotgun scope.

I've done a little research into ACOG's, and I've read mixed reviews on their reliabilty in the Armed Forces.

1. Sully said a while ago that he wouldn't use optics for general issue in Minnesota due to frost, fogging and other practical problems connected to temperature extremes. Would that hold true for rain, exposure to direct sunlight, frost or not?

They use them in Afghanistan.

[rugerfreak]

Ditto on being unimpressed.

The one I looked through at the store was very fuzzy and blurry-------no way its worth the high price.

[Navy joe]

I have a carry handle 2x compact with red crosshair and fiber/tritium. Been with me for a long while now. I have nothing negative to say about it, the biggest user problem is learning a new cheekweld with the higher mount, not really a problem. Its height above bore axis will magnify your pain if you cannot get your head around line of sight vs. flight of bullet. Also will magnify canting errors, but those are both AR general scoping issues, not ACOG specific.

The scope is very rugged, optics still bright and unscratched, and I have gotten the gun(s) pretty dirty. I remove it when heavy cleaning to keep it away from solvents. What impresses me there is that it goes back on and maintains zero. I use the same tq and semi-perm(blue) loctite. I think the red crosshair is ideal for me, depending on light conditions and your eye the brightness varies in daylight, but you are always left with a fine crosshair that is easy to see. It does not wash out in sunlight like a dot sight is prone to do. I have gotten good hits shooting in half moon conditions where it was too dark to see the whole front sight tower. If you can see so much as a omving shadow it is toast. Quick aquisition.

I think over the dot you have the advantages are durability and no batteries. The aiming point is finer than many dots also. I want a Tri-power, but those are in short supply right now. Cool accessory is Tenebraex Killflash, but the bottom has to be cut away to allow iron sight usage. Or you can just quickly flip it off.

I've used mine in the rain, no problems, the thing is sealed up tight. Gasfilled, so snow and cold shouldn't be a problem either. I don't hunt with .223 and combat hasn't come to pass around here yet, so dunno. I use it in IPSC side matches to no detriment against all the Aimpoint Comp M2s, very fast handling even on my 20"(the way it should be) gun. My mark of usability is I've handed it to several novice shooters in the same match and had them all get good hits easily. For regular 3 gun I take it off so as to stay in Limited class.

If you ever put a bipod on with an ACOG, look out. With the iron sights you still lose track of the front sight on recoil and can only shoot so fast. On a bipod through the scope it's like a poor man's SAW, just pull trigger and observe hits. Gauranteed to get you tossed fromn a stodgy range, more fun than should be legal especially with tracers.

:evil:

[Andrew Wyatt]

that's odd. my 4X32 ta01 is CLEAR. (it's on par with the schmidt and bender scopes mounted on AI rifles)


YMMV, but the 4X32 ACOG is probably the best all around .223 scope, because it's adequitely fast at close ranges and allows for at least a modecum of first shot hit ability at ranges out to 800 meters.


I detest the 3.5 power acogs (i hate the reticle and the donut of death thingy), but they do get used a lot at the SWAT match, along with the 4x32 TAO1 and TAO1NSN scopes.


I think this blurryness is because the scopes you looked at had gunk on the optics. an acog without grease or gunk on the lens is clear as the proverbial bell.

[Wildalaska]

. Sully said a while ago that he wouldn't use optics for general issue in Minnesota due to frost, fogging and other practical problems connected to temperature extremes. Would that hold true for rain, exposure to direct sunlight, frost or not?

ACOGs are not only mil spec, but awesome scopes for cold weather hunting. I know many people who use them for wolf hunting in -40

Does ACOG with illuminated reticle (tritium or tritium AND fiber optic) offer any advantages over EOTech 552

Absolutely....far better optically, far sturdier...and if I recall the EOTECH use batteries...say no more....

3. Do ACOG scopes have any direct competition of similar ruggedness and clarity?

As rugged as anyhting out there....optically on the par with Leupold...they use Nikon glass that is coated by the same poeple who coat Leupold I beleive (will check on this)

You can go wrong with an ACOG...I use the TAO1NSN

[HK_UMP.45]

Oleg, if you don't need magnification, then you might want to look into Trijicon's Reflex II. FWIW I've found it durable and fast on target. The amber triangle reticle takes very little time to get comfortable with and there are no wash-out problems.

I have one mounted on a HK USC so I can't talk about accuracy past 100 yds but I've seen them mounted on ARs. The owners seemed happy with the optics

Some say that standing in a shadow and looking at a bright target area results in a dimmer reticle. This has not been my experience. The tritium illuminator compensates for the lack of light coming in through the fiber optics. YMMV.

Either way, Happy Shooting!

[Jeff White]

I have had a TAO-1 since 1988 or so. Very clear optics almost indestructable. The tritium is still bright after all this time.

It's currently mounted on a TA51 flattop adapter. Some don't like the short eye relief but I find it perfect for nose to charging handle cheekweld on an AR or M16.

I'll bring it with me next time I'm through Nashville.

Jeff

[Bottom Gun]

I’ve had a couple of months to play with my new ACOG. It’s the 3.5X with red donut reticle. I like it.
The optics are crystal clear and the donut is extremely bright. Much brighter than any red dot sight I’ve used. It has so far been useful in all levels of light. The optics appear to be as good as any I’ve used including my Nikon and Zeiss scopes.
I wasn’t sure if I would like the 3.5X magnification, but I do like it. The magnification helps with target identification with no apparent loss of speed since you still use both eyes when aiming. It’s a very fast sighting system. Much faster than iron sights.
This past weekend I shot it side by side with an AR-15 which had some other manufacturer’s reflex type red dot on a forward mount and found this Trijicon to be quicker and a bit more precise.

I first mounted it on the carry handle of my A2 but did not care for the handle mount. I now have it mounted on my flat top. The flat top mount works better for me since I’m more comfortable with the cheek weld. Target acquisition seems a bit faster with the flat top mount.

I haven’t had this one in any serious weather yet but I expect it to perform well. It seems to be very well constructed.

I have only hunted coyotes with this one so far and it works very well on moving targets.
I’m considering buying another ACOG to mount on my AR-10 for big game hunting.

Pricey? Yes they are, but I guess you get what you pay for.

[Skunkabilly]

Oleg, Trijicon is in Michigan, I'm assuming the climate is similar?

How is our friend in Minnesota, have you heard from her?

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Oleg, I've got the full size 3.5x (TA11). If you are ever in the Dallas area, look me up and I'll be happy to let you give it a try.

1) Haven't had much opportunity to test for frost down here; but I've used it in light rain and definitely a lot of direct, bright sunlight with no issues. So far the temperature range I've used it in has been pretty mild - maybe 40-75F.

2. I compared the EOtech, Leupold CQT, TA01NSN, TA31 and TA11 head-to-head when I was shopping for sights. After brief comparison I dropped the CQT and TA01NSN from contention.
Out of the remainder, the TA11 and TA31 dominate the 150-300 range. From 50-150 there weren't any clear winners - speeds were similar with EOtech being the fastest but tighter hits from the ACOGs. Under 50, the EOtech regularly produced the best scores using IDPA targets and times; but I think part of that has to do with a slightly steeper learning curve for the ACOG as you get used to dot shift.

3. US Optics markets some scopes using the same concept as does a budget brand called Elite IR. I haven't used either so I can't comment to their ruggedness and clarity. Whatever the sight is, it will have to be pretty rugged to beat an ACOG.

4. I haven't. Someone at Tactical Forums had the TA31 (4x with fiber optic tube) in Afghanistan. The Marines purchased around 1000 TA31Fs and are using them in Iraq now. Have some friends deployed there with private purchase TA11s and am waiting to hear a full report from them.

Haven't ever seen any fuzzy or blurry ACOGs but they are designed to be used with both eyes open. You have to focus on the target and the reticle will appear very sharp and crisp in your field of vision. If you try to look through the scope at the reticle it will appear blurry. I can explain it with enough time; but it is a lot easier just to show someone.

[Oleg Volk]

How is our friend in Minnesota, have you heard from her?
Last I heard she was doing allright. Maybe Sully would know more?

Keeping both eyes open is easy with non-magnifying optic...but I had a hard time with 2x Aimpoint...eyes kept switching dominance. I better get my hands on an ACOG before buying...

[Correia]

Team Trijicon had a bunch of demo scopes at the WC3gun. I played around with a few of them and I was very impressed. I thought that they were clear, and had a good field of view.

My favorite was the 3.5x with the chevron style recticle and bullet drop compensator. It made hits on a 400 yard gong a piece of cake.

[Nero Steptoe]

I've been looking for ACOG's in the footage from Iraq; don't see too many, mostly "conventional" or red dot optics. I need more magnification than the ACOG offers. For what an ACOG costs, you can buy a real scope.

[El Rojo]

I have seen all sorts of ACOGs in Iraqi Freedom pictures. I think I have seen a fair number on the British Enfields too. The only experience I had with them was at the 2002 Shot Show. Oh I wanted one bad. Problem is I live in the PRK and can't get a AR-15 to go along with it, unless I want a FAB-10. :cuss:

[blackrazor]

Nero,

The ACOG *is* a "real" scope, actually, IMO it's better than most "real" scopes. Fantastic optics, excellent design (for a .223), super durable construction, tritium illumination (find that feature on another scope). I have a TA01 and love it, but I would like a TA11F better. BTW, trade, anyone...? :D

[sully]

The ACOG is a great optic. It works very well for most applications. My personal opinions on using optics on the AR15/M16 weapons system is that it depends what you are using the rifle for and in what type of enviroments. My personal application is for the Law Enforcement patrol car and tactical employment. My experiences with optics in this application here in Minnesota is that if you take the rifle from a warm patrol car out into the cold, the optics will fog temporarily. If the rifle is out in the cold for some time, and you go into a warm building then the optics will fog temporarily. This is why I am an iron site fan, no fogging. If you are in a consistent enviroment for tempature then fogging is usually not a concern. Also if you drop your rifle or bang your optic against something you might throw it out of zero. On my rifles I use the A1 upper receivers which can be dropped and banged without this concern. I also am able to consistently hit steel torso sized silhouette targets out to 700m with my iron sites, though I wish to try further sometime to see how far I can go. My being able to site in on long distance targets with iron sites I somewhat attribute to great vision, but a lot of people need the magnification to engage targets as well. I use Leupold Vari-X3's on my hunting rifles, and prarie dog rifles. Optics are a great choice for the right weapon system and the right application. The ACOG is a great optic. One just needs to consider their anticipated application, and what their preference is.

Oh yes, your friend is fine. I will tell her that she was inquired about.

Just my $.02
Sully
Chief Instructor
www.defensive-edge.net
www.dpmsinc.com

[MolonLabe416]

I find the mini-ACOGs to be more user friendly. They have much better eye relief and weigh next to nothing.

If you don't require magification, you mght consider the new Trijicon TriPower. I like it much better than the AimPoint.

Another option, though not "tactical looking" is either a low powered 2.5x fixed Leupold, or one of their 1.5x5 illuminated reticle scopes. Very handy. Works very well for CQB at the low setting and allows precision at your 300 yard envelope.

The biggest advantage I see for most defensive situations is that the scope provides a much, much faster hit than does iron sights, especially in low light.

[Navy joe]

I'm detecting a trend here. Everyone that has had them likes them a bunch. Many who have little to no experience with them find something wrong with them. Odd. Are there any "practical negative experiences" out there, or are some people just mad at what they can't buy?

Sully, on the fogging have you ever tried something like Fog-free or whatever anti-fogging stuff Rain-x makes? Just wondering, it never gets real cold down here, and the few times it has I've just left the gun in the truck overnight to stay acclimated.

[Oleg Volk]

All I want is a low-power (2x or so) scope with illuminated reticle. Other than East European scopes and Trijicon, who makes fixed power scopes with illumination?

[sully]

I've tried several anit-fog treatments and none seem to work. The fogging up you get is only temporary and goes away shortly, but it can be an issue in my applications. Our winters here get way below zero degrees, so we are dealing with extreme tempature changes. The other problem we have with that quick temporay fogging occurs with eye glasses and goggles as well. If you are stable tempature conditions then all is well, the temporary fogging issues occur when you have been in either the extreme cold outside for sometime that your optic is now very cold and then you have to rapidly deploy inside a warm building, or when your rifle is in your nicely heated squad car and you have to quickly deploy outside into the extreme cold as in felony car stops etc. On the ACOG itself I have nothing but good things to say, it is a great optic as well as others that are available.

Sully
Chief Instructor
www.defensive-edge.net
www.dpmsinc.com

[Oleg Volk]

If I get a scope, it would go onto a carry handle. I could still get a semblance of a sight picture under the mount, I suppose...wonder how badly that would interfere. I still can't point shoot AR15 well but will learn. Seems that pistol grips really get in the way of pointing a rifle.

[Jeff White]

Oleg,
You can use the iron sights with a TAO-1 mounted on the carry handle. The AR isn't hard to point shoot, but with the Trijicons you can access the irons anyway.

Jeff

[Badger Arms]

Oleg:

I'd do it the other way around. Instead of mounting your primary optic way above the sights and having an uncomfortable cheek weld, buy the ACOG with a backup iron sight like the Special Forces guns I've seen so often.
http://www.trijicon.com/parts/62FF.jpg

[Andrew Wyatt]

I mounted my ACOG tao1 in the carryhandle as well, and had narry a problem.

[Oleg Volk]

Grrr...I have one flattop (currently with EOTech 522) and one A2 rifle. I suppose I could get another flattop upper and go with the option sugegsted here (maybe make it a light 16"...would make sense but I keep coming back to 20" HBAR for some strange reason). Maybe if I manage to sell my Mak90 and Sig 232, I'll get another upper and a 4x ACOG (the mini-ACOGs don't have backup sights, right?)

[SodaPop]

Odd. Are there any "practical negative experiences" out there, or are some people just mad at what they can't buy?

Can't buy? Or can't justify the cost of?

I wonder what the military pays for them?

[Navy joe]

Soda, not flamin' just asking for negative user experience.

Oleg, with the carry handle mount you could knock the rear sight off and still be pretty close, not obstructed at all. I did fool myself once though, my killflash was shifted and cutting off a little of the top of the circle and I didn't notice, was shooting rather high as a result. I guess I'm just a anachronism, I can't stand flattops and feel that you have to do some contortionist act to align your eyes and face to a stock with no drop. The straight stock and pistol grip put my eye up where the iron sights are. For the ACOG I back my nose off the charging handle about an inch. Somtimes I like a little spot rubberized grip tape on the stock in the manner of a bow kisser button to get you used to sticking your face in the same spot each time.

Now that I asked for negative, I'll go for why positive for me. Someone alluded you could buy a real scope for the price of an ACOG. Yep, also could buy a wild night in Vegas or something, who cares. In their quest for "real" scopes many American gunners buy way too much scope. High magnification can help you shoot tiny groups but can really impact usability. It is "too much syndrome" I came into a Rem 700 that had a fixed 32x scope. I could shoot 5 shots touching all day long, I could also read what the NRA had to say on the bottom of the target at 100yds. My field of view at 200 was maybe 10 feet. I had enough trouble getting it lined up with my target, imagine something moving! If there are people shootnig 600 and more yds on iron sights you do not "need" high magnification. You also do not need the compromise variable power scope in most situations that an AR can handle. Variables have more moving parts.
Parts that like batteries, quit.

So, I like:
-Low moving parts count
-Lack o' batteries
-Low fixed magnification. Decreases extreme precision, increases shootability. (See also less moving parts)
-very durable construction
-compact size
-simple, repeatable mount. Rock solid.
-And finally, that cute little red crosshair I can see in the dead of night.

:D

[Jeff White]

Ok, the model with the backup sights is the TAO-1 NSN. The BDC reticule is calibrated for M855 out of a 14.5", 1/7 twist barrel. The backup sights are pretty useless for anything beyond CQB range. The tritium illumination in the NSN model is amber in color.

The TAO-1 has a reticule BDC calibrated for M855 out of a 20", 1/7 twist barrel. the tritium illimination is red.

You may also run into some problems with the BDC mounting ithe NSN on the carry handle. It comes with the TA51 flattop adapter. The height above bore may be too much to make the BDC all that useful.

I'll try to take some pics of my set up.

Oleg,
Not that it's any of my business, but what do you want with a 20" HBAR? One of the advantages of the AR15 is it's light weight. I'd recommend a 20" govt. profile barrel, thin under the handguards and heavy forward of the front sight base.

Jeff

[Oleg Volk]

When I was shopping for rifle #1, I didn't know any better. When shopping for #2, I wanted a flat-top with integral front sight...couldn't find that in a light barrel. The only light barrels I've found have been A1 uppers or 16". Can my heavy 20" barrel be replaced with a light 20" without too much trouble? I do prefer rifles which aren't front-heavy.

PS: I am still not sure about "tactical" sling -- it helps to move and allows faster deployment, but makes off-hand much more wobbly compared with hasty sling...but regular sling sucks for cross-country walking. Ugh.

Is there a complete guide as to which ACOGs are set up for which barrel length (20") and bullet weight (55gr) and which reticle? The number of model designations is very confusing...

[Jeff White]

No problem changing the barrels. I'll even do it for you if you can't find someone local. Look in the equipment exchange at AR15.com, you should be able to find about any barrel you want. I'd recommend either a Colt or Bushmaster chrome lined barrel.

You might try Trijicon's website for descriptions of all their models. Have it bookmarked on the computer at work, I'll get the link tomorrow.

There are tradeoffs in everything. The best sling for shooting is not necessarily the best one for carrying. Trust me, you won't often shoot offhand anywhere but in bullseye competition. The exception will be CQB or the target that jumps up suddenly at close range. It should be part of your contact drill to seek a more stable shooting position. This will also lower your profile. Drop to prone or squatting as part of your contact drill for anything but a near ambush.

Here is a pic of my prototype Squad Designated Marksman's Rifle. It started as an Essential Arms pre-ban lower that had a Bushmaster 11.5" w/long flash hider A1 upper and two position collapsible stock. I sold off the upper and stock, added a Bushmaster V-Match flattop upper with A.R.M.S. SWAN Sleeve, Colt 1/7 20" govt. profile barrel, KAC M5 RAS, Armalite green furniture, Harris bipod, Eagle tac sling and magazine stock pouch, Trijicon TAO-1 4x32 ACOG on TA51 flattop base. While the thmbscrews on the Trijicon base aren't as fast as the hrowlevers on A.R.M.S. base would be, I can still get the scope off quickly and use the backup irons on the SWAN Sleeve should the scope fail.

Jeff

[Oleg Volk]

Looks like compact ACOGs have certain tradeoffs: 1.5x16 has longer eye relief and field of view than 1.5x24. Guess those two qualities beat brightness, esp. since exit pupil 10 2/3 is plenty anyay. Not even certain what eye relief means -- is it the distance at which the reticle is in focus OR mag distance fromwhich the whole field of view is visible or something else? Also - ACOGs are designed to be used with both eyes open...does this mean that some people can't use them at all? (I read something about that a while back)

Any down sides to compact models? I doubt that high magnification would necessary... Also, does any manufacturer make light barrel 20" uppers with flat top AND a fixed front sight?

[Zak Smith]

Eye relief for scopes is the distance between, roughly, your eye's lens, and the scope's lens to see the widest possible view through the scope.

Some, like Trijicon, will specify an optimal value.
Some, like Leupold, will specify a range.

For nose-to-charging handle on an AR-15, there will be about 1.5" distance from your eye to the rear end of the flat-top. Thus, to get correct eye relief on something with long E.R. (3.5" or so) like a Leupold with a nose-to-charging-handle stance, you'll need to mount the scope such that the rear lens of the scope is about 2" in front of the back of the flat-top, like this:
http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/pictures/2003-03/b43.shtml

An ACOG with 1,5" eye relief should work properly with the rear lens at the rear end of the flat-top.

hope this helps

-z

[Onslaught]

What I haven't seen mentioned regarding the ACOG is the Bindon Aiming Concept (http://www.trijicon-inc.com/aiming.html). In short, it makes your optic a "non-magnified red-dot" when you're field of vision is moving, and a "4x optic" once you stop moving.

That, in my opinion, makes the ACOG more functional than either a red-dot or magnifying optic. The "donut of death" and Chevron reticle work better for this than the crosshairs, and although I can't afford one of my own, the ones I've tried out at the range have shown me that they are the BEST option for an AR. Also, given the BAC, I'd mount mine to the flat-top, with maybe a BUIS, just in case...

If you do a search at AR15.com, you'll also get a lot more positive feedback on the ACOG's and using the BAC.

Just my personal experience, I had a Reflex II for about 3 weeks... I didn't like it. I'm not knocking it, because lots of people do like them... but I didn't.

First, I didn't like the "yellow wash" effect of the oddly tinted lens, and I did have a hard time picking up the triangle at the covered range on even average-sunny days. It did absolutely nothing for me that a $175 red-dot sight couldn't do... except for the overall "triangle" concept. Someone should incorporate a triangle reticle into one of these multi-reticle red-dots. Great concept for an AR.

[Oleg Volk]

Hmmm...so switching of eye dominance I had with Aimpoint 2x red dot was normal? I like the looks of the triangle but that's not an option with AGOC scope, AFAIK...only chevron. At this point, I am considering crosshairs and chevron, not sure which would work best. My experience with scopes is limited to low-end 4s Simmons and 3x9 Bushnells, both unsatisfactory...

[Zak Smith]

Oleg,

The BAC ACOGs have the option of donut, chevron, or triangle reticle. In the 4x w/ BAC, the TA31 has the donut, TA31A has the triangle, TA31F has the chevron. The TA01* models are the 4x without BAC.

BTW: http://www.sableco.net/id10.htm

Sableco.net has a good summary of models and features, and they are great to do business with.

-z

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Oleg,

About 96% of the population can use the Bindon Aiming Concept according to Trijicon. Those who can't use it can still use ACOGs like a more traditional scope but won't enjoy any of the extra benefits from using them with both eyes open.

If you know you are going to use the ACOG on a carry handle and want the BDC feature, then I wouldn't get the TA01NSN, TA31F, or TA11F. Most of the time you can play with a ballistics calculator (http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=18&t=152794&w=searchPop) and get a decent match to the BDC just by changing the distance you sight in - but the 62gr flattop BDC used in those ACOGs will make it impossible to get a good match from a carry handle mount.

If you haven't seen this thread from arfcom yet, it is a good discussion of the ACOGs:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=18&t=148926&w=searchPop

Compared to the EOtech or the Aimpoint, I can think of a few negatives for the ACOGs - one is that they aren't unlimited eye-relief and parallax-free like those two sights. The other is that you won't get dot-shift with either of those sights as eye dominance switches.

That's about it though... the ACOG has a lot of positives to it. It also is pretty versatile with the BAC option.

[Jeff White]

http://www.tacticalintervention.com/cqbsling.html

Check this link for a tactical sling that you can also use as a hasty sling. Don't know how well it works.

Jeff

[JShirley]

I've wanted an ACOG compact for years. My company (and Bat/Div/Corps) is using them for SDM rifles, which are currently M4's. (Everyone else in the company has M68 Aimpoints mounted.)

I plan on mounting TA50-2 to my FAL.

[Correia]

Jeff, thanks for that link. That looks like just what I have been looking for. I'm going to start a new post to get feedback on that sling.