acog vs. aimpoint

[grayhambone]

MAY BE OLD
may be an old post but i just recently traded my aimpoint pro and a couple of dollars in for a acog ta31f bac.
i really enjoy the acog, and see much more uses out of the acog than the eo tech or aimpoint.
a little heavier, and it's harder to have my iron sights on in case something happens. what's everyone elses opinion on this subject.

as for LE i beleive if you're truly comfortable with your side arm at 25 yards then you need something between 25 and 200? again, to me the acog wins

 

[Captains1911]

Inside of 100 yd an ACOG will only hinder you. I see little to no applications for an ACOG in law enforcement.

 

[grayhambone]

why do you feel that way

why do you feel it hampers you inside of 100 yrds? based on the eye relief and how long it takes you to get your sight picture squared away?

 

[Captains1911]

why do you feel it hampers you inside of 100 yrds? based on the eye relief and how long it takes you to get your sight picture squared away?

Because it has magnification, and anything with magnification will take longer to acquire a target, and will limit your field of view.

For man-sized targets within 100 yds, red dots with no magnification work best.

 

[Derek Zeanah]

I think he's arguing that 3.5 to 4 power optics at close range slow down target acquisition.

I think he's probably right. I'm a fan of the 1-4/1-6/1-8 variables, so you can keep it on 1 power (even running an illuminated reticle if you like) for CQB distance shooting, but crank it up for 200m+ engagements.

My answer tothe Acog vs Aimpoint is neither -- the Aimpoint is miserable for me anyway because I have astigmatism and see an oval rather than a dot. But the utility of a low power zoom is pretty darn high. It's enough to make either Acog or Aimpoint a compromise, and at the prices you see nowadays (< $500 for the Vortex 1-4) I find the variables more compelling.

 

[grayhambone]

i see where both are coming from...
but to say little to no use in LE
think about this...I will not be going cqb stacking up in a swat scenerio into a house.....if that's the case, will have a shotgun but in the county or say school building, i'd rather protect citizens with a little bit of a zoom (acog) and have the buis iron on the side. the acog would be for well placed shots bc what's usually in our back ground....colateral damage perhaps...just food for thought.
maybe an aimpoint with a magnifier behind it

 

[eldon519]

They are expensive, but they do make that EOTech setup with the magnifier that flips to the side. Kind of like a holosight and a ACOG-like-optic in one. They also have that Elcan Spectre optic that is kind of like a ACOG that switches back and forth between 1 and 4 x which a fast swipe of a lever. A lot of the ACOGs also have a spot to allow you to add a small back-up holosight over the optic tube itself.

 

[steve_dune]

I have an Aimpoint CompML3 and I really like it. I wanted something that was 1x for CQB. I'm sure that the acog makes a great sight I just didn't want 4x on my carbine. If I was buying one for my 20" I would have probably picked acog.

 

[-v-]

I'll split the middle, with the ACOG's BAC reticle, its entirely possible to use it for CQB with great effect. Will you lag behind a aimpoint/EOTech? Yes, but by a few tenth/hundredth of a second. Enough to make you place 2nd or 3rd in a 3-gun match, but I really doubt it will be enough to hinder you in any appreciable way on a two-way range. The main thing is practice, practice, practice.

If you have range where you can do move-n-shoot exercises, practice with your ACOG and get comfortable with it. It is fairly popular for many competitors in 3-gun for the Tactical division (1 optic on rifle only), and I think if it was that bad for CQB as many are making it out to be, it would enjoy nowhere near the popularity that it does.

Besides, I'd say that with a rifle inside of 25 yards, you stand a very high chance of successfully engaging a man-sized target using only point shooting techniques.

 

[Starz26]

I can see where the magnification could be an issue, but with the ACOG, one of the best features for me is the ability to see the reticule with both eyes open. Thus you are not magnifying the target but you still gain the benefit of the sighting system.

I am new to the whole thing with ACOGs though so I could be completely off base. Just my experience so far.

Inside 100yrds using both eyes and "projecting" the reticule without actually looking through the acog per se, I am about 1/2" to the left of the aim point.

after having both red dots and ACOG, the ACOG wins for me.....however, that is said without actually having to use it in a urban encounter......

 

[Jenrick]

You can train with an ACOG to the point that the difference between it and an EOTech is minimal (tenths of a second if that). The biggest thing an ACOG provides you with is the ability to observe and gather intel with magnification while still being able to engage in an instant. When I have deployed with my rifle and had time to actually get a static position, having the magnification was wonderful. Having the magnification to determine if the suspect is armed or not, etc. is a great thing.

-Jenrick

 

[taliv]

the only problem with a 4x acog is when you're trying to aim small on a large target. for instance if you turn a corner and see an IPSC cardboard target 5' from you, and bring your acog up to take a shot, suddenly, all you see is brown through the acog. are you going to miss the target? no. can you shoot extremely quickly? yes. are you in the A zone? B zone? ehh, hard to tell

same scenario with a bad guy wearing a tshirt? all you see is white cotton in the whole field of view. are you aiming at his belly button? his heart? could be hard to tell

it can be excruciatingly slow when you are scanning some types of targets. like for instance if your target is a 1" shoot-n-see dot on that ipsc cardboard. if it's not in the picture when your eye first views it, you can spend a while scanning around for it

 

[12gaugeTim]

the only problem with a 4x acog is when you're trying to aim small on a large target. for instance if you turn a corner and see an IPSC cardboard target 5' from you, and bring your acog up to take a shot, suddenly, all you see is brown through the acog. are you going to miss the target? no. can you shoot extremely quickly? yes. are you in the A zone? B zone? ehh, hard to tell

Do you even need a weapons sight at 5 feet?.. You're almost hitting the target with the barrel at five feet...

 

[1911 guy]

And how many of you are shooting with one eye closed?

Use both eyes and the magnification "problem" is reduced to the point of being non-existant with anything below about 4X

 

[C-grunt]

I can and have beaten about 90 percent of the rifle users on my dept with an ACOG equipped rifle on stages that have 50 yard max shots. Is it slower than a red dot? Yes. Is it horribly slower? No.

 

[aubie515]

I feel the ACOG is a great battle sight...but what's good for the military isn't always the same story for LE.

I agree with the poster above that for LE applications...a RDS is a better option.

I've made 400 yard hits on my steel without magnification. If you need magnification at 100 or less to hit man sized targets...you better get your eyes checked.

My T1 with 2MOA dot is much lighter than ACOG and it takes less rail space.

I'm not bashing the ACOG, but a fixed magnification does have some limitations, just like no magnification on the T1 hurts that optic.

 

[esheato]

First of all, I get the impression that a lot of people are talking about the ACOG without having some direct experience with it.

Inside of 100 yd an ACOG will only hinder you.

I politely disagree. I have zero problems getting on man size targets from contact distances to 200y in a very quick manner, and out to 600 using the reticle (TA33 horseshoe at a fixed 3x magnification) and a stable rest. Sure, 5 yards and less POI is a couple inches low compared to POV, but you compensate or shoot high chest when you mean center mass. Either way, it's significant damage.

The trick with the ACOG is the BAC, and not treating it like a normal scope. Both eyes open and it'll work as advertised. The view I get is the reticle is superimposed on my normal field of view, and when I wish to take a longer shot, I squint my off eye.

I see little to no applications for an ACOG in law enforcement.

I completely agree. RDS is where it's at.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I've made 400 yard hits on my steel without magnification. If you need magnification at 100 or less to hit man sized targets...you better get your eyes checked.

Sure, if your target is standing in the open on a nicely mown field with a gentle grade and wind flags flapping in the breeze. I've done a course of fire where they set out 12 white painted poppers in the brush (mesquite, grass, cactus and sand). The entire course was only 300yds long and none of the poppers was more than 15' off a dirt trail. The longest shot of the day was 80yds taken with an ACOG because even wearing all white, a popper doesn't really stand out in that environment.

Now add in an urban environment with darker interior rooms or glass. Is that a camera in his hand or a gun? Is that guy in the second floor window across the street filming mayhem with his iPhone or getting ready to cause some? There are many positives to the ACOG for LE or defensive use.

There are negatives as well. ACOGs are slower than red dots. If you don't have a consistent cheek weld, point of impact shifts and keeping a consistent cheek weld while moving or using non-traditional shooting positions can be difficult. The magnification of the ACOG creates a "blind spot" where the unmagnified weak eye view and magnified dominant view overlap - that can be a problem at household distances. Using the BAC concept to shoot the ACOG like an occluded eye gunsight causes a variable shift in point of impact again. It may not be enough to make you miss a silhouette; but it will certainly take you out of the A-zone - and if you are having a gunfight at 10 feet, A-zone hits are going to minimize how much you get shot up.

No free rides. You make the compromises you can live with and train to use the gear you have. Personally, I started running an offset T1 with my TA11 and I really don't like the T1 95% of the time; but that other 5% of the time it blows the doors off the ACOG.

 

[henschman]

A good do-it-all setup is the ACOG plus a micro red dot on an offset mount. For close quarters, just rotate the rifle in your shoulder and use the dot.

 

[briansmithwins]

Which is better, a pickup or a sports cars?

If I need to haul stuff, the pickup is better. Driving fast on a curvy road? Not so much.

I've got both a Aimpoint and a ACOG, on different rifles. Inside of ~30 yards the Aimpoint is much faster. From 30 or so out to 100, it's pretty much a wash. Outside 100 the ACOG gets me hits faster, plus I can take advantage of the ACOG's ability to ID targets.

As far as which is better, it depends. ACOG's suck for very close range (and yes, you're never too close to miss) and the Aimpoint's not great at 300 yard headshots. Both are robust and not likely to let you down. Which to get depends on what you think you're going to be trying to do with a rifle most.

BSW

 

[C-grunt]

Inside of 100 yd an ACOG will only hinder you. I see little to no applications for an ACOG in law enforcement.

Kinda depends on where you work as a LEO. Here in Phoenix it's mostly suburban type environments. I have deployed with my rifle several times where my closest good cover was at 100 or so yards. My department also has a shooting from several years ago from a distance of just over 320 yards which was done by a patrol officer.

Here in Phoenix we have a significant percentage of land that his open desert and mountain ranges. The bad guys love to flee to those areas. I'd rather take a well aimed shot from one hill to another against a dug in gunman than raid the hill Rough Riders style.

 

[taliv]

I've made 400 yard hits on my steel without magnification. If you need magnification at 100 or less to hit man sized targets

as bart said, the acog gives you better ability to do target identification, which is even more important for LEO than for mil.

Do you even need a weapons sight at 5 feet?.. You're almost hitting the target with the barrel at five feet...

yeah, so i'm exaggerating, but only slightly. up close, the acog can be annoying