I'm looking to get a quality optic for my FAL. I was considering the Valdada tactical 1.1-4x. Is 4x enough magnification for a 308 SHTF battle rifle? I already have dot optics for 2 carbines so I wanted something that could reach out a bit further but still be relatively fast. Also, what magnification would be issued to a "Designated Marksman" Thanks.
Best Magnification for Battle Rifle Optic?
- Thread starter ctiger
- Start date
- Status
4x is plenty, though I don't know if I'd use a variable optic.
The IOR M2's are decent. Recently, I went with an ELCAN and don't regret it at all.
The IOR M2's are decent. Recently, I went with an ELCAN and don't regret it at all.
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
I shoot out to 500yds with a 3.5x scope and there is enough magnification that I would feel comfortable using it on smaller 10" targets out to 600yds. It wouldn't be my first choice for shooting exclusively at that distance; but as an anywhere from 15yds to 600yds, it is about perfect in my view.
The Marines went with the 4X ACOG. The ACOG, when used both eyes open, works as a dot scope for close range. Point and shoot with both eyes open.
With one eye closed, it works as a conventional riflescope. They've scored hits out to 400-500 or more meters I think. I remember hearing an ACOG-equipped M4 carbine in Afghanistan took out a machine gunner with a couple hits at 500 yards. The ACOG also has a range-finding reticule built into the chevron, at least on the 5.56mm model.
With one eye closed, it works as a conventional riflescope. They've scored hits out to 400-500 or more meters I think. I remember hearing an ACOG-equipped M4 carbine in Afghanistan took out a machine gunner with a couple hits at 500 yards. The ACOG also has a range-finding reticule built into the chevron, at least on the 5.56mm model.
Definitely an ACOG.
ACOGs don't have the eye relief to be forward mounted.
And, they have plenty of magnification to shoot as far as you can hope to hit anything. Considering that tomorrow I will be shooting my M1 with iron sights out to 400 yards at targets smaller than a human torso, I think you would be fine with 4X.
ACOGs don't have the eye relief to be forward mounted.
And, they have plenty of magnification to shoot as far as you can hope to hit anything. Considering that tomorrow I will be shooting my M1 with iron sights out to 400 yards at targets smaller than a human torso, I think you would be fine with 4X.
artherd
member
ACOG. perioid.
Now you just have to choose between TA11 and TA31.
And then between .308 and 5.56mm BDC tables.
And then between the various different reticules
Now you just have to choose between TA11 and TA31.
And then between .308 and 5.56mm BDC tables.
And then between the various different reticules
I don't think the debate is closed.
However, in my opinion, there are very few optics made for the purpose specified that are mil-spec and battle proven. One of them is the ACOG. It is being used extensively as we speak in Iraq and Afganistan.
Sure, you could use a sporting/civilian optic, and you would have something that is less than optimum IMO.
However, in my opinion, there are very few optics made for the purpose specified that are mil-spec and battle proven. One of them is the ACOG. It is being used extensively as we speak in Iraq and Afganistan.
Sure, you could use a sporting/civilian optic, and you would have something that is less than optimum IMO.
Zak Smith
Member
You can search here and on AR15.com for the gazillion threads about ACOG vs. anything else.
The TA11 has 2.4" of eye relief which is enough for 308.
1.5" - 2.4" of eye relief on the TA31/11 is not a hindrance, it's a feature considering the platform (AR15/M16/M4).
-z
The TA11 has 2.4" of eye relief which is enough for 308.
1.5" - 2.4" of eye relief on the TA31/11 is not a hindrance, it's a feature considering the platform (AR15/M16/M4).
-z
well I look at it differently
considering its not all that hard to hit a "human sized" target out to about 200 yards with iron sights, personally I go for more magnification. I'm a fan of variable power scopes (all my "full size" rifles have 'em, but for 1 .22). Considering its a .308, with considerable (realistic, unlike .223) effective range I would lean towards a 2-7x or a 3-9x. This being the difference between "aimed fire", and just launching bullets. In SHTF, if you need to take shots over 200 yards, you probably have the time to aim well (and want to). Close in stuff, and "bullet launching" is handled by lesser weapons (carbines). You can keep the scope set on low magnification, for "quick" shots, dial it up if you need more accurate, long range, shots. I find, with practice, that i can get "on target" pretty quickly even at higher magnifications. My .02.
considering its not all that hard to hit a "human sized" target out to about 200 yards with iron sights, personally I go for more magnification. I'm a fan of variable power scopes (all my "full size" rifles have 'em, but for 1 .22). Considering its a .308, with considerable (realistic, unlike .223) effective range I would lean towards a 2-7x or a 3-9x. This being the difference between "aimed fire", and just launching bullets. In SHTF, if you need to take shots over 200 yards, you probably have the time to aim well (and want to). Close in stuff, and "bullet launching" is handled by lesser weapons (carbines). You can keep the scope set on low magnification, for "quick" shots, dial it up if you need more accurate, long range, shots. I find, with practice, that i can get "on target" pretty quickly even at higher magnifications. My .02.
The ACOG uses the Bindon Aiming Concept, which means it works with either one eye open or both eyes open. You can mount it close up like a normal scope, because half the time you're using it as a normal scope.
When both eyes are open, the image your right eye "sees" is centered by your brain on the target, just like a dot scope does. Can't really explain, but it does work well.
Trijicon also makes the Tri-Power now, which is powered by fiberoptic, tritium and battery backup (as well as a mini-chem-light backup to the battery) but I can't remember if it has any magnification.
There is also a lower-powered Compact ACOG (1.5, 2X, 2.5X, etc). It's made more for the "close range only" guys like SWAT cops, etc, say out to 200 yards.
The ACOG isn't cheap ($600-800 I think) but it's made of the same stuff the M16's reciever is, and has a fiberoptic/tritium sighting system, so no batteries to worry about. If you want the best, you pay for it.
When both eyes are open, the image your right eye "sees" is centered by your brain on the target, just like a dot scope does. Can't really explain, but it does work well.
Trijicon also makes the Tri-Power now, which is powered by fiberoptic, tritium and battery backup (as well as a mini-chem-light backup to the battery) but I can't remember if it has any magnification.
There is also a lower-powered Compact ACOG (1.5, 2X, 2.5X, etc). It's made more for the "close range only" guys like SWAT cops, etc, say out to 200 yards.
The ACOG isn't cheap ($600-800 I think) but it's made of the same stuff the M16's reciever is, and has a fiberoptic/tritium sighting system, so no batteries to worry about. If you want the best, you pay for it.
Dave Markowitz
Member
My $0.02
I would not want a high magnification optic on a rifle intended for SHTF. If TSHTF, you are as likely to need the rifle at short range as at long, probably more so. High mag optics are problematical at short range because the field of view is so restricted.
I'd go with something no more powerful than 4x. My personal SHTF rifles (a Mini-14 and a Colt AR-15) both currently wear iron sights, although the Colt may be getting a red dot in the near future.
Also, optics break. Not always, but when they do it often comes at the worst possible time. Murphy's Law and all that. Make sure your rifle has a good set of iron sights and that you know how to use them.
I would not want a high magnification optic on a rifle intended for SHTF. If TSHTF, you are as likely to need the rifle at short range as at long, probably more so. High mag optics are problematical at short range because the field of view is so restricted.
I'd go with something no more powerful than 4x. My personal SHTF rifles (a Mini-14 and a Colt AR-15) both currently wear iron sights, although the Colt may be getting a red dot in the near future.
Also, optics break. Not always, but when they do it often comes at the worst possible time. Murphy's Law and all that. Make sure your rifle has a good set of iron sights and that you know how to use them.
CTiger... options are always a good thing, but simplicity is much more important... consider the fact that a "designated marksman" may be shooting from a shot distance to the max distances...and not at a paper target, often your scope is your long eyes, if your without a spotter, for target acquisition, and clairification...and the target itself, may be moving, or offering a small profile. One of the best, of the best...of all time GY. SGT. Carl N. Hathcock II...used a Leupold fixed 10X Ultra, that had its zero at 700 yards, keep in mind, he knew his weapon, knew the art of wind, and hold off, excuse me, knew is the wrong word... "lived with, and breathed", would be better... keep it simple, know your ammo and weapon, and go high in the X departments....8X, or 10X, fixed, outside adjustments.... and then practice, figure, in war, hitting anywhere between the nose and the belt buckle, is a hit, (36" X ring) only paper requires... key holeing. figure out the music you plan on dancing too...and then choose your optics...and equipment. Arc-Lite
Thought another reply might be in order...
For a FAL, there are a number of good options available (many from DSArms). Those that seem like decent options include:
For a FAL, there are a number of good options available (many from DSArms). Those that seem like decent options include:
- The IOR tactical you're looking at. I talked with the folks at DSArms about this one and it seems like a good choice; it's just new and there are few reviews out there. In general I don't think variable power on a battle rifle is necessary or desirable, but IOR optics tend to be built like tanks anyway.
- The IOR M1 and M2 optics work fine. They're kind of dull and have kind of a "tunnel" feel to the view, but they're simple, rugged, bright, and have a BDC and light that're easy to use. Cheap too.
- The Trilix scopes (from DSA or Cheaperthandirt) are something like $250 and are the original optic designed for FALs. The reticle is a little odd, but it's all built in to a upper cover and can be removed for cleaning and replacing without affecting zero. Tritium sources are non-existent, but you can get a LED with it if you like. Apparently you might want to make a mod or two to strengthen the attachment, but no biggie. This is probably the cost/performance leader, unless you're going with a used IOR or something.
- ACOGs are sexy -- tons of options for reticle and BDC, BDCs are built into the reticle for a simpler design, they're lightweight, and multiple light sources of your choice are available. They aren't cheap, and some have really low eye relief, so I chose to leave them alone.
- Elcans. Leica glass, rugged build, kind of heavy and big. The BDC is built into the mount so the optic itself has no moving parts, but apparently the mounts can loosen up if you issue them to recruits as Canada did. Newer mounts are supposed to minimize the problem, but it's still the weak point. There are a few reticle designs out there (see DSA for a couple), but I like the basic ^ reticle with a lightly glowing tritium triangle for low-light use (you can't notice it unless you need it -- not bright like the ACOGs during daytime).
- Regular hunting scopes can be mounted as well if you'd rather. No real reason not to, I don't guess.
shoobe01
Member
Be aware, by no means are all ACOGs BAC capable. The most common NSN one, the TA01, is just a scope, so be aware. The Compacts are a good choice, as they are cheaper, all lighted and mount lower (good for a FAL, tossup for an AR).
I also, after some experimentation with optics like this, settled on irons for the FAL. I did narrow the front sight. If I am planning to work with greater precisition or at longer range, I'll bring the bolt gun with dedicated scope.
I also, after some experimentation with optics like this, settled on irons for the FAL. I did narrow the front sight. If I am planning to work with greater precisition or at longer range, I'll bring the bolt gun with dedicated scope.
SHTF ? How about the guys who are doing it for real ?
http://www.trijicon-inc.com/whats_new.cfm
Marines Name Trijicon ACOG Official Rifle Combat Optic
The Trijicon ACOG riflescope (Advanced Combat Optical Gunsight) has earned the singular distinction of being named the first-ever Rifle Combat Optic (RCO) of the United States Marine Corps. A multi-year contract was awarded to the Michigan-based optics manufacturer in August, 2004. The RCO will be mounted to the M16A2, M16A4, and the M4A1 carbine to enhance the Marines’ ability to identify and accurately fire upon targets from muzzle to 800 meters.
http://www.isayeret.com/optics/acog/acog.htm
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=116347
One problem with basing your scope buying decision on what Carlos Hathcock used in Vietnam is that he was a sniper. I assume you are interested in a general purpose, jack of all trades rifle that might be used for any purpose a rifle might be used for. As was mentioned previously, the odds of using your rifle at close range or relatively close range are far greater than that of using your rifle at extremly long range. There are a number of reasons for this but the biggest is that targets at great distance are probably not a threat to you: you arn't in the military engaged in a battle with enemy soldiers. You are trying to stay alive. Another problem with outfitting a rifle with a real heavy emphisis on long range shooting is that most people are frankly not able to hit anything at long range no matter what they are using. I see a lot of discussion on this board about a rifle's ability to engage targets at ranges in excess of 500 yards and wonder how many of these people could honestly hit a silhouette target at those ranges if put on the spot.
Most, if not all of the first world militaries, long ago realized that the average soldier engages in combat at ranges inside 300 yards. That is one of the main reasons many first world armies are carrying rifles and carbines chambered for cartridges like the 5.56 Nato. The US Army and Marine Corp. use optics to enhance accuracy and speed within that range.
"Also, optics break. Not always, but when they do it often comes at the worst possible time. Murphy's Law and all that. Make sure your rifle has a good set of iron sights and that you know how to use them."
That is certainly good advice. It is also a very good reason to buy good quality optics. If you expect that your rifle may someday have to undergo the kind of use and abuse that our countries military rifles are exposed to, you might want to consider using the same optics they are using.
http://www.trijicon-inc.com/whats_new.cfm
Marines Name Trijicon ACOG Official Rifle Combat Optic
The Trijicon ACOG riflescope (Advanced Combat Optical Gunsight) has earned the singular distinction of being named the first-ever Rifle Combat Optic (RCO) of the United States Marine Corps. A multi-year contract was awarded to the Michigan-based optics manufacturer in August, 2004. The RCO will be mounted to the M16A2, M16A4, and the M4A1 carbine to enhance the Marines’ ability to identify and accurately fire upon targets from muzzle to 800 meters.
http://www.isayeret.com/optics/acog/acog.htm
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=116347
One problem with basing your scope buying decision on what Carlos Hathcock used in Vietnam is that he was a sniper. I assume you are interested in a general purpose, jack of all trades rifle that might be used for any purpose a rifle might be used for. As was mentioned previously, the odds of using your rifle at close range or relatively close range are far greater than that of using your rifle at extremly long range. There are a number of reasons for this but the biggest is that targets at great distance are probably not a threat to you: you arn't in the military engaged in a battle with enemy soldiers. You are trying to stay alive. Another problem with outfitting a rifle with a real heavy emphisis on long range shooting is that most people are frankly not able to hit anything at long range no matter what they are using. I see a lot of discussion on this board about a rifle's ability to engage targets at ranges in excess of 500 yards and wonder how many of these people could honestly hit a silhouette target at those ranges if put on the spot.
Most, if not all of the first world militaries, long ago realized that the average soldier engages in combat at ranges inside 300 yards. That is one of the main reasons many first world armies are carrying rifles and carbines chambered for cartridges like the 5.56 Nato. The US Army and Marine Corp. use optics to enhance accuracy and speed within that range.
"Also, optics break. Not always, but when they do it often comes at the worst possible time. Murphy's Law and all that. Make sure your rifle has a good set of iron sights and that you know how to use them."
That is certainly good advice. It is also a very good reason to buy good quality optics. If you expect that your rifle may someday have to undergo the kind of use and abuse that our countries military rifles are exposed to, you might want to consider using the same optics they are using.
Thanks for all the replies. What I'm hearing from most is go with a 4x fixed magnification. Are the variable scopes being ruled out b/c of the KISS philosophy or is there another reason? I thought it might be possible to get the target acquisition of a dot sight AND the longer range capabilities of an ACOG. Is this unrealistic or does the 4xs ACOG offer extremely fast acquisition? I have never handled one before. Also, besides the others listed in the thread already are there any other similar scopes that I should look at? Thanks again.
Gunny Hathcock
My reference to Gunny Hathcock, was more then just the fact he was THE sniper... it also addressed the need to be in tune with your equipment, be it at 20 feet or 2000 yards....if your only connection to your equipment is how it looks, its performance will always be less, then your hopes. What ever you own, use it, or lose it Arc-Lite
My reference to Gunny Hathcock, was more then just the fact he was THE sniper... it also addressed the need to be in tune with your equipment, be it at 20 feet or 2000 yards....if your only connection to your equipment is how it looks, its performance will always be less, then your hopes. What ever you own, use it, or lose it Arc-Lite
Leupold makes a 1-3X optic, can't remember the name right at the moment, I've seen some pics of it being used in Iraq. For normal movement, you leave it at 1X as a dotscope, if you need a long shot, crank it to 3X and take your shot.
It works fairly well, I handled one for about 10 minutes on an M4.
It works fairly well, I handled one for about 10 minutes on an M4.
"I thought it might be possible to get the target acquisition of a dot sight AND the longer range capabilities of an ACOG."
http://www.trijicon-inc.com/aiming.cfm
"According to Major General J.N. Mattis, Commanding General of the 1st Marine Division during Operation Iraqi Freedom: “The ACOG mounted on the M16 service rifle has proven to be the biggest improvement in lethality for the Marine infantryman since the introduction of the M1 Garand in WWII.â€
http://www.trijicon-inc.com/aiming.cfm
"According to Major General J.N. Mattis, Commanding General of the 1st Marine Division during Operation Iraqi Freedom: “The ACOG mounted on the M16 service rifle has proven to be the biggest improvement in lethality for the Marine infantryman since the introduction of the M1 Garand in WWII.â€
Browns Fan
Member
I havent seen the ACOG, but, I have seen a tricked -out Saiga with Eotech optics at my local gunshop. It is pretty impressive... and at about half the price of the ACOG.
MAGNIFICATION: 1.4-6.2x 1x-4x variable and 1X,2X,3X Fixed
RETICLE: Recoil proof, etched and chromed on optical glass Front focal plane (Rear on demand) Circle-dot & 200 others
FIELD OF VIEW: 1x @100yds=116ft., 4x@100yds=31.2ft, 3X=41ft.
EYE RELIEF: 4.3in.@x, 3.3in@4x
HUMIDITY: Waterproof to 30 feet
TEMPERATURE: -20° to 140°F
WEIGHT: 13.75oz.
LENGTH: 9.5in
Personally, I think the details speak for themselves. Obviously none of the major brands will be a failure, but with the relatively minor price differences I don't see why not to get the variable magnification with the SN-4.
- Status
