Rifle Scopes Acog yes or no?

[Sgt. 0811]

I have a little experience with acog nothing bad but I would like some honest pro and con to the system. Thinking of putting one on an LWRC Spartan Alpha .223 with a 1 in 7 twist match 14.5 inch barrel. The gun is capable of 3/4 MOA. My other option is a good 1x4 scope.
Thoughts?

 

[C-grunt]

Having used an ACOG in the Army on a SDMR and as an LEO I say they make great general purpose scopes. If you want quick hits out to 400 meters on a man sized target they are hard to beat. If you want to shoot small groups at the range there are better options.

I have friends with the new 1-4s. They are also really nice.

 

[ego235]

I have an ACOG TA11J-G it is the 3.5x model with longer eye relief bought new about a year ago. I got the green illuminated crosshair model as the reticle is fairly thin and allows for decent target shooting from the bench. Paid just over $1k from an online vendor. A few years back I had one with a donut reticle which I did not like as much since it covered too much of the target.

At the same time my friend bought a Primary Arms 3x compact scope (PAC3x). Although they're not in the same price range, after some detailed comparison, we both agreed the ACOG had significantly better contrast and depth of field. It also had similar field of view size despite being .5x higher in magnification.

However this isn't to say either have been running perfectly. After about a month I noticed the windage knob was not working. Sent it back to Trijicon and had it back in 3 weeks. The Primary Arms scope had a canted reticle. It didn't come canted but after a few uses it seemed to have "tilted" to the right. My buddy sent it back and got it back in a month. The repairs were covered under warranty so that shows both companies stand behind their product.

Overall I love my ACOG. I had it on my Wilson Combat SPR and my FN SCAR 16S both in .223. I routinely shoot at 8 and 12 inch plates at 300 meters as well as punch paper at 100 yards. It also totally looks badass, nice compact size and lightweight. If you can stomach the cost I recommend you get one.

I found a little video of my ACOG model on Youtube which shows off the reticle nicely.
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=_Z_LQebd-tQ&desktop_uri=/watch?v=_Z_LQebd-tQ

 

[CUSTOM1911FAN]

I think someone summed it up best when they said, base your optics on what distances you think you will most likely be engaging targets. If you are at CQB range, irons or Holographic Red Dot sights are awesome. But they get a bit problematic the further out you go, due to the size of your dot obscuring the target, or just plain not being able to see the target with unmagnified optics.

Now, the ACOG, and even better, the Leupold HAMR (better eye relief, clear glass and user adjustable brightness) works great if your distances are mostly, say, 80%, in mid range engagements like 2-400+ yards.

Of course your big, 3-10, 4-16, 5-25 are obviously for if you spend most of you time at long ranges.

So, the 1-4 is a good compromise if you spend, say, 60% of your time in the open at mid ranges, and 40% at cqb ranges. For instance, if you are a sheriff deputy, you can dial down for a building search, and dial back up when you are going to go search the barn, or wooded areas surrounding a structure in the country. According to some, the S&B Short Dot 1-4 was made due to interest from military units who participated in combat in Somalia and wanted an optic good for storming into a building, then making shots on bad guys on rooftops, down the street. Plus, these days, ROEs are such that it really helps to be able to dial up and identify if a person has a weapon and is a threat to you or not.

In closing, the ACOG is a tough as nails optic that has seen all kinds of service and would be great on a carbine used at carbine distances. The only thing you will notice is that its a little difficult to run real fast at CQB ranges. There's a sticky called Optics Selection (iirc) in the Optics section of the Hide, read that. I've owned a shit ton of different optics, message me if you want more info.

Cheers

 

[gehrm]

Good info, thanks. What're people's thoughts on the ACOG + RMR combo? I have read that one has to break their cheek weld to use the RMR, the RMR is too far back for proper eye relief and that the height above the bore axis makes the RMR problematic. Do people have a better solution like RMR on offset mount?

 

[camocorvette]

CUSTOM1911FAN is pretty much spot on..

I love the ACOG for what it is, a jack of all trades, master of none. Its tough as nails. I carried one for a few years in the Army and it never failed me. I had a screw come loose on the larue mount once or twice, but that was after thousands of rounds. Put some locktite on and I was good to go. I used it for Short Range Marksmanship which I remember shooting at least 4-5,000 rounds in a week, in the rain... It worked just fine for in close stuff because you don't use it you just aim and shoot. You get used to it after awhile and it becomes muscle memory. Anything 15-20 meters out if you take just a second you can glance through it on the way up to the target. But that's about it. So I would say that's CON # 1.

I also used it for a 2 week Long Range Marksman course. We engaged E-Type silhouettes out to 800 meters with a spotter. I had the TA31F with red chevron and bdc out to 800 meters. My buddy Warner had the TA01N I think. They worked great for what we needed it for, getting steel on target. Anything under 600 meters we were normally 10 for 10 shots. It was just to easy, put the bdc of whatever corresponding range your target is at and blast away. Ding!!! At 700 meters is when you want more magnification. My scores dropped to 50-60% first round hits. But your rifle is most likely less used and abused than ours were. But I would say that it gave you fast target acquisition and ranging capabilities if you know your target size. So that's a PRO in my book.

My illumination tube was cracked the whole time I had it ( almost 3 years ) and I still had to put tape on it and peel just a little back during the day or the reticule would be to bright and blurry. So that's a PRO and a CON It was tough. But non adjustable.

Just a few things to think about. Its not adjustable, or variable, in any way. You just zero it there's no brightness adjustment, just tape and a mini glow stick at night. Which works..

Its built like a tank and can take a bullet. Google the picture its pretty gnarly. But your stuck with one magnification. 3.5x35mm or 4x32mm. I just seen the 6x48mm but I think I would just rather have a 10 power or more then. Are you going for 3/4 MOA or going for hits? Because in my opinion the ACOG is not for grouping. It can be done Ive seen it, but its better suited getting hits on target. ( not in a small group, but good enough...)

Its all about what your intended use is and the ease of use you want. I hope I could help.

 

[Cobrajoe99]

As others have stated the Acog is a good all around option. I have the TA31FG which is the Green Chevron reticle. The glass quality is very nice, and even using it in low light I can see well. I use mine on a duty rifle and have never had any issues with it. The only CON I can think of is, you have to train with it a little to get your eyes used to being able to use the reticle with both eyes open. I didn't find this to be difficult, however some of the other guys in my Dept didn't like it. So just be aware if you plan to use it up close, you will need to practice with it. If you look up Bindon Aiming Concept you can find more on this. I like having both eyes open as I feel it gives me better situational awareness.

Also here is Trijicon's video explaining it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpGSKKgWWks

After I practiced with it for a while, I found it to be just as quick as my buddy's Aimpoint. I don't have any experience with 1-4x scopes yet, so I can't compare it for you. But I doubt you will be disappointed with an Acog.

 

[CUSTOM1911FAN]

Hey Gehrm,

Well, I gave the Delta Point/HAMR setup a try for 2 years. Not exactly an ACOG/RMR setup, but I will tell you my experiences. First off, I had an ACOG before, and I can say that if you practice a shit load and keep both eyes open, or close a lens cap over the front, you can very quickly apply the Bindon Aiming concept at CQB distances. When you get it down, it's pretty cool-with both eyes open, the red chevron just appears on your target. Now, where I had trouble was transitioning through multiple targets in the 25-50 yard range. Enter the Delta point. The DPoint was nice cuz I could wail on close range stuff and engage out to 25+ yards with the same zero as my optic (but with a 4inch offset, which was a bitch for 7 yard head shots!). Now, you mentioned the cheekweld. Well, the ACOG is high already, all combat optics mounts are high cuz they assume you are gonna run backups underneath. Add an extra couple inches to that with your RMR or Dpoint and that is a tall MFr. So, what I did was train on two positions: one was a standard cheekweld, and in the other, I turned my head to the right as my chin slid up my stock and i developed a "chin-weld" that would be the same point of reference every time. It was a good setup. It was accurate and at 1-400 meters, I connected with everything I aimed at with the RMR (and ACOG, fo r that matter). But I am not a smart man and I would often get confused as to which optic to be on as I negotiated the various shooting points in a big 3 gun field course! Oops! SO, I ended up putting the DPoint on a 1 oclock D-Defense mount and that was pretty damn cool. BUT, the HAMR and the DPoint were still on different planes, so I had to hunt for the optics when I transitioned. So, I took off the HAMR and put a Leupold VX-R (it was what I had on hand) in low height Badger rings and mounted it directly to my AR receiver with a Badger AR Riser/Rail Extender (no backup iron sights), and THAT setup kicked ass. Both optics were on the same plane, so I had one good, low, solid cheekweld and the only thing I had to do was to roll the gun over to the left and my optic was perfectly in view, with no shifting of my head or cheekweld. If there was a lower mount for the ACOG/HAMMER that would solve the aforementioned problem, but there's not. I bet that's why JP had the built in ACOG mount on their CTR02 upper receiver, to get it down lower and transition well with their iron backup sights.

So, the takeaways from my experiences are:

Train your ass off at varying distances so you naturally know which optic to be on, for a given distance (ACOG w RMR on top).
Train your ass off to adapt your shooting position to your equipment (ACOG w RMR on top).
Or, if you mount the primary and secondary optic seperately, try and make sure you choose teh correct height mount, or shim an existing mount, so that both optics are at about the same height so you can keep your face on your stock and move smoothly from one to the other.

Oh, and I have to give Kudos to Trijicon on their RMR. I started using an RM07 on my outlaw 3gun G17 and that thing is BAD ASS!! I love that setup. If you are used to using a red dot sight, it is a very quick and natural transition to that sight. I love that it is super tough and you can rack the slide off shit, and use it as a charging handle, and bash into barricades and it laughs at the abuse. I think the Dpoint is a little easier to see through, but I give the win to the RMR for battle toughness. Oh, and before you naysayers talk shit about how the RMR breaks or wanders when used on pistols, I have news. I was drinking beer at the Hofbrauhaus in Vegas, recently, and some nerds from Michigan came in and sat down next to my wife and I. It turns out that these nerds knew a WHOLE LOT about optics and I have it on good account that the RMR has been beefed up and that if you have ANY problems with it, send it back and they will make it better.

And after all that, I am going with the Leupold MK 1-6 with the 556 reticle! Haha!!

Whatever you choose, have fun with it.

Good info, thanks. What're people's thoughts on the ACOG + RMR combo? I have read that one has to break their cheek weld to use the RMR, the RMR is too far back for proper eye relief and that the height above the bore axis makes the RMR problematic. Do people have a better solution like RMR on offset mount?

 

[Sgt. 0811]

Interesting reads so far. I'm finding myself hesitant because I have a Vx-R and a burris XTR 1-4 setup right now. I wonder if the Acog is almost a downgrade in some aspects.

 

[CUSTOM1911FAN]

Interesting reads so far. I'm finding myself hesitant because I have a Vx-R and a burris XTR 1-4 setup right now. I wonder if the Acog is almost a downgrade in some aspects.

Aww, don't get me wrong, it's a great optic. Just depends what you wanna do with it. Ultimately in our hands these things are toys, expensive toys. You just gotta figure what games to play with them. My game is three gun in Texas, so I use the optics which are good for the courses I play at. I have a CQB gun with a holographic sight, I have a midrange gun with a 14.5 barrel and 1-6 scope, and I have a 16" gun with a 2stage trigger and I use the same 1-6. Or at least, I will. I just got this 1-6. I used to have a 1-4 Short Dot and that thing was great, but I wanted to see what all the hooplah is about the new Leupolds.

Oh, and as far as my motivations for buying, this is how it went: I am in the Reserves, so I bought an ACOG so I could get very good and familiar with it, in case I went to war with it. I got good with it and sold it. I got the HAMR/Dpoint from someone with Leupold for test and eval, and I bought the Leupold VX-R Zombie cuz I think its cool and it lives on my 6.8caliber dedicated hunting AR! I was happy with the Short Dot and would have stayed with it, but I had to sell it to afford the Mark 6 as my "all-around" optic. I have had the same Aimpoints for years. They make my favorite red dot optics. So, unless something incredible comes out in the future, my main optics will be a Leupold VX6, an Aimpoint M4, an Aimpoint H1, and a 5-25 S&B for my big gun. My friends say my gun safe is like their golf bags: I just pull out whatever club I need and go play.

Lastly, I figure I should mention that I've seen sponsored shooters kicking plenty of butt with that Burris XTR of yours......

 

[Sgt. 0811]

Again, thank you for the informative posts. I'm going to go look at one today, I'm bringing my XTR and rifle with me to see how they compare.

 

[gehrm]

Custom1991Fan, thanks for the great write up, very informative and detailed. I particularly liked your description of the chinweld!

How do you like the Leupold Mk6? It seems to be getting rave reviews, but I haven't seen one yet. Also, have you had a chance to see the USO 1-8? If so, how would you compare the two?

Seems like most people these days are going the 1-n route if they have one rifle and want max flexibility. For those with dedicated platforms, then it is back to your idea of RDS for CQB, 1-4 or ACOG for mid and then optic of choice for longer range.

 

[burneyr]

Personally, I tried a few friend's ACOG models, but I could never get used to the close eye relief.

 

[HD1911]

I had an ran a TA31F for a short time. Hated the Uber short eye relief. Other than that it is a really nice optic. But I think 1-4x's and such are a way better option.

 

[DMW32/16]

yep the first time I "got bit" was an acog lol however ive also seen consistant results out to just over 600m.

 

[Sgt. 0811]

Gonna pass, went and took a look at one. Mounted it on my rifle and had a few big bones to pick with it.
Eye relief was unforgiving and way to close for my liking.
Price was obscene for a fixed power optic.

It was extremely cool but not for me. Thank you all for the input.

 

[HD1911]

Your thoughts mimicked mine. Good choice sir

 

[CUSTOM1911FAN]

Hey Gehrm,

Well, sir, I have not had any time to shoot my Mark 6, to tell you the truth. But, looking through it, seems to me that the glass is very bright and clear, and the CMR W, looks like it is a very well laid out reticle. I am glad that I am seeing a shift from a crazy busy crosshatched Horus reticle, to simplified reticles that have dots or tick marks going down in a "christmas tree" pattern that gives you simple visual references to figure out where you need to hold, in relation to the target. Even cranked up to full power, the view through the Mk6 scope is clear and uncluttered. I have to commend Leupold for listening to end users in the design of all of their new gear. I know the guy who designed the reticle, and has had input on the Mk6 design as well, and he is a real-deal end user who knows a thing or two about fighting with optics. His influence will be felt, positively, for years. I know I sound like a fanboy, but I like what Leupold is doing-they are putting alot of thought and resources into their designs and into taking care of customers, after the sale-and doing it in the USA.

Oh, on the US Optics scopes-honestly, I can't comment on them because I don't know anything about them. Between the 8 power Leupold and USO scopes you asked about, I've handled the Mk8 and it is a fine piece of glass. Again, the guy who advises Leupold told me that the Mk8 was an honest effort by Leupold to build a scope that was exactly what the end users wanted, and they did it without regard to what it cost (hence the price and quality). I know you would be well served by a Mk6 or Mk8. But, among my circle of friends, and my very extended shooting family, there's not a single guy using USO products. All I ever run into are: Leupold, S&B, Nightforce, Premier, IOR, Vortex, Trijicon, Burris, annnnndd, that's about it. SO, unless I get a review or two by people I trust and that I shoot with, and are at the same, or better, skill level as me, I am not gonna buy it. If someone wants to lend me one for T&E, I'll shoot it for a year and give it an honest writeup, but I am not gonna spend high end money to buy a scope I've never seen and on which I have no feedback from people I know.

I hope that helps!!!!

Cheers!

Custom1991Fan, thanks for the great write up, very informative and detailed. I particularly liked your description of the chinweld!

How do you like the Leupold Mk6? It seems to be getting rave reviews, but I haven't seen one yet. Also, have you had a chance to see the USO 1-8? If so, how would you compare the two?

Seems like most people these days are going the 1-n route if they have one rifle and want max flexibility. For those with dedicated platforms, then it is back to your idea of RDS for CQB, 1-4 or ACOG for mid and then optic of choice for longer range.

 

[luciausarmy]

I personally dont like the ACOG myself, To pricey. I would rather get a 1x4, or hell myself I like the red dot. but maybe its just me. i traded my acog for red dot CCO when I was in the army. (and yes everyone thought i was crazy)

 

[samnev]

I have a little experience with acog nothing bad but I would like some honest pro and con to the system. Thinking of putting one on an LWRC Spartan Alpha .223 with a 1 in 7 twist match 14.5 inch barrel. The gun is capable of 3/4 MOA. My other option is a good 1x4 scope.
Thoughts?

I have 4 different COG'S on my Ar's. A TAO1, a TA01NSN, a TA 31F and a RCOM4. While they have served me well I eventually put a Nightforce NXS 1-4X24 with a FC-2 reticle when I got my LMT CQB. If I had it all to do over again I would have gone that route instead of the 4 ACOG's. Just my opinion.

 

[gehrm]

This thread has been great, thanks to everyone for contributing their thoughts.

Custom1911Fan, I especially appreciate your well thought out and articulate responses. I think you may have won me over to giving the Mk6 a hard look. Everyone seems to really like them and compared to some of their competitors, prices seem a bit more reasonable.

 

[SuckitTrebek]

Interesting reads so far. I'm finding myself hesitant because I have a Vx-R and a burris XTR 1-4 setup right now. I wonder if the Acog is almost a downgrade in some aspects.

An acog is never a downgrade.

Clear concise optics and can be used as a hammer.

Anyone that has used one in very harsh conditions knows what's up.

If your going to baby whatever it is as a safe queen then get whatever.

 

[boonewsm]

Ill be short and sweet got a TA31ECOS with the doctor. Glass quality is good. Getting shots on target is easy. The only CON I have for it is the eye releif. Been out shooting pigs at night and have came back with a kiss or two above the eye..

 

[ronnl001]

I use a TA11 on one of my rigs. It uses the 308 reticle, which matches well with 77 grainers out of a 16" barrel.