Rifle Scopes ACSS reticle for precision shooting?

[R700P308]

I'm looking at the Primary Arms scopes and they seem well thought of and robust (for the price). However I can't help but wonder about that reticle. It seems great (in theory at least) for quickly ranging and engaging moving targets, but few of us are doing that.

How accurately can you aim with a center chevron instead of a dot? My only experience with the ACSS was one of their red dots, which is kind of a joke anyway.

Specifically looking at their 3-18x50 FFP ACSS 308 scope for a Tikka CTR in .308. Would be used for a crossover hunting and hobby/precision shooting.

 

[Creedmoor87]

I had Primary arms 4-14 ACSS .223/.308 on my 6.5 before they came out with one for the 6.5. I like it wasn’t to difficult to use, for the BDC being off for my caliber.
100 yard shots

R

Sadly longest I got out with it was 200 yards, which aiming at 1lb exploding target tape to a tree and hit it in 1 shot. I have since moved to bigger scope in different brand. Will miss the ACSS reticle as I wish PA would release different reticle for 6.5 and add a 24-25 mag range for bridge gap between the 18 and 30 mag scopes

 

[Hollywood 6mm]

IMO, the reticle is more for the "point and shoot" crowd - people that want to lob rounds at full size IPSCs without doing a lot of work. For a true precision rifle, I feel there's too much clutter. The chevron actually isn't a big problem, IMO, other than the amount of space it takes up, but all of the BDC-type stuff they build into it just drowns out what little useful markings (ie: MIL/MOA markings) there are.

If you want something to throw on a gas gun for quick and dirty shots, then it seems to work fine. On a rifle where I need to make accurate corrections, holdovers, and measurements for UKD/corrections... not so much.

(Second edit: I went back and looked at that reticle I thought was a mil tree reticle... it's not. It's another BDC reticle dressed up as a tree. Disregard that first edit if anyone saw it - my original comments above still stand.)

 

[VegasHKShooter]

I’m a fan of the Griffin reticle that PA uses. But, it isn’t an ACSS, it is very similar to the NF ATACR 1-8 reticle. I DO NOT like BDC reticles for true precision work. They are fine for, as stated above, minute of man on a Carbine. However, once you start holding precision shots on 1.5 moa targets at 800 yds, good luck getting a BDC to be that good. I’m a big fan of the H59 for match shooting. It is a very fine center aiming point, and it makes precise holds very possible.
I’m not a hater on PA, and in fact, their Platinum line is very solid. Just more of s DMR type scope than a precision optic.

 

[bfglowkey]

As mentioned above, the PA ACSS reticle is good for tactical engagement for quick dirty work. It comes with very specific information on what the reticle is optimized for and you can hit stuff quickly. When you talk about LR precision work you will focus on the word precision. Now only you can determine what is "acceptable accuracy" is in your circumstance. Just know that its more of a fine art that many LR shooters take seriously and BDC style reticles usually don't fit into that niche. You can make it work with lots of practice....just not as elegant.

 

[R700P308]

This is all very very helpful. Thank you. Pretty much confirms what I'd expected.

I'll be looking at more "standard" reticles then and maybe look at the ACSS for a 5.56 AR.

 

[Birddog6424]

As stated above, BDC designs are for quick adjustments on the fly.

I really like BDC reticles for 3 Gun where speed is crucial and first round impacts are important, but not absolutely necessary. I find detailed mil reticles to be too slow and cluttered for that application.

But the opposite holds true for accuracy and precision. The BDC lacks the proper detail.

 

[Hollywood 6mm]

As stated above, BDC designs are for quick adjustments on the fly.

I really like BDC reticles for 3 Gun where speed is crucial and first round impacts are important, but not absolutely necessary. I find detailed mil reticles to be too slow and cluttered for that application.

But the opposite holds true for accuracy and precision. The BDC lacks the proper detail.

I'd rather have a simplified MIL hash reticle in those applications since it's going to be caliber agnostic. The BTR-2 in the Bushnell SMRS is a great example of what I prefer of the BDC style stuff.

 

[Birddog6424]

I'd rather have a simplified MIL hash reticle in those applications since it's going to be caliber agnostic. The BTR-2 in the Bushnell SMRS is a great example of what I prefer of the BDC style stuff.

My first G2 1-6 Razor had the mil reticle. It drove me nuts. I had to spend more time figuring out my holds versus knowing my first 3 lines and post were 270, 320, 420, and 510.

I swapped it out for the JM reticle and like it much better. I hardly have to think about it.

 

[Primus]

It's the most overrated reticle out there. It does nothing well and is one giant compromise. I tried to talk some sense Into the designer when he was soliciting it years ago but he didn't listen. That's why the only people you see with them are low IQ, low information types. And it sucks balls for actual precision shooting.

 

[wade2big]

My first G2 1-6 Razor had the mil reticle. It drove me nuts. I had to spend more time figuring out my holds versus knowing my first 3 lines and post were 270, 320, 420, and 510.

I swapped it out for the JM reticle and like it much better. I hardly have to think about it.

I dont mind mil reticles on carbines.

200 yard zero on main line
.5 300 yards
1.5 400 yards
3 500 yards

Close enough to put 62 grain ammo out of a 16” ar on a 12” target.

 

[Primus]

Mils is Mills. Why learn multiple systems when you can run the same from SBRs to ELR . Learn the holds, tape them to the gun and be done with it.

 

[Steel+Killer]

It's the most overrated reticle out there. It does nothing well and is one giant compromise. I tried to talk some sense Into the designer when he was soliciting it years ago but he didn't listen. That's why the only people you see with them are low IQ, low information types. And it sucks balls for actual precision shooting.

The ACSS wasn't and isn't designed to be a precision reticle and I don't think PA ever said it was. It is as stated a BDC reticle that does a pretty damn good job at what it was designed for, hitting man sized targets out to 800 yds with the ammo the BDC was calibrated for. The intended weapon platform is obviously gas guns with a LPV scope. Yeah it sucks so bad Trijicon puts it in a couple ACOGS pretty sure the designer is probably glad he didn't listen to you.

 

[Sako man]

It's the most overrated reticle out there. It does nothing well and is one giant compromise. I tried to talk some sense Into the designer when he was soliciting it years ago but he didn't listen. That's why the only people you see with them are low IQ, low information types. And it sucks balls for actual precision shooting.

Primus, please STFU! Most assholes understand that the ACSS is a quick and dirty, yet effective BDC, not meant for the precision community!

That said... the ACSS coupled with the griffen Mil reticle found on the PA 1-8 Platinum is a fantastic combo of BDC and Mil adjustable hold over reticle with wind dot's, nicely suited to use on a DMR in 5.56 or 7.62 gas gun.

Cheers!

 

[Lthrt]

I have the ACSS in both a 2nd Focal plane 1-8 and the 3-18FFP and apparently a double low IQ. Great on a square rnage when shooting berm distances(200, 300, 400) so I thought it may be possible for PRS matches but using the bdc was not. I still had to dial the FFP one (also incorporates a mil scale and has .1mil turrets) to get hits. The 3-18 tracks perfectly so you can use it in prs style matches but you have to dial the elevation for nearly every shot and not use the ACSS BDC for small targets. Target ranges in matches vary so much that trying to use a BDC (any bdc) will land you toward the bottom of the standings. Said another way, when a stage has mutiple targets at ranges like 467, 591, 735 etc. you’ll still be best-guessing and holding in space without a reference aiming point. I’m going back to the H59 for matches, its mil based so it actually works and my crutch for correcting misses on the follow up shots.

 

[Primus]

Primus, please STFU! Most assholes understand that the ACSS is a quick and dirty, yet effective BDC, not meant for the precision community!

That said... the ACSS coupled with the griffen Mil reticle found on the PA 1-8 Platinum is a fantastic combo of BDC and Mil adjustable hold over reticle with wind dot's, nicely suited to use on a DMR in 5.56 or 7.62 gas gun.

Cheers!

Thanks for confirming the earlier post.

 

[Dolomite_Supafly]

I contacted them and they have a 3-18 with a mildot and extended mil reticle being released later this year.

 

[ddavis]

ACSS was awesome for the one PRS gas gun match I did. Targets were relatively large and it lined up out to 800. No dialing, no calculations. If your target is at 600 yards, put it on the 8 and hold of for either the 5 or 10 wind dot, or in my case for that match, double the 10 mph dot.

 

[Primus]

So you happen to be shooting a load the matches up with the reticle? What happens when you don't?

 

[Ghilly]

I really like that ACSS for fast stuff but prefer the older style with the dot in the center and not the delta.

 

[Birddog6424]

So you happen to be shooting a load the matches up with the reticle? What happens when you don't?

No such thing.

Each line corresponds with a range with any caliber or bullet. Just like mil lines..

 

[Ghilly]

I have used scopes with the tuned reticle before and it worked mostly for a load or so but when you switched it was worthless. Now all me stuff in in mils so does not matter what load you run

 

[wade2big]

I'm not familiar with the scope or reticle in question. If it is a bdc type reticle like what many are saying then no it is not a good choice for a precision rifle. It would be a great choice on a DMR or carbine type rifle though. A BDS reticle that is calibrated to a specific caliber such as a .308 for example can be used to make hits on 2/3 silhouettes out to 600 yards (furthest I have tried) with any loading of that cartridge. It just takes a little work to find the sweet spot.

I usually take the middle range (300 yards) and make that line on the scope hit center. All other BDC lines out to a reasonable distance for the rifle type will match up within a few inches either way.

Who cares if it hits 4" high at 200 and 4" low at 500. A hit is a hit. For all the guys that think this isn't accurate enough for the weopon type you are wrong. Chances are if you are engaging multiple targets with your highly calibrated mil scope on a non static range with unknow distant targets, the error in judging distance without a rangefinder will have you up and down on the target as well.

On a precision rig, choose a different reticle.

 

[021411]

I have a few holdover reticle scopes. I don’t switch to different ammo often. When I do I just run actual chrono data through Strelok Pro and get my holdovers. Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

 

[Primus]

Not quite... .308 bullets can range from 110gr to 230gr with vastly different drops at range for each. Unless you are the military buying 100k optics to be used on the same gun with the same ammo, BDC is fucking retarded. I can Kentucky windage as good with a mildot as most of these shitty bdc reticles. This is why mil based reticles like the h27 are king for this kind of work.

 

[Steel+Killer]

 

[Primus]

Another youtube shill. Don't people realize by now these monetized youtube videos are the gun rags of the 80's/90's.

Let me break it down for you. Companies pay money for reviews and the reviewers get to keep the product as part of the compensation. This is their business. Its nothing but entertainment value at best.

Not to even mention the guy is sponsored by Primary Arms directly. ROFL

Can't argue with facts and reason.

 

[ddavis]

So you happen to be shooting a load the matches up with the reticle? What happens when you don't?

I just used the generic 75 BTHP load I use for all my 223 rifles. As long as they were going 2650-2850ish I could just set the 100 yard zero a little higher or lower and get everything pretty well lined up. It was pretty much +/-3" out to 800. My rifle couldn't do better than 1 moa so it wasn't a big deal. You are overthinking this. Yes BDC generally isn't great, but this one works fine for what it is. I wouldn't shoot a PRS bolt gun match with it. The accuracy demands are different and speed isn't as important.

Dan

 

[SRPowah]

Not quite... .308 bullets can range from 110gr to 230gr with vastly different drops at range for each. Unless you are the military buying 100k optics to be used on the same gun with the same ammo, BDC is fucking retarded. I can Kentucky windage as good with a mildot as most of these shitty bdc reticles. This is why mil based reticles like the h27 are king for this kind of work.

I actually agree with you here unlike your earlier post. If one buys bulk ammo and shoots minute of man, these reticles are awesome. But once you graduate to knowing your more precise drops and have them noted on a rifle, I can take that extra second to glance down and put a shot closer to the center of a given target than the BDC reticle would allow. without ever touching a dial.

Had fun showing that trick to a local who was way too eager to get into distance shooting and thought BDC was all that he needed. In the end, it comes down to different needs and I will likely never run a BDC reticle.

 

[Primus]

I just used the generic 75 BTHP load I use for all my 223 rifles. As long as they were going 2650-2850ish I could just set the 100 yard zero a little higher or lower and get everything pretty well lined up. It was pretty much +/-3" out to 800. My rifle couldn't do better than 1 moa so it wasn't a big deal. You are overthinking this. Yes BDC generally isn't great, but this one works fine for what it is. I wouldn't shoot a PRS bolt gun match with it. The accuracy demands are different and speed isn't as important.

Dan

For a 3 or 4x acog... Yes.... for a high end lpv at 8x it's pathetic.

 

[ddavis]

For a 3 or 4x acog... Yes.... for a high end lpv at 8x it's pathetic.

Your attempt at trolling is what's pathetic. I'm giving you real world experience. I got 4th place by the way and it was with a rifle that shot about 1.25 moa with pretty shitty ballistics. The reticle has its place and your whiny AF opinion isn't going to change that.

 

[Primus]

Who's trolling? Some of us have actually used these in combat. Facts are facts. If your ballistics line up great...it's a one trick pony. If not it's a shitty compromise at best. Your inability to understand the difference is your problem

 

[ddavis]

Who's trolling? Some of us have actually used these in combat. Facts are facts. If your ballistics line up great...it's a one trick pony. If not it's a shitty compromise at best. Your inability to understand the difference is your problem

We aren't talking about combat here bud. There is a pretty wide range at which the ballistics line up. I've also owned a Leupold with the CMRW reticle. That one is garbage. I couldn't get shit to line up with it.

 

[Steel+Killer]

Who's trolling? Some of us have actually used these in combat. Facts are facts. If your ballistics line up great...it's a one trick pony. If not it's a shitty compromise at best. Your inability to understand the difference is your problem

Primus you have used a optic with the ACSS reticle in combat? Can I ask when, where, what optic, and what weapon it was mounted on?

 

[Sako man]

Who's trolling? Some of us have actually used these in combat. Facts are facts. If your ballistics line up great...it's a one trick pony. If not it's a shitty compromise at best. Your inability to understand the difference is your problem

Dude, you are a Luddite, who still prefers a mil dot, commenting on a reticle you have probably never used. They are not being used in combat at least in any great volume, but the fact that Trijicon is adopting them for use in the ACOG says something. Sure it's hard to beat dialing but for a quick and easy solution the ACSS is viable.

 

[R700P308]

It repenteth me that I started this thread.

 

[ddavis]

It repenteth me that I started this thread.

No harm no foul, hope you got the info you wanted. If you are more intelligent than a grapefruit, you can figure out how to use the reticle for a given load in a certain range. You can look up the subtensions before you buy one to see if it's going to work for you.

 

[Sako man]

It repenteth me that I started this thread.

Not your fault the internet is rife with armchair quarterbacks and assholes.

 

[rob.sfo]

I run the PA Platinum 1-8 ACSS in 3gun. At 1x the illuminated horseshoe is basically a fast red dot, and the BDC has had me on steel out to ~600 (after transitioning quickly off a bunch of 5-25 yard paper targets). I've also used it for hogs. It's worked well in those situations.

I was impressed with the glass quality for the money with their Platinum line, so I also got the PA Platinum 6-30 DEKA MIL (It's a MIL reticle, *NOT* a BDC). I like the chevron aiming point and 0.1 mil subtensions, and it seems like good glass for the money.

 

[Billiam1211]

Just as a data point:

I have an 18-inch 223 Wylde AR that I put together with a 1-8x Primary Arms Platinum ACSS on top. Given the directions that come with the reticle, I loaded up a couple of different loads. I found a load with the 69gr Sierra Matchking that gets me 2,900 fps and it matched up perfectly with the BDC and also was a sub-minute shooting load.

The first time I took the platform out past 100 yards, I was able to get first round hits all the way out to 500 yards. At 600 yards, we had a 10-inch square, which I missed simply due to a 15-20 mph wind. Once I adjusted, I was all over the 10-inch plate at 600 yards. I think that for a medium distance AR platform, the PA 1-8x ACSS is certainly a capable optic.

It's certainly not a PRS optic, but I think that's obvious. For a close to medium range optic on an AR, you can't go wrong with this scope.

 

[phlegm]

 

[Billiam1211]

ACSS reticle is definitely not a good option for PRS. You'll find lots of trouble with the smaller targets or precision shots at distance. You'll hit targets, but there's no substitute for dialing the exact firing solution for a given range.

If you have a 2 MOA target at 534 yards on a PRS barricade stage it's a hell of a lot easier to just dial in the elevation and aim dead center and just worry about building your position.

I have an ACSS on one of my ARs and it's a lot of fun to shoot and to smack steel out to 600 yards but I would never run it in a match. If you're just starting out in PRS do it right and get an Athlon or Vortex scope that's first focal plane in MILs with a tree reticle. That will get you pretty far for a while. Get the best optic you can afford for PRS shooting - it's far more important than having a 1/2 MOA rifle.

 

[marsh1]

We have many reticles. OP was asking about a 3-18X. In addition to long range BDC ACSS we have a MIL grid (Tree reticle as Billiam 121mentioed) the Athena BPR MIL with more MIL in the works

3-18 with Athena MIL Grid reticle

 

[Billiam1211]

We have many reticles. OP was asking about a 3-18X. In addition to long range BDC ACSS we have a MIL grid (Tree reticle as Billiam 121mentioed) the Athena BPR MIL with more MIL in the works

3-18 with Athena MIL Grid reticle

Since this post a few years back I swapped over to the Griffin MIL for my LPVO which is great for a dmr gas gun. I’ve gotten a chance to tinker with the nicer GLX and PLX scopes once. If you get a Griffin MIL or Athena BPR MIL that’s good to go for PRS.

Keep in mind there’s a lot of glass elitism in PRS, you don’t need an ATACR or Tangent. It’s sure nice, but make sure optic has FFP, MIL, tree reticle, zero stop, and at least 20x magnification and you’re likely good to go to compete

 

[Charmingmander]

Marsh that's quite the necro post

I think the better precision options for reticules went into the PLx scope. That one had the Athena and DEKA which were more precision oriented.

 

[Tictacticaltimmy]

They have the Athena across the whole lineup now. Personally I would much prefer a dot or cross in the center instead of the small chevron. Its too small to draw the eye on mid magnification and unnecessarily coarse for precision work, although certainly totally workable. Would be cool if they had a 2-3mil ring around the center like you see on the Optika6 Mrad1 reticle or the Helos 2-12.

 

[marsh1]

Chevron on Athena is much smaller than on LPVOs. Here it is over a .5 MOA dot. At high magnification you have a very precise aiming point