Is ACOG still a solid option?

[aslrookie]

I have been using an EXPS3 on my 11.5” SBR. It’s my do it all rifle, range, 2-gun, NV shooting and coyote hunting. I just didn’t see enough positive feedback about using a magnifier and that total weight combo is just shy of an LPVO with less capabilities.

I don’t have an IR laser, just modlite IR 850 illuminator that works really well. I currently aim passively through the eotech. I haven’t had any issues hitting steel at 200 aiming passively or running a stage with relatively decent speed.

Id like to see better for hunting yotes and further targets for 2-gun matches. My thought is 3.5x LED ACOG since it has the longer eye relief and can aim passively through a top mounted RMR or quick daytime.

The ACOG would have 12k hours battery life with AA battery, lighter weight than LPVO, and proven durability. The RMR has battery life measured in years and can be used passively with NV or close up daytime.

Any other reason to consider LPVO when most shots are within 300m?

 

[AngryKoala]

I really don't think an LPVO makes sense on a 11.5 in general. I had a vortex 1-6 gen 2 e on a 11.5 geissele and it was kind of retarded. My application was home defense so it didn't make sense.

Your application might make sense and you can always run an offset rmr and train with it.

 

[LRRPF52]

For 11.5” guns shot within 300yds, I really like to focus on compactness and well-matched compact optics that maximize what it can reasonably do well within the intent, without sacrificing the close quarters edge that it has over longer guns.

For a 5.56 blaster and good loads, you can still make hits easy at 300yds.

One of the most overlooked factors I take into account is regional orientation.

The recommendations I have for someone living out in the Mountain West US are different than for someone living East of the Mississippi, but with an 11.5” gun, that playing field gets leveled pretty well since we’re not talking about intermediate ranges generally.

I personally like current and emerging generation LPVOs, but the proven durability of the ACOG and its compactness favor well for an 11.5” gun.

With the RMR, your biggest training point will be remembering to compensate for height over bore at CQM under stress when looking at head shots.

 

[slothlacrosse]

Mission dictates gear.

Most Mk18s I see have EOTechs or Aimpoints. I saw one guy with an ACOG with an RMR on his.

All of the LVPOs I’ve seen were on 14.5” guns.

But your mission != theirs

 

[LRRPF52]

 

[aslrookie]

Being in the Midwest where it can get wet and then cold...I figured less crucial moving parts the better. Or going from a warm vehicle to cold outside stuff immediately gets condensation, last thing I want is a frozen mag ring.

I know a quality LPVO won’t have much issue with that, but the peace of mind would be nice.

 

[Jackalope]

Acogs will always be cool.

That being said, The NX8 1-8 works better for my go to rifle. It’s an 11.3 that will run a Surefire socom permanently once it’s approved. Same use cases as your rifle. An aimpoint may edge it out within 25 yards, but the night force blows it out of the water beyond that.

 

[AngryKoala]

I guess another option might be a fixed prism but I have zero experience with them. I am not sure how good the eyebox on that compares with the acog or LPVO.

 

[Asiparks]

A KISS LPVO like the Trijicon TR24 with a red triangle might be an option- Rugged, light and simple, both eyes open at 4X is like using a more comfortable, better glassed ACOG.

 

[hypno02]

I’ve had a ta31, ta02led, ta33, and ta110led.

I've come to the conclusion that a exps3/aimpoint or a NF C599/ATACR are a far better option when it comes to versatility.

Any & every acog carries far more drawbacks than advantages in today’s day and age compared to other modern optics.

 

[RUTGERS95]

ACOGs absolutely have a viable purpose to this day. They are simple, rugged, proven in multiple environments and easy to get used to. As someone alluded to earlier, environment matters and I'd rather have an ACOG in the cold or changing temps than an lpvo. I run LPVOs as they do everything I need from 1x to reaching out further but I don't have changing temps, or rather dramatic changes, to be conscerned with.

 

[RUTGERS95]

I’ve had a ta31, ta02led, ta33, and ta110led.

I've come to the conclusion that a exps3/aimpoint or a NF C599/ATACR are a far better option when it comes to versatility.

Any & every acog carries far more drawbacks than advantages in today’s day and age compared to other modern optics.

far more? please elaborate

 

[Ucfknights17]

I ran a acog with RMR on top for years on a SBR Scar 16 and loved the setup and still do. However I am very interested in the LPVO’s so I sold the acog. I like the fact that the LPVO has more mag for better spotting/ID. But, I think when I decide on a LPVO I will run a rmr at 45degrees or on top for quickness.

 

[FatBoy]

Running a 12.5”, hits from 7 yards to 300 yards with a (former) Sig Romeo 3 or an Aimpoint PRO is point and shoot. I haven’t noticed a need to change POA to T-Box a target from 7-25 yards. 300y requires a shoulder hold with 77s for a mid body shot but it’s stupid fast if I can settle down and execute.I don’t feel under served with a red dot.

If I was running a 14.5” or longer the LPVO begins to make sense. I set my daughters 16” up with a daylight visible Steiner ( been pretty decent so far) and shots from 7y- 25y with the dot and out to 400 are simple with the hold overs and shitty 55gr bulk pack. 500 the reticle is wrong or we’re not getting the MV it’s set up for but for her purpose it doesn’t matter.

I just don’t see the need for an LPVO in a short rifle. My ACOG also just sits. I’ll probably end up building another rifle around it, or give it to my kid if she breaks the Steiner.

 

[aslrookie]

Running a 12.5”, hits from 7 yards to 300 yards with a (former) Sig Romeo 3 or an Aimpoint PRO is point and shoot. I haven’t noticed a need to change POA to T-Box a target from 7-25 yards. 300y requires a shoulder hold with 77s for a mid body shot but it’s stupid fast if I can settle down and execute.I don’t feel under served with a red dot.

If I was running a 14.5” or longer the LPVO begins to make sense. I set my daughters 16” up with a daylight visible Steiner ( been pretty decent so far) and shots from 7y- 25y with the dot and out to 400 are simple with the hold overs and shitty 55gr bulk pack. 500 the reticle is wrong or we’re not getting the MV it’s set up for but for her purpose it doesn’t matter.

I just don’t see the need for an LPVO in a short rifle. My ACOG also just sits. I’ll probably end up building another rifle around it, or give it to my kid if she breaks the Steiner.

What really did it for me wanting magnification was after a 2-gun competition. At the time, I had a vortex UH1 and one of the stages you had to engage steel targets that were inside a bus and on top. There were targets inside the bus windows and a target in the open on top of the bus. I could barely see the grey steel in the window and even with a UH1 it was hard to see where exactly my center dot was in relation to the target.

The more open target was much easier to hit. The bus had to have been no more than 300y away. My guess was about 250. Another shooter let me checkout his 3x magnifier and that same bus would’ve been 10x easier to get consistent hits. It’s easy to hit nice open targets with a red dot, but even partial obstructions make it much harder. These were silhouette targets in the window too, not some small tiny circle plates.

I couldn’t even tell whether I hit them or not if it wasn’t for the spotter and the sound of the steel. Ever since then, I’ve been wanting magnification but trying to keep it simple, durable and light as possible.

 

[pmclaine]

I have two ARs. One has an Aimpoint Pro other has a TA33.

Im finding myself really liking the Aimpoint.

In class it is fast for most typical drills.

When we got out to 100 yards or so targets had to be big. Checking zero at 50 yards when asked to shoot the typical shapes in the top left or right of silhouette paper I couldnt see them good enough to get a good sight picture.

Thats probably a factor of my light prescription more than the optic. I think with steel torsos, ie bigger targets with good visibility, I could stretch the range pretty far and still get the dot on steel.

On my other AR I have a TA33.

The 3-3.5X ACOGs seem to avoid the limited eye relief issues others speak of.

Down side is with no ocular focus I have to wear vision correction to see the reticle.

Ill be taking a mid range carbine class soon (300 yards and in) and I will see if 3X is enough mag for what I need to do.

I dont think there is any one perfect solution.

Shooters with LPVO last class made mention they lose "some" situational awareness looking down the tube. That might just be the opinion of the limited survey of two NF LPVO shooters I spoke to in that class.

I dont know maybe red dot with magnifier would be my perfect beast but its not clean. I note one shooter using an Aimpoint Pro with magnifier took off the magnifier day two.

Never used prism like Primary Arms seems like a lot to like there.

 

[FatBoy]

Moving from a mini-Red dot to a PRO I can relate to the difference in my perception on what’s down range. It’s “shaded” if that makes sense, compared to the mini dot. That said, for me, I felt I didn’t have a choice. The Sig failed me 3 times in a month. It just collects dust now. I may go to an RMR, or try a Comp M5 or T2, shit maybe even a delta point. I didn’t have this “shaded” view with the MRO so I assume it has to do with tube size and maybe the battery compartment.

I shot my buddies NF 1-8 ATACR and had similar issues. Works fine but I’d have to train through the difference in contrast. I know it’s a 1x but it looks different. I get a little bit of “tunnel” in my sight pic too that draws my attention in when I’m looking down range. It’s slight, but I noticed a difference. I don’t see that with the Aimpoint.

 

[AngryKoala]

Moving from a mini-Red dot to a PRO I can relate to the difference in my perception on what’s down range. It’s “shaded” if that makes sense, compared to the mini dot. That said, for me, I felt I didn’t have a choice. The Sig failed me 3 times in a month. It just collects dust now. I may go to an RMR, or try a Comp M5 or T2, shit maybe even a delta point. I didn’t have this “shaded” view with the MRO so I assume it has to do with tube size and maybe the battery compartment.

I shot my buddies NF 1-8 ATACR and had similar issues. Works fine but I’d have to train through the difference in contrast. I know it’s a 1x but it looks different. I get a little bit of “tunnel” in my sight pic too that draws my attention in when I’m looking down range. It’s slight, but I noticed a difference. I don’t see that with the Aimpoint.

The comp m5 is amazing, I had to sell it because the starburst was really bad for me but the glass was really clear and easy to use.

Vortex 1-6 is really nice as well but it is a tube sp training is required for fast acquisition.
I want to toy around with a fixed optic and a 45 degree offset red dot here in the near future. If running a offset im not sure a variable optic is needed.

 

[Ucfknights17]

Moving from a mini-Red dot to a PRO I can relate to the difference in my perception on what’s down range. It’s “shaded” if that makes sense, compared to the mini dot. That said, for me, I felt I didn’t have a choice. The Sig failed me 3 times in a month. It just collects dust now. I may go to an RMR, or try a Comp M5 or T2, shit maybe even a delta point. I didn’t have this “shaded” view with the MRO so I assume it has to do with tube size and maybe the battery compartment.

I shot my buddies NF 1-8 ATACR and had similar issues. Works fine but I’d have to train through the difference in contrast. I know it’s a 1x but it looks different. I get a little bit of “tunnel” in my sight pic too that draws my attention in when I’m looking down range. It’s slight, but I noticed a difference. I don’t see that with the Aimpoint.

That's exactly why I think if you run LPVO you need a secondary red dot at 45 degrees or an RMR mounted on top. But, at that point its a lot of weight starting to stack... I also shoot in 2 gun matches and I've seen the guys have to transition their LPVO's from X power to 1x and they do loose time doing so. When I was running the ACOG with the RMR on top it was a quick shift of head position, and we always had 1 long range stage 150 to 250 yards and that's where the ACOG really shined.

NF ATACR 1-8: 21oz + Mount + Red Dot + Mount
ACOG ECOS w/reddot and mount : 15oz

Red dot with magnifier is nice because you have the light weight when you want to run your gun cqb and you can essentially clip on the mag if you need more power mission/stage specific or leave it on the gun in the side position. My problem with this was essentially it was my same setup with the ACOG and I didn't gain the benefit of more mag for more identification that an LPVO would offer with that +4x.

Now when going to LPVO's I had the chance to look through a NF ATACR 1-8 and a S&B short dot Dual CC and it was no comparison the S&B was significantly better. The 1x was better and the overall picture just seemed more HD crisp. But, shit the S&B is soooooooo expensive in comparison .

S&B scope weight only: 22oz

My 10" SCAR will continue to run a red dot because I love that setup being light and fast and it just runs so beautifully with a mini KAC QD can. My 14.5 SR15 will run the LPVO when that happens. My Ideal setup on a 14.5 when running through a stage would be keep LPVO on 4x and red dot canted at 45 for quick work. I like when you are on the canted red dot and you snap back to LPVO you are exactly on target without having to find the target in the mag setting if that makes sense... Sometimes on my ACOG when I would switch from red dot to mag I would have to re-sight picture the gun because I got lost in the mag granted this was small seconds. But, seconds matter.

 

[Ucfknights17]

I had to post this from my phone, but this was my setup for a long time. Some things have changed since then.

 

[aslrookie]

That's exactly why I think if you run LPVO you need a secondary red dot at 45 degrees or an RMR mounted on top. But, at that point its a lot of weight starting to stack... I also shoot in 2 gun matches and I've seen the guys have to transition their LPVO's from X power to 1x and they do loose time doing so. When I was running the ACOG with the RMR on top it was a quick shift of head position, and we always had 1 long range stage 150 to 250 yards and that's where the ACOG really shined.

NF ATACR 1-8: 21oz + Mount + Red Dot + Mount
ACOG ECOS w/reddot and mount : 15oz

Red dot with magnifier is nice because you have the light weight when you want to run your gun cqb and you can essentially clip on the mag if you need more power mission/stage specific or leave it on the gun in the side position. My problem with this was essentially it was my same setup with the ACOG and I didn't gain the benefit of more mag for more identification that an LPVO would offer with that +4x.

Now when going to LPVO's I had the chance to look through a NF ATACR 1-8 and a S&B short dot Dual CC and it was no comparison the S&B was significantly better. The 1x was better and the overall picture just seemed more HD crisp. But, shit the S&B is soooooooo expensive in comparison .

S&B scope weight only: 22oz

My 10" SCAR will continue to run a red dot because I love that setup being light and fast and it just runs so beautifully with a mini KAC QD can. My 14.5 SR15 will run the LPVO when that happens. My Ideal setup on a 14.5 when running through a stage would be keep LPVO on 4x and red dot canted at 45 for quick work. I like when you are on the canted red dot and you snap back to LPVO you are exactly on target without having to find the target in the mag setting if that makes sense... Sometimes on my ACOG when I would switch from red dot to mag I would have to re-sight picture the gun because I got lost in the mag granted this was small seconds. But, seconds matter.

Did distance to the target make any difference? Example, RMR to ACOG at 100 having to adjust to find the target vs 200 RMR and ACOG pretty much see the same thing? I would imagine the further the target, the more “in line” they would be like when people put dots on spotting scopes or long range optics.

 

[308pirate]

I struggle to understand the need to take something simple like a 1-something LPVO and then complicating life with extra red dots and shit.

My 1-4X Steiner works exactly like my Aimpoint CompC or SIG Romeo5 at 1X, which is where I keep it 80% of the time. A quick flick of the throw lever and I have magnification for a longer shot on smaller objects.

If you think that LPVOs don't work for close in, fast shooting, go look on youtube for videos of European hunters shooting wild boar on the run using LPVOs on top of bolt action rifles.

ACOGs don't have reticle focus. I can't use one no matter how good they may be.

 

[Ucfknights17]

I struggle to understand the need to take something simple like a 1-something LPVO and then complicating life with extra red dots and shit.

My 1-4X Steiner works exactly like my Aimpoint CompC or SIG Romeo5 at 1X, which is where I keep it 80% of the time. A quick flick of the throw lever and I have magnification for a longer shot on smaller objects.

If you think that LPVOs don't work for close in, fast shooting, go look on youtube for videos of European hunters shooting wild boar on the run using LPVOs on top of bolt action rifles.

ACOGs don't have reticle focus. I can't use one no matter how good they may be.

No I agree they definitely work for 1x shooting and fast with training. I am just saying when you are running and gunning and its time to throw power on or off it will take time for you to adjust and get back on the gun vs canting over. That ring on the NF is kind of stiff in my opinion too. But again we are talking about gaining small seconds here...

(308pirate) It was more of an issue when we had targets up close and I was running the RMR and transitioning to a target at say 40 yards and decided to take it with the ACOG. A lot of the targets setup were either really CQB close or 40+ yards distant so I had my RMR setup to point of aim point of impact at ~5 yards so I didn't have to think about hold overs in stress quick shooting. On the longer stages 100+ I would sometimes use the red dot as my quick reference to find the targets bigger FOV and cheek weld to the glass immediately.

 

[Ucfknights17]

If you run NOD's I think the ACOG would be really beneficial with that high mount head up shooting position, but I can't confirm as I don't own NOD's. So for that I do see as a benefit on the ACOG setup... It's all personal preference and what weight you're willing to shed, carry, or have mag or no mag. That is what's cool about the 2 gun tactical competitions you get to see all kinds of gear being used. There are guys running red dot only and know their holds and will bang steel at 300 yds easy pretty damn quick. But, having the ability to ID targets at distance is super nice to me...

 

[Sevenmilsright]

I live in the west and with it being pretty open around here I prefer having a magnified optic on my gun. But I also like to keep things light. My current truck gun setup is a POF Rogue 308 with a Steiner T432 on top. The whole combo is really light and handy. The eye relief on the steiner is more forgiving than my ACOG and the reticle is great. It gives me the magnification I need to shoot out to 500 pretty easily and is handy and fast at closer to medium ranges without the weight or bulk of an lpvo. It wouldn't be my preferred optic inside my house, but I don't use it for that anyway.

 

[aslrookie]

I struggle to understand the need to take something simple like a 1-something LPVO and then complicating life with extra red dots and shit.

My 1-4X Steiner works exactly like my Aimpoint CompC or SIG Romeo5 at 1X, which is where I keep it 80% of the time. A quick flick of the throw lever and I have magnification for a longer shot on smaller objects.

If you think that LPVOs don't work for close in, fast shooting, go look on youtube for videos of European hunters shooting wild boar on the run using LPVOs on top of bolt action rifles.

ACOGs don't have reticle focus. I can't use one no matter how good they may be.

It’s about more than just the magnification. Aiming passively with NV through an LPVO would be a major pain in the ass. Hence the need for a red dot. I don’t have an IR laser and refuse to spend $1500 on something that’s only good for 100 yards due to civilian restricted lasers. The full power units are generally $2k or more and require some fact finding to make sure it’s not stolen.

So the dot for me personally is more for NV aiming vs up close shooting.

 

[AngryKoala]

I live in the west and with it being pretty open around here I prefer having a magnified optic on my gun. But I also like to keep things light. My current truck gun setup is a POF Rogue 308 with a Steiner T432 on top. The whole combo is really light and handy. The eye relief on the steiner is more forgiving than my ACOG and the reticle is great. It gives me the magnification I need to shoot out to 500 pretty easily and is handy and fast at closer to medium ranges without the weight or bulk of an lpvo. It wouldn't be my preferred optic inside my house, but I don't use it for that anyway.

That was my issue as well with the LPVO. I put it on my home gun and quickly realized the deficiency of the LPVO on 1x compared to a red dot. It can be used for that but it just wasn't as quite as good. I can imagine adrenaline of a real life scenario causing a larger performance gap.

I think slapping it on a 16" makes a little more sense.

 

[USMC_03XX]

My Kahles 1-6 and my NF NX8 1-8 perform ALMOST as good as an Aimpoint, but not as good as an EOTech at 1x. Its the flexibility that the 1-6, and 1-8 give me that I cannot live without. Besides, Ive never been in a situation where Ive thought 'I really wish I had LESS mag on this optic...'

 

[aslrookie]

My Kahles 1-6 and my NF NX8 1-8 perform ALMOST as good as an Aimpoint, but not as good as an EOTech at 1x. Its the flexibility that the 1-6, and 1-8 give me that I cannot live without. Besides, Ive never been in a situation where Ive thought 'I really wish I had LESS mag on this optic...'

The NF NX8 is actually something I’ve been considering being how light it is but still 1-8x. What are your thoughts on this optic? How long after sunset can you still see on 8x? Hows the eyebox? I heard the NX8 is more finnicky than others

 

[USMC_03XX]

The NF NX8 is actually something I’ve been considering being how light it is but still 1-8x. What are your thoughts on this optic? How long after sunset can you still see on 8x? Hows the eyebox? I heard the NX8 is more finnicky than others

I think the NX8 is about the perfect optic - the eyebox is plenty forgiving, at least to me and I like the reticle, the 1x is almost a pure 1x. I have not played with it much at night without NV. I will be adding another one soon

 

[aslrookie]

After much thought, I’m going with the NX8 in a Badger C1 mount. The NX8 is only 0.2oz heavier than the LED ACOG, so the main weight difference will just be the mount itself. The C1 mount doesn’t list weight specs, but it doesn’t look heavy.

Nightforce makes high-quality stuff, so I’m not worried about durability of the optic. Thanks everyone for the input. Having covid this past week gave me a lot of time to ponder this lol.

 

[WillHugh]

Good choice. I'm running the same setup (NX8 and C1) on a 14.5 and absolutely love it. Started with an absolute height Geissele mount and moved to a 1.7 Badger and find it much easier/faster to get behind now. I'm definitely slightly slower with the scope than I am with an aimpoint, but find that difference disappears as soon as I'm past about 10 yards. I'm not clearing houses for a living, so the difference to me is negligible when considering the added capability of having 8X.

Top mounted rmr is next for passive night shooting.

 

[aslrookie]

Good choice. I'm running the same setup (NX8 and C1) on a 14.5 and absolutely love it. Started with an absolute height Geissele mount and moved to a 1.7 Badger and find it much easier/faster to get behind now. I'm definitely slightly slower with the scope than I am with an aimpoint, but find that difference disappears as soon as I'm past about 10 yards. I'm not clearing houses for a living, so the difference to me is negligible when considering the added capability of having 8X.

Top mounted rmr is next for passive night shooting.

Good choice. I'm running the same setup (NX8 and C1) on a 14.5 and absolutely love it. Started with an absolute height Geissele mount and moved to a 1.7 Badger and find it much easier/faster to get behind now. I'm definitely slightly slower with the scope than I am with an aimpoint, but find that difference disappears as soon as I'm past about 10 yards. I'm not clearing houses for a living, so the difference to me is negligible when considering the added capability of having 8X.

Top mounted rmr is next for passive night shooting.

I’m trying to decide between the 1.7 and 1.93 mount height. When I think of it, the 1.7 is like an EOTECH EXPS3 which isn’t bad, but still requires some crane in the neck/head position.

The 1.93 is still shorter than what I use with elevated red dots, so it might be the perfect compromise. But I’ve never tried an elevated LPVO only elevated red dots.

If I go with a 1.7” mount, I could top mount an RMR, but if I go 1.93” mount, I’d have to offset the dot otherwise it would be ridiculous.

 

[WillHugh]

My dilemma as well. I settled on the 1.7 for more comfortable prone shooting, plus the possibility of running a dot on top. I think 1.93 would be better if you had no plans to piggyback an rmr. I'm waiting on Reptilia to make a 45 offset ring mount for the Badger, but nothing from them yet.

 

[hypno02]

I hope you guys are getting the capped elevation nx8’s. I’d have much anxiety running the uncapped version on a carbine.

My c599 is sitting in a Geissele sopmod. I’d prefer a 1.7 but the c1’s 12oclock RMR mounting solution would be super high. (I want 12oclock for NOD purposes) Once my reptilia rof90 comes in that 14.5” socom build will be money.

With very little practice you can almost achieve RDS quickness with the C599 because it’s so bright.

Is it as fast as my 3-0? No. Dang close though.

 

[hypno02]

far more? please elaborate

Biggest issue—if you’re running acog under a bright white light at cqb distances with a dual illum acog your reticle will not jump at your eye.

Biggest issue (again)— the short eye relief of the 4x in my opinion makes this optic an ideal solution for midgets only. NTCH shooting needs to die and the 4x needs to follow it to the grave.

The 3.5 led is the best acog if you ask me. Better eye relief and an OK fov. Still gets smoked by the mk6/Nx8/g2e imo especially when it comes to versatility and shooting from awkward positions.

Is the ACOG that much tougher than your duty grade LPVO’s out there? Not sure. I haven’t been able to break a nightforce just yet.

Not sure what you’re referring to with the lpvo temperature issues but my ATACR, mk6, and Nx8 perform awfully consistent in our SD -30*-100* climate swings.

 

[GUNNER10]

I have been using an EXPS3 on my 11.5” SBR. It’s my do it all rifle, range, 2-gun, NV shooting and coyote hunting. I just didn’t see enough positive feedback about using a magnifier and that total weight combo is just shy of an LPVO with less capabilities.

I don’t have an IR laser, just modlite IR 850 illuminator that works really well. I currently aim passively through the eotech. I haven’t had any issues hitting steel at 200 aiming passively or running a stage with relatively decent speed.

Id like to see better for hunting yotes and further targets for 2-gun matches. My thought is 3.5x LED ACOG since it has the longer eye relief and can aim passively through a top mounted RMR or quick daytime.

The ACOG would have 12k hours battery life with AA battery, lighter weight than LPVO, and proven durability. The RMR has battery life measured in years and can be used passively with NV or close up daytime.

Any other reason to consider LPVO when most shots are within 300m?

I can't comment on NV hunting use but I still think some ACOG's have a place, I really liked the TA33 I had a few years back and would definite consider another as its just a light weight, simple 3x scope that just worked for me.

 

[S197]

I have been using an EXPS3 on my 11.5” SBR. It’s my do it all rifle, range, 2-gun, NV shooting and coyote hunting. I just didn’t see enough positive feedback about using a magnifier and that total weight combo is just shy of an LPVO with less capabilities.

I don’t have an IR laser, just modlite IR 850 illuminator that works really well. I currently aim passively through the eotech. I haven’t had any issues hitting steel at 200 aiming passively or running a stage with relatively decent speed.

Id like to see better for hunting yotes and further targets for 2-gun matches. My thought is 3.5x LED ACOG since it has the longer eye relief and can aim passively through a top mounted RMR or quick daytime.

The ACOG would have 12k hours battery life with AA battery, lighter weight than LPVO, and proven durability. The RMR has battery life measured in years and can be used passively with NV or close up daytime.

Any other reason to consider LPVO when most shots are within 300m?

LPVO’s are nice and Once you build muscle memory they can be fast but they are not forgiving with head positions. Do you have an option to barrow a magnifier or LPVO from someone? For me I could not walk away from my RMR, they are to easy to use with very little downside.

you could alway build / buy another upper

 

[PBWalsh]

I freaking love my TA31. The more I use it, the more I enjoy it. I run mine primarily with the objective cover flipped up, basically making it a red dot. If I need magnification, I can flip down the cover for near instant 4x. This works great for me in Alabama. “Long range” doesn’t really happen here so for my uses, its near perfect. Mounted on an ADM cantilever mount, it totals at about 12.5 oz. Show me something better for the weight.

 

[aslrookie]

LPVO’s are nice and Once you build muscle memory they can be fast but they are not forgiving with head positions. Do you have an option to barrow a magnifier or LPVO from someone? For me I could not walk away from my RMR, they are to easy to use with very little downside.

you could alway build / buy another upper

I have another SBR that's a 8" 300blk. I have buddies with LPVO and magnifier. The one with the magnifier never uses it because he doesn't like it. My other buddy has a bunch of military clone rifles, so none of the LPVO's I am interested in.

 

[USMC_03XX]

Nothing wrong with an RMR for sure, but I think they are fairly limited in their role. I have some on AK's and I have them on some 3-15's as a reflex backup. For a primary optic I think there are a lot of better options, Aimpoint micro, EOT to name a couple.

 

[Jackalope]

I run my NX8 in a 20MOA 1.54 C1. With a colt N1 stock it gives me a good head position similar to the bolt guns I’m used to. If you want a little more of a heads up CQB type head position, the 1.70 mount will be great.

 

[nick338]

I just actually ditched my LPVO on a 13.9". Figured that 95% of the work that firearm does will be inside 300 yards and couldn't justify the extra weight of a scope and mount and being the first weapon at my side in bad situation, I absolutely wanted a sight that doesn't require anything accept shouldering and firing.

After weeks of experimenting with a Trijicon TA01/RMR combo, Eotech and Aimpoint Micro I settled on the Aimpoint with a magnifier. Pro's and con's of each

Trijicon/RMR pros-weight, glass, always having a reticle, RMR always on
cons-eye relief, cheek weld for the RMR on top sucked and was not comfortable at all

Eotech pro's- field of view, reticle with 1 moa dot in the center is the best for me, speed is unsurpassed.
con's-weight is approaching an LPVO with the magnifier, no constant on feature

Aimpoint pro's-weight (lightest of all the combinations), constant on, fast but not quite Eotech fast, battery life.
con's- small field of view and 2 moa dot for longer shots is slightly more obtrusive than the Eotech center dot.

In the end I really wanted the Eotech because of how fast it is and really being able to use the center dot for long range use but the lack of constant on feature and weight with the magnifier pushed me to the Aimpoint Micro. And you can't argue with the battery life of the Aimpoint.

Concerning the Trijicon, having an etched reticle and some magnification is always a plus but I just couldn't get behind that RMR on top and utilize how I like to run the gun. Not a fan of the offset mounting option so that was the deal breaker for me.

 

[RUTGERS95]

Biggest issue—if you’re running acog under a bright white light at cqb distances with a dual illum acog your reticle will not jump at your eye.

Biggest issue (again)— the short eye relief of the 4x in my opinion makes this optic an ideal solution for midgets only. NTCH shooting needs to die and the 4x needs to follow it to the grave.

The 3.5 led is the best acog if you ask me. Better eye relief and an OK fov. Still gets smoked by the mk6/Nx8/g2e imo especially when it comes to versatility and shooting from awkward positions.

Is the ACOG that much tougher than your duty grade LPVO’s out there? Not sure. I haven’t been able to break a nightforce just yet.

Not sure what you’re referring to with the lpvo temperature issues but my ATACR, mk6, and Nx8 perform awfully consistent in our SD -30*-100* climate swings.

fair enough
one point I'd definitely disagree with is toughness of the acog. No way an lpvo would hold up to some of the abuse I've seen them take imho. Part of what makes the ACOG so attractive is it's simplicity in design.

good discussion though, thanks

 

[Praetorian_6]

Ran an Acog in 2 theaters for over a year each with multiple 2-way range situations, and god knows how long in training. Eye relief is not an issue for me, and I doubt I'm much faster through any sight other than a true 1x red dot. You can train out the eye relief issues and eye focusing issues on 4x Acogs and using the optic is 2nd nature to me. I do not use the BAC and I think it's a stupid theory when you can run a secondary red dot, which I do. However, I would use it if my red dot was down and I was in a sub 50m engagement. That said, when you can run a secondary RDS, I prefer the 4x Acog with cross hairs and BDC to any chevrons, horseshoes, etc... That leaves the old school TA01 & TA01B for me. I like the red dot on top or offset. Either way is good. If I'm running through buildings, I slightly prefer the top mount's height above bore. Feels a little quicker/comfortable. Proper cheek to stock weld is not as important when engaging at sub-50m CQB distances. However, in tactical situations, proper cheek to stock weld is critical at longer ranges and always through the TA01B to achieve quick, reliable eye-relief. The offset RMR works a little better keeping cheek to stock weld and rotating the rifle over to the acog, rather than re-establishing your eye relief and transitioning optics simultaneously.

I own an eotech exps 3-2, Micro T-2, Vortex Razor Gen III, RMR, TA01B, Trij RMR, and KAC offset irons. I like them all for what they are and would prefer each one over the others in particular situations. The Acog is my favorite optic ever, but I'm admittedly biased because of how much time I've spent behind one.

 

[nick338]

Ran an Acog in 2 theaters for over a year each with multiple 2-way range situations, and god knows how long in training. Eye relief is not an issue for me, and I doubt I'm much faster through any sight other than a true 1x red dot. You can train out the eye relief issues and eye focusing issues on 4x Acogs and using the optic is 2nd nature to me. I do not use the BAC and I think it's a stupid theory when you can run a secondary red dot, which I do. However, I would use it if my red dot was down and I was in a sub 50m engagement. That said, when you can run a secondary RDS, I prefer the 4x Acog with cross hairs and BDC to any chevrons, horseshoes, etc... That leaves the old school TA01 & TA01B for me. I like the red dot on top or offset. Either way is good. If I'm running through buildings, I slightly prefer the top mount's height above bore. Feels a little quicker/comfortable. Proper cheek to stock weld is not as important when engaging at sub-50m CQB distances. However, in tactical situations, proper cheek to stock weld is critical at longer ranges and always through the TA01B to achieve quick, reliable eye-relief. The offset RMR works a little better keeping cheek to stock weld and rotating the rifle over to the acog, rather than re-establishing your eye relief and transitioning optics simultaneously.

I own an eotech exps 3-2, Micro T-2, Vortex Razor Gen III, RMR, TA01B, Trij RMR, and KAC offset irons. I like them all for what they are and would prefer each one over the others in particular situations. The Acog is my favorite optic ever, but I'm admittedly biased because of how much time I've spent behind one.

Interesting how the top mount RMR height works for you. The gun just seemed out of position for me to utilize the sight properly, almost like the stock with my LOP was too low and would not shoulder properly.

 

[Praetorian_6]

Interesting how the top mount RMR height works for you. The gun just seemed out of position for me to utilize the sight properly, almost like the stock with my LOP was too low and would not shoulder properly.

I think you're trying to cheek-weld it. I don't when mounted on top. I do when offset.

Cheek-weld to me is about quick target acquisition. In the old days, when all of the qualification rifles were irons, cheek weld was absolutely a fundamental, and it still is with irons or when shooting with any parallax optic. Any inconsistency in sight-picture makes for inconsistent POI. For parallax free optics, it's less necessary. No optic is truly parallax free, but some are close enough, and sometimes targets are close enough that speed of acquisition matters more than pinpoint accuracy or precision.

What I'm saying is that a consistent cheek-weld is necessary for the 4x ACOG, because it speeds acquisition significantly in spite of the limited eye-relief. With a red dot's parallax correction and limited engagement distances, cheek weld is far less important. It can still be helpful in picking up the red dot, but this is not an issue I've experienced on my rifle when positioned above ACOG height. Consider how many use an RMR on a non-braced pistol. Are they doing it wrong, because a cheek weld is impossible?

Now, all that said, I'm a firm believer in doing what feels natural to you, as long as the fundamentals are there. So, if you just don't feel right without a cheek weld, then by all means. There's nothing wrong with that. Make your equipment work for you.

 

[nick338]

I think you're trying to cheek-weld it. I don't when mounted on top. I do when offset.

Cheek-weld to me is about quick target acquisition. In the old days, when all of the qualification rifles were irons, cheek weld was absolutely a fundamental, and it still is with irons or when shooting with any parallax optic. Any inconsistency in sight-picture makes for inconsistent POI. For parallax free optics, it's less necessary. No optic is truly parallax free, but some are close enough, and sometimes targets are close enough that speed of acquisition matters more than pinpoint accuracy or precision.

What I'm saying is that a consistent cheek-weld is necessary for the 4x ACOG, because it speeds acquisition significantly in spite of the limited eye-relief. With a red dot's parallax correction and limited engagement distances, cheek weld is far less important. It can still be helpful in picking up the red dot, but this is not an issue I've experienced on my rifle when positioned above ACOG height. Consider how many use an RMR on a non-braced pistol. Are they doing it wrong, because a cheek weld is impossible?

Now, all that said, I'm a firm believer in doing what feels natural to you, as long as the fundamentals are there. So, if you just don't feel right without a cheek weld, then by all means. There's nothing wrong with that. Make your equipment work for you.

You are correct I am trying to cheek-weld it. It's a training issue and muscle memory. I've always trained with a cheek weld no matter what sight I was using and coming up to the firing position with a proper cheek weld is just automatic to me unless I'm in an unnatural position.