ACOG Eye Relief?

[Hunt3r]

I read around some place saying that Trijicon doesn't post the true eye relief specs.


Is it true, and if it is, what is the true eye relief for say, a TA11 and TA33?

[Teletiger7]

they both have better eye relief than the X4 models.

[Hunt3r]

But it doesn't seem like it'd be enough for a .308 rifle, where you want to keep from having scope marks everywhere.

Just worried, because I'm used to optics with 3 inches of eye relief, not 2.4 or 2.

I also wear glasses when I shoot, so eye relief is important for me.

[sirgiles]

i wear glasses too and have no problems with my acog at the range.

[Hunt3r]

Cool.

Seems like Trijicon posts some conservative eye relief specs.

[bruce_ventura]

ACOGs really are designed for battle rifles. The designers made compromises to reduce size and weight. The optical deisgn is more like a roof prism binocular than a rifle scope. The use of roof prism to invert the image precludes the use of a field lens to extend eye relief. Also, the horizontal reticle is out of focus on the far right side. ACOGs are fine on an M4 or M16, and other applications where the felt recoil is light. If you have a rifle with a significant kick, be prepared to get dinged in the forehead sometime - especially in the prone position.

There are plenty of good 1-4X variable mag scopes on the market that will outperform an ACOG for a lower price.

[Hunt3r]

ACOGs really are designed for battle rifles. The designers made compromises to reduce size and weight. The optical deisgn is more like a roof prism binocular than a rifle scope. The use of roof prism to invert the image precludes the use of a field lens to extend eye relief. Also, the horizontal reticle is out of focus on the far right side. ACOGs are fine on an M4 or M16, and other applications where the felt recoil is light. If you have a rifle with a significant kick, be prepared to get dinged in the forehead sometime - especially in the prone position.

There are plenty of good 1-4X variable mag scopes on the market that will outperform an ACOG for a lower price.

I like the bullet-proof build of the ACOG, I don't mind weight, I like the reticle, and I'm most likely not going to go above 7.62 NATO caliber, and I like the fiber optic/tritium combo, and I like the BAC.

Is there any other optic that fills the bill?

[Requiem]

There are plenty of good 1-4X variable mag scopes on the market that will outperform an ACOG for a lower price.

wanna name some? I'm not challenging you, I would just like to know myself...

[Hunt3r]

I know there are better alternatives to the ACOG, but it seems to be the best combination, even if it has some annoying problems.

If anyone can post up something that can beat an ACOG in every aspect except maybe size, weight, and durability, I'd snap that up.

Edit: I mainly say that because the old standbys don't have anything remotely like the ACOG's chevron, the range ladder, and the fiber/tritium combo.

Edit again: Perhaps a US Optics, but it costs the same, and the optic is lit by batteries, not fiber and tritium..

Another edit: Or what a person said in the "Top of the Line 3-Gun Scope" thread, a TR24 on first plane focal plane with ACOG reticles and for cheep.

[bruce_ventura]

Requiem - Use the search feature to find lots about good alternatives, for example:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=160991

Hunt3r - As I said, the ACOG is designed as a battle sight. Troops like 'em a lot, primarily for 5.56 rifles. But then Uncle Sam is paying the bill. The BAC doesn't work for everyone. If it works for you, then great! If the compromises and cost don't bother you, then go for it.

[Hunt3r]

Requiem - Use the search feature to find lots about good alternatives, for example:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=160991

Hunt3r - As I said, the ACOG is designed as a battle sight. Troops like 'em a lot, primarily for 5.56 rifles. But then Uncle Sam is paying the bill. The BAC doesn't work for everyone. If it works for you, then great! If the compromises and cost don't bother you, then go for it.

I know that I'm right-eye dominant, and I haven't had concussions or any phoria of any sort, but I'm near sighted a bit, so I'm fine with an ACOG, as long as I know that my glasses won't end up being scratched up and my nose having nosepiece impressions after a day of shooting a .308 with an ACOG on it.

An Accupoint that is first focal plane, with a chevron and BDC for .223 and .308 would be the best thing since sliced bread, but I believe that the Accupoint design doesn't allow for that very easily.

If Trijicon decides to try and capture the entire 3-gun optic market that would probably most everyone's wishlist, but I THINK that it's going to be hard to make something like that, but I'd like to see if someone from Trijicon could say if this is even possible at a reasonable price and with the same durability of an Accupoint.

[randy]

If you are in the military the ACOG may be the top dog.

For my use which is 3 gun the ACOG isn't as good a choice as many other scopes. A few examples. 1.5 to5 Leupold, Accupoint 1.25 to 4 and the new 1 to 4 30mm tube, Meopta Meostar with the K dot. I haven't used the Burris but I hear it's good too.

[Hunt3r]

If you are in the military the ACOG may be the top dog.

For my use which is 3 gun the ACOG isn't as good a choice as many other scopes. A few examples. 1.5 to5 Leupold, Accupoint 1.25 to 4 and the new 1 to 4 30mm tube, Meopta Meostar with the K dot. I haven't used the Burris but I hear it's good too.

I'm not in the military, that's going to be for sure.


I realize that the want for a BDC is most definitely useless, since I'm going to be shooting at 100 yards at the most, but I'd like to have one if I ever get the chance to do some distance shooting using holdover.

I'd definitely snap up an Accupoint with a Chevron and a BDC for .223 or .308, given it holds the same zero at all points.

PS But I'm pretty sure that the current Accupoint design wouldn't allow for that.

[Jicko]

I have TA11F.... I love it.... get that one... you will be pleased..

I used to use TA31F.... it won't be enough eye relief for you...

[LibertyOptics]

The TA33 has oodles of eye relief (up to 4") and you won't get dinged with a .308 cal rifle. However, FOV is small, as is the reticle. The TA31 has huge FOV and reticle, but lousy eye relief. The TA-11 is a decent compromise.

However, the eye relief of the TA-33 that is published isn't quite accurate. Usable eye relief is from about 2-4".

Scott