Buying first acog need help

[ExtremeX]

Good to hear your happy with it. I take it you don't mind the eye relief on the ta31? That's the only thing making me think I should go with a ta11 or ta33.

I had a hard time with this one myself too before I decided on the TA31 series for various reasons. It was a bigger PITA making a decision on the reticle.

If you have any local stores that actually carry them, its the only way you are really going to know what you like and works for you. Everyone is different.

I thought the TA33 was for me until I had a chance to check them out side-by-side. The field of view was too narrow for me, I found the TA31 a lot more pleasing to look though. Eye relief was a non issue for me, I was able to use either one comfortably. The TA33 does fit close in application better, but I figured if it really bothered me that much, I would just throw a RDS on a 45 degree side mount.

The TA11 just felt too large for my carbine, so the TA31 was a good pick.

Some people complain about CBQ type shooting with a TA31 due to eye releif. I found by extending my stock a little more, I was still able to see the reticle and perform the task better. You don't get the full field of view thought the optic, but it makes reflex shooting easier.


All models of ACOGs have their own pros and cons, the one you pick should better match your shooting style and ergonomic preference. Its hard to tell without trying it.

[darmog]

Good to hear your happy with it. I take it you don't mind the eye relief on the ta31? That's the only thing making me think I should go with a ta11 or ta33.

I was worried about that as well since the natural position of my stock is at about 3 or 4 clicks back for me to get a comfortable cheek weld and length of pull. So, I bought a Larue RCO QD mount which pushes the ACOG further back. Of course, I had to remove my rear fixed sight to get it to where I wanted it. I was going to do that anyways since my rear sight was a standing fixed sight and not a folding one so it'd be in the way of the scope. Here's a pic of the RRA EOP2 with the ACOG and La Rue RCO mount. I have the stock folded in just for fitting in the case, but you can see how far the RCO mount pushes the scope back which is just perfect for me.

[ExtremeX]

Wow that's pretty far back... I shoot about 1-2 clicks out and my ACOG ocular lens is right over the charging handle. I have also removed my rear sight.

I shoot with my nose pretty close to the charging handle. Everyones ergonomics are different, which is why I recommend trying before you buy.

I also use a Larue QD mount, but the LT100.

[goodlookin1]

One of the reasons most people cant group well with an ACOG (TA31) is because of the small eye box and parallax. If you mount the rifle so it is not moving, and look through the ACOG while moving your head slightly left to right, up and down, etc.....you will notice that the POI changes at the tip of the chevron. In other words, when shooting, if you do not keep a solid and consistent cheek weld throughout your shooting group, your groups will suffer. You need to make sure your eye is positioned in the same spot shot after shot. If you are off, the bullet can/will impact up to a few inches off the intended POI (at 100 yards). It happens much more, or at least it is much more noticeable inside of 50 yards. I like ACOGs, but in my experience the TA31 is not a very forgiving optic. It looks gorgeous when looking through it.....the super wide FOV is really something you will appreciate, and the design is slick looking....very appealing. But it's very short eye relief, unforgiving parallax and small eye box contribute to an optic that is not as easy to get consistent repeatability as other scopes are.

I have a Vortex Viper PST 1-4x and a Leupold 3-9x40.....while the glass is not near as good on them and they both have a much smaller FOV, the eye box is EXTREMELY forgiving and the Parallax seems to be non-existent. I can move my head around while the scopes are stationary and the center dot/cross hair stays on target no matter where your eye is positioned. The longer eye relief might help with the ease of use as well. To be fair, these scopes (and all other scopes) DO HAVE parallax, it just seems to be to a much smaller degree.

I say all this not to scare you away from the ACOG, but to help you realize what it's role is: It's a military optic intended for better/faster target identification, quicker target acquisition and "body MOA" in accuracy. In my opinion, if you're hitting inside a 6"-12" circle while standing from 100 yards with an ACOG, it is doing it's job. Yes, it can be much more accurate than that, but pinpoint accuracy was not on the "must have" short list when designing the TA31, or any ACOG for that matter. For what it's indended purpose is, it is a GREAT scope!

I HIGHLY recommend going to your closest Trijicon dealer and asking to look through the various ACOGs....nothing will be more telling than looking through it yourself.

Best of luck!

[ExtremeX]

Very well said goodlookin, my observations were the same as yours in regards to parallax.

To further elaborate on some of my comments (pros and cons) about ACOGs... I am a hobbyist, most of my shooting is target and plinking. I don't run and gun shooting man sized silhouette targets as much as I would like.

$1000 was a lot of cash to spend on something that might fill less than 5-10% of they type of shooting I do due to the ACOGs actual design/intent.

For me, the purchase was more of a want than a need. Its a luxury item and investment to me. I always wanted to shoot with one, I think its one of the sexiest optics you can put on an AR. BUT, it took me owning one to realize its not the end all optic. It fills a niche roll ill probably never have to use it for; my SHTF defense carbine. It excels over the 1-4x in really just this category for me. Set it and forget it, always on already ready, extremely durable high quality optics which is easier and faster to use in a high stress or dynamic environment... It provides speed and a generous field of view on the 4x models.

Sad to say, I would sell my ACOG before I would sell my 1-4x scope (also the Vortex Viper PST 1-4x). If I could only have ONE, I would take the 1-4x scope. Its so much more versatile than an ACOG... I can use more effectively as a CQB optic, zoom in for longer shots, depending on the reticle, it can be used for ranging of non standard targets, and measurements when target shooting.

If Trijicon spent the time to make an ACOG type reticles for their Accupoint 1-4x scope, it would be my dream optic.

[morthrane]

Some people complain about CBQ type shooting with a TA31 due to eye releif. I found by extending my stock a little more, I was still able to see the reticle and perform the task better. You don't get the full field of view thought the optic, but it makes reflex shooting easier.

I noticed the same with the TA31-- nose to charging handle I get the full FoV. With my head further back, I can still line up the horseshoe using the body of the scope as a pseudo ghost-ring and the hash marks to center. 10 vertical hashes left and right at full FoV, 4 vertical hashes left and right at reduced FoV. Although, to be fair, I still have to test shoot that viewing style and see if it works well enough...

In other words, when shooting, if you do not keep a solid and consistent cheek weld throughout your shooting group, your groups will suffer. You need to make sure your eye is positioned in the same spot shot after shot.

Kind of an odd nitpick-- that sorta issue is a problem regardless of irons or optics. Bad body to weapon weld == inconsistent results.

FWIW, after a little range time with a TA33 (chevron 3x30) and a TA31 (horseshoe 4x32): what little FoV the TA33 has (less than half that of the TA31), it makes up for in eye relief. with more eye relief, head set farther back, and you can see more around the optic with both eyes open than the TA31. Because the TA31 requires such a close view, it ends up obscuring quite a bit more around the optic with both eyes open. Even though the paper specs make the TA31 look like a superior unit over the TA33, I have to agree that the TA31 is not very forgiving.

If I had to choose just one, I'd probably stay with the TA33, as it is lighter, more forgiving eye relief, and easier IMH(inexperienced)O to use at very close range than the TA31. My only real beef is with the chevron-- I love the chevron, find it easier to use than the horseshoe-- but can't for the life of me understand why the horseshoe has ranging hashmarks and the chevron doesn't.

[Smoothshifter41]

I'd go with the TA31RCOM4CP because it was designed for a 14.5" barrel firing a 62grain M855. That seems like a closer fit than the M16 model or others designed for 55 grain rounds.

[goodlookin1]

Kind of an odd nitpick-- that sorta issue is a problem regardless of irons or optics. Bad body to weapon weld == inconsistent results.

FWIW, after a little range time with a TA33 (chevron 3x30) and a TA31 (horseshoe 4x32): what little FoV the TA33 has (less than half that of the TA31), it makes up for in eye relief. with more eye relief, head set farther back, and you can see more around the optic with both eyes open than the TA31. Because the TA31 requires such a close view, it ends up obscuring quite a bit more around the optic with both eyes open. Even though the paper specs make the TA31 look like a superior unit over the TA33, I have to agree that the TA31 is not very forgiving.

Well, I dont know about a "nitpick", but you are definitely correct in that inconsistent cheek weld will result in inconsistent shots. My point was not that this issue is unique to the ACOG, but rather that it seems to be more prominent than in other scopes, hence the "unforgiving" feel in regards to accuracy. The strong parallax is my biggest gripe with the TA31.....more so than the eye relief. I dont have the same issue to the same degree with the Vortex at 4x, even though it is not completely eliminated....the bigger eyebox, larger exit pupil and generous eye relief lend to a less critical "consistent" cheek weld (even though doing so is just good practice). The resulting shot groups seem to group a little better too, which tells me that there is less parallax.

I agree on the TA33 as far as your observations go while using it. My father has one and I have put them side-by-side and felt both while shooting. My observations were that, while you have much less FOV, the VERY long eye relief and smaller footprint would serve a shooter best who is doing fast, heads-up, reaction based shooting or shooting from very awkward positions. However, there was something that just kept drawing me back to the TA31, and that was the absolutely gorgeous sight picture (crystal clear glass combined with a wide FOV). I love looking through it and shooting with it. I would also say that the TA31 is much better for target identification and more concentrated shots. It may not be as fast, but a Mil/SHTF optic isnt looking to shave milliseconds off the time it takes to raise and shoot the rifle at the target. If that is the goal, an Aimpoint or Eotechwould fit the bill much better than the TA33 (IMO).

In the end, the TA31 suits my style of shooting much better than the TA33, so I know I made the right choice in my purchase. Nothing against the TA33 because it is a great optic as well. It just didnt fit my shooting style as well.

[problemchild]

Would like to clear up some misconceptions in this thread.

If you are aiming during cqb your wasting time. I point and shoot across the room, much faster! If it is across the street or
down the road the Acog is a great choice for its LARGE FOV and clear bright glass. I also like the both eyes open with
the Acog which lets me line up smokin fast on target.

Anyone buying a NON TA11 Acog is wasting their time. The eye relief is terrible and in my opinion will not only slow you
down but forces you to press your nose into the charge handle to see through the scope.

Whoever said the Acog isnt accurate with the BDC is off too. I was making 650 yard shots on a steel plate (1st shot 1st time) in a gusting
25mph semi-side wind almost every time. Having done that I would say the practical limit is 500yds but you can push it farther with good eyes.

If I was going to run a 1 x X I would run a 1x10 March scope. 4x just isnt enough for longer shots, target ident, etc. especially under less than ideal conditions like dark cloudy skies or sunset/sunrise.

Last.... I dont need no stinkin batteries to see my reticle at night or make it bright red during the day. Its always on.







200 yards rapid fire and I mean rapid not slow

[EvolutionGSR]

I dont think we (or I) meant that it isnt accurate with the bdc, just that I dont think it was meant to be a like a precision scope. And the bdc doesnt always line up with the ammo you are using. I know that at 400 yards with 55 grain 193 that i have to sit the target on top of the line to get a hit, and with 75 grain i put the target right below the line.

[45R]

Would like to clear up some misconceptions in this thread.

If you are aiming during cqb your wasting time. I point and shoot across the room, much faster! If it is across the street or
down the road the Acog is a great choice for its LARGE FOV and clear bright glass. I also like the both eyes open with
the Acog which lets me line up smokin fast on target.

Anyone buying a NON TA11 Acog is wasting their time. The eye relief is terrible and in my opinion will not only slow you
down but forces you to press your nose into the charge handle to see through the scope.

Whoever said the Acog isnt accurate with the BDC is off too. I was making 650 yard shots on a steel plate (1st shot 1st time) in a gusting
25mph semi-side wind almost every time. Having done that I would say the practical limit is 500yds but you can push it farther with good eyes.

If I was going to run a 1 x X I would run a 1x10 March scope. 4x just isnt enough for longer shots, target ident, etc. especially under less than ideal conditions like dark cloudy skies or sunset/sunrise.

Last.... I dont need no stinkin batteries to see my reticle at night or make it bright red during the day. Its always on.

Good shooting. The ACOG is a fantastic optic. The only gripe I have is that you can't see the hash marks for yardage at night. Only the chevron lights up. Still a great optic.

[Darksides]

Everyone makes some very valid points to consider. Which ACOG to go with is ultimately a choice you should be comfortable with. If at all possible look at a few versions and better to look into them at range. I think that alone should help with your decision.


My case as it may help..I went with a TA-55 AR .308 22" chrome fluted 1:8 twist after looking at the TA33 for 6 months. I was lucky to find someone at my range using a 55 and i didn't know him but explained and all it took was a mil second or two and it was back saving up. And it took me a good 2-3 weeks to get comfortable with the TA-55 maybe more. Poke around, read, and try to eye ball as many as you can.

[ExtremeX]

problemchild,

Excellent shooting

[wizdumb]

This should help anyone looking at ACOGs.

http://www.militarywarfighter.com/Trijicon_ACOG_Comparison_and_FAQ_s/386.htm

[TruEdge]

Nice shooting problem child. I finally got to bass pro since they are the only ones near I live..and got a chance to look through the ta31. The fov is definitely very nice but I will have to agree there is still much to be desired when it comes to eye relief. Not sure if it was because it has just been sitting in the store and not getting any natural light, but the red chevron seemed very dim to me. I was hoping to get to look at a ta11 but they had absolutely nothing other than the ta31. I found some pretty good pics online comparing the 31 and the 33


looking at both the I'm imagining the ta11 fov being somewhere in between the two and that would seem good to me I just wish I could look at one on a rifle and see how compares. Also I believe someone mentioned 4scopes.com about having good deals which it seems like the best around on acogs...almost too good. Anyone else go through these guys? Thanks again for all you help guys.