ACOG Question

[goodlookin1]

Can you explain further? The ACOG doesn't have an exposed tritium tube. The tube on top is fiber optic and it doesn't illuminate the reticle in the dark.

No offense meant to Lightstrider, but he is wrong. Maybe he meant it another way than what he wrote, but what he said is incorrect.

People will tape up the fiber optic line to occlude the amount of light entering the fiber because it can be too bright in certain conditions. Or if they want a brighter reticle at night, they can tape or secure a glow stick next to the fiber line for more artificial brightness to the reticle than the tritium alone can provide.

There is no exposed tritium vial in an ACOG, so there is no "tritium" to tape up.

There is nothing you can do to brighten the reticle than to put an ACOG out in the sun. Taping or occluding the fiber line only dulls the reticle, not brighten it....since you're blocking or decreasing the amount of light entering the fiber optic line.

[JMP]

There is nothing you can do to brighten the reticle than to put an ACOG out in the sun. Taping or occluding the fiber line only dulls the reticle, not brighten it....since you're blocking or decreasing the amount of light entering the fiber optic line.

Yes, the black electrical tape works well since it'll stay sticky after moving it around a few times. Plus, black is tactical.

[Whatthepho?]

BROWE optics is looking more and more attractive lately....

+1 can't wait for their 3.5x35 to come out. Tooling is made and prototype are in the works.

[Packy14]

+1 can't wait for their 3.5x35 to come out. Tooling is made and prototype are in the works.

Really? Nothing I've seen about browe would lead me to ever buy one... Roughly same price as acog and nowhere near the quality.

[goodlookin1]

Really? Nothing I've seen about browe would lead me to ever buy one... Roughly same price as acog and nowhere near the quality.

Allegedly: (I havent seen one in person)

- Same specs as TA31 without tritium or fiber optic (FOV, Eye relief, weight, etc)
- Same glass quality
- Sensor that determines the brightness of target vicinity and adjusts reticle to that area vs lighting up the reticle based on where you are shooting from.
- More expensive from what I have seen....by $100-$200 or so.

Whether or not these things are true or work as intended, remains to be seen in my opinion. I'm certainly not going to drop the coin to do a review. But it does look like a decent scope. It just hasnt been vetted out as much.

From what I understand, the owner used to work at Trijicon and branched off to do his own thing. It seems very likely that this is true based on the specs and design....they are very similar in specs.

[sunborder]

Roughly same price as acog and nowhere near the quality.

And you would back up the latter part of that statement with what testing or evidence beyond the fact that it is "new"?

[Packy14]

And you would back up the latter part of that statement with what testing or evidence beyond the fact that it is "new"?

Google reviews of it... Many have reported QC issues.

[Whatthepho?]

what did you type in the search box?

[Packy14]

what did you type in the search box?

http://www.amazon.com/Browe-Chevron-Reticle-5-56Mm-Lever/dp/B0081G3HWS#customerReviews

Here is one. Just typed Browe optics. It's interesting but I don't think I'd sell my acogs or pay 1500$ for one.

[LensAndLasers]

The big attraction for ACOG's is that they're built like tanks. (For some people, it's that the military uses them, but that's another story). They can take all sorts of abuse--even taking hits from enemy fire--and keep going. The tritium in the reticles goes dim after 10+ years, but the rest of the scope is warrantied for life.

I don't have experience with Browe, so I don't know if Browe optics are that durable. They have a lifetime warranty on the body and lenses, but the electrical parts are only warrantied for two years.

Does anyone have any hands-on experience with the Browe scopes?

[serjm1a1]

I took my M16A4 clone shooting yesterday at Angeles, I fall in love with my Acog over and over again each time I take it out, hitting out to 600 yards is very possible with this optic, love mine

[Whatthepho?]

http://www.amazon.com/Browe-Chevron-...ustomerReviews


Here is one. Just typed Browe optics. It's interesting but I don't think I'd sell my acogs or pay 1500$ for one.

Interesting. I'm curious if there's more reviews on it. Id probably still buy the 3.5x35 browe when it comes out to compare with my ta11. A couple thing I dislike about the acog is the fiber cracking... Figured for a 1300 dollar optics they could have developed something a bit more durable... Then again I'm no engineer... My other dislike is that shooting from a complete shade to a bright setting you can't really see the chevron. Takes my eyes a bit to adjust to the black outline of the reticle.

I should have bought an elcan specter from the start..

Anyone here with a browe want to meet up at Angeles crest and do some comparasions?

[mrvash]

Some of the reviewers in that Amazon link are sure biased, which is expected to be myopic if you drop that type of coin on an item. One reviewer said s/he had chosen the Browe optic because it does not have tritium that will wear out within 10 years, but is completely fine with CR123 batteries for illumination, which would have to be replaced eventually and is less dependable compared to tritium.

Also, Trijicon will replace your tritium when it wears out and if it passes their "dimness" test, at no cost if you're the original owner. For now, I'll stick my TA11F and hope good things come from Browe optics in the future.

[sunborder]

Some of the reviewers in that Amazon link are sure biased, which is expected to be myopic if you drop that type of coin on an item. One reviewer said s/he had chosen the Browe optic because it does not have tritium that will wear out within 10 years, but is completely fine with CR123 batteries for illumination, which would have to be replaced eventually and is less dependable compared to tritium.

Also, Trijicon will replace your tritium when it wears out and if it passes their "dimness" test, at no cost if you're the original owner. For now, I'll stick my TA11F and hope good things come from Browe optics in the future.

CR123 cells are available at the corner drug store or 7-11, without the hassle and cost of shipping it off to Trijicon and re-zeroing once it comes back. It's also a very common battery in tactical flashlights/weapon lights. The Browe setup fixes one of my biggest complaints about the FO/tritium ACOGs: Mismatched optic/target light levels. The concerns about durability/electronics lifespan are reasonable, as the optic is fairly new. If the electronics don't need to be replaced in 10 years, then it's a bonus.

[mrvash]

It just may be me, but I'd rather have an optic that is less prone to mechincal failure and isn't dependant on batteries, even if that means shipping it out back to the manufacture once every decade. Hell, the money you would spend buying CR123 batteries over the span of 19 years would be more than the shipping cost of sending the ACOG back to Trijicon. But like I said, that's just me and I hope nothing but the best from Browe and its customers, I believe having different options of optics is a good thing.