Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 40

Thread: Is the ACOG dead?

  1. #11
    @JRB, maybe we can get a thread split, I don't want to completely derail this thread but I completely agree with you about combat environments about precision loss 4x to 3x. Though for me, even though you lose some precision at 4 + for the shorter engagement ranges the advantage difference on having 3x is its easier to run house to house and you get a little more SA which for my experiences was more important but if you are in A'stan or places where there are longer engagement ranges then that's different. Seriously though you and rcbusmc24 make excellent observations and points. I also get what you are saying about needing/wanting a solid barrel and FF tube to make it worth the squeeze but even if I had a basic gun a Vortex would probably be riding on it if not something else at max budget, since I am not in anymore. Caveat I'd say and as you pointed out would be for training gun use by someone who still has their feet in issued boots, I see your point and couldn't agree more for your situation. If I were still wearing issued boots I would be running the most common optic on all my stuff for the same reasons.

    @rcbusmc24, I am excited for the Corps this concept is really interesting and seems to follow trend with what SOCOM is doing with common optic. Better measure after all than new guns, I think will make a great difference at squad level. The Corps does a great job at training marksmen and impressing upon Marines that they are all riflemen first. A squad optic with 1-6 will be the ticked I'm certain so long as they are robust enough to withstand a Marine. Your points on night shooting are spot on even at 90M at night I had a hard time making shots due to poor illumination through one when we were running SKT's. Newer lens coatings and light transmission on some of the newer variables are insane. Not wanting to emit IR can and could especially in the future is a real concern. Integration with PPE getting the extended eye relief and all the other points are spot on. As for getting sucked in yes that can be an issue but you already know the fix to that by making sure SL's and TL's are switched on. Exciting times for you guys for sure. You could really get into the weeds on this.
    Last edited by Mike C; 09-12-2019 at 08:29 AM.

  2. #12
    Site Supporter rob_s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    SE FL
    Much like the “magwell hold” thread I think there’s optimal and then there’s killed on the streets.

    There’s not doubt that the ACOG has been used, and continues to be used, to kill badguys and even win matches. But maybe it’s not the ideal choice for a fully trained and switched on user.

    I was always particularly happy with my TA33 in match and training environments but I’ve never been in a gunfight with it (or without, for that matter). I used the front-cap-closed trick for close up but (a) never felt hamstrung by it and (b) was completely capable of running without it, just preferred closing it to not.

    I am going to fall back to my days of running and shooting local carbine matches, and IMO the masses keep rushing in to things like LPVOs with no idea how to use them. I’ve regularly beaten tac-tardy at matches with them using all the new hotness and me using either irons or the ta33. Doesn’t mean irons or the ACOG are the best, and I doubt either are winning 3xgun nationals, JT it also means they aren’t particularly “bad” and I wouldn’t feel wrong or challenged using either (although I’d prefer the ta33 to the irons).

  3. #13
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    ABQ, NM
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike C View Post
    @JRB, maybe we can get a thread split, I don't want to completely derail this thread but I completely agree with you about combat environments about precision loss 4x to 3x. Though for me, even though you lose some precision at 4 + for the shorter engagement ranges the advantage difference on having 3x is its easier to run house to house and you get a little more SA which for my experiences was more important but if you are in A'stan or places where there are longer engagement ranges then that's different. Seriously though you and rcbusmc24 make excellent observations and points. I also get what you are saying about needing/wanting a solid barrel and FF tube to make it worth the squeeze but even if I had a basic gun a Vortex would probably be riding on it if not something else at max budget, since I am not in anymore. Caveat I'd say and as you pointed out would be for training gun use by someone who still has their feet in issued boots, I see your point and couldn't agree more for your situation. If I were still wearing issued boots I would be running the most common optic on all my stuff for the same reasons...
    I'm afraid I wasn't very clear - I didn't mean the loss of precision going from 4x to 3x, but instead the loss of precision having a 3 or 4x ACOG vs a modern 1-6x or 1-8x variable at its max setting.

    I definitely prefer the M68 CCO aka Aimpoint CompM4 when doing room to room stuff, but if I needed a 'do it all' option, I'd take the ACOG every time. Sure, it'd be ideal to have something like an NX8, and when they make one that is as durable as an ACOG, that'll be awesome. It'll be even more awesome if they issue them to guys like me!

    I do think it's on topic, though, because until there's a truly durable 1-6x or 1-8x that'll survive what an ACOG can, the ACOG is not dead. Even after that happens, all of these ACOG's will still be around and work just fine.

  4. #14
    Member Hizzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Not for me. Running AK’s makes eye relief critical and most of the good LPVO’s have too much. The TA33 has gotten me through multiple classes and the TA44 continues to impress.
    Last edited by Hizzie; 09-12-2019 at 02:07 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by caleb View Post
    Oh man, that's right. I forgot that some people feel like they need light SA triggers in DA guns instead of just learning to shoot the gun better. You can get a Redhawk DA trigger pull down to 10 lbs, and if you can't manage that you suck and should probably just practice more.
    *RS Regulate Affiliate*

  5. #15
    Site Supporter JodyH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Mexico
    The ACOG isn't dead mainly because you can't kill them.
    On a carbine that's carried around in a Pelican case and deployed on da streetz or at da rangez a LPVO is the best thing going.
    On a carbine that spends its life getting banged around in da dirtz and rockz the ACOG is still undefeated when it comes to durability.
    "For a moment he felt good about this. A moment or two later he felt bad about feeling good about it. Then he felt good about feeling bad about feeling good about it and, satisfied, drove on into the night."
    -- Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy --

  6. #16
    Jody nailed it, IMO.

    For civilians, having a magnified optic on a carbine does not make a ton of sense. There is virtually no need for additional magnification in any practical situation within 200 yds barring any sort of WROL scenario. Our troops on the other hand often need magnification in addition to absolute durability and reliability. For these individuals, ACOG's fill that role beautifully.... but at the cost of obviously not being ideal up close.

    It is for this reason they are going to LPVO moving forward, closer threats are generally a far greater concern than ones hundreds of meters away. Marines still need to be able to reach out so LPVO makes sense especially now considering technology is doing a good job of making these types of optics suck less in terms of durability/weight/reliability/etc.

    ACOG's only really came en vogue 'cause the military only uses the best and if it's good enough for them it's what I need' types of mindset, without actually looking at how they might have different realities than an infantryman. I believe an Aimpoint T2 or Trijicon MRO would serve virtually any non-LEO/MIL ideally for any serious purpose other than hunting/gaming.

  7. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    South Central Us
    OP here, I'm still following the thread. I just have very little input as my ACOG experience is largely YouTube, while I have done more with, and own LPVO's. My budget kindof became viable right around the time LPVO's hit their stride, so I bought what the cool kids bought, but the ACOG still seems to pop up, more now, since the ACSS reticle has made it into them, and it got me thinking. Good idea fairy and all...

  8. #18
    Member Hizzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by Unobtanium View Post
    OP here, I'm still following the thread. I just have very little input as my ACOG experience is largely YouTube, while I have done more with, and own LPVO's. My budget kindof became viable right around the time LPVO's hit their stride, so I bought what the cool kids bought, but the ACOG still seems to pop up, more now, since the ACSS reticle has made it into them, and it got me thinking. Good idea fairy and all...

    ACSS in the TA44 is great if you have perfect vision. It’s pretty damn small. The circle dot is my preference. I know with 762x39 that a forehead hold gets me torso hits at 300. Honestly I didn’t bother with the BDC in the TA33 at CSAT. I knew my hold and it was faster. That technique allowed me to run the Scrambler clean. I just look at the 44 as a RDS equivalent.
    Quote Originally Posted by caleb View Post
    Oh man, that's right. I forgot that some people feel like they need light SA triggers in DA guns instead of just learning to shoot the gun better. You can get a Redhawk DA trigger pull down to 10 lbs, and if you can't manage that you suck and should probably just practice more.
    *RS Regulate Affiliate*

  9. #19
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by Thy.Will.Be.Done View Post
    Jody nailed it, IMO.

    For civilians, having a magnified optic on a carbine does not make a ton of sense. There is virtually no need for additional magnification in any practical situation within 200 yds barring any sort of WROL scenario. Our troops on the other hand often need magnification in addition to absolute durability and reliability. For these individuals, ACOG's fill that role beautifully.... but at the cost of obviously not being ideal up close.

    It is for this reason they are going to LPVO moving forward, closer threats are generally a far greater concern than ones hundreds of meters away. Marines still need to be able to reach out so LPVO makes sense especially now considering technology is doing a good job of making these types of optics suck less in terms of durability/weight/reliability/etc.

    ACOG's only really came en vogue 'cause the military only uses the best and if it's good enough for them it's what I need' types of mindset, without actually looking at how they might have different realities than an infantryman. I believe an Aimpoint T2 or Trijicon MRO would serve virtually any non-LEO/MIL ideally for any serious purpose other than hunting/gaming.
    There is no need for magnification to make hits out to 200 but in “practical” use there is a real need for magnification to locate and identify / discriminate threats,

  10. #20
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by Unobtanium View Post
    I watched when ACOG was the only thing worth having if you wanted durable magnification on a fighting gun.
    Then it became NXS and SB 1-4's on QD mounts with irons backing them up.
    Now it is 1-8's hardmounted, with offset T2s and RMRs.

    Which brings me back to the ACOG...if 4x is enough for your AO, is the acog+offset t2 a better path than a LPVO? Most of the competition shooters I've watched simply roll the gun for those stages rather than throw the lever on the lpvo, effectively turning it into a fixed mag sight.

    The acog is tough, and weights in at a whopping <14oz WITH mount. A t2 in an offset is about 5oz. Mounted up, on the gun, this is a 19oz combo. That is shaving over half a pound off of a Razor-E in a 6oz mount...
    Your premise is flawed.

    You mean is the 4x ACOG with shitty eye relief dead ? No. There are hundreds of thousands in service use and people will be buying them for decades based on that alone.

    The 3x and 3.5x have much better eye relief and are better general purpose optics IME.

    The 1.5x will have a continued market with people who have astigmatism.

    Nice gear is nice but training > gear.

    I love my Khales 1-6 but at work I can use an Aimpoint H-1 or.... an Aimpoint H-1. Taking what you are issued and making it work is not a unique situation.

    As Kyle DeFoor said “An ACOG might not be my first choice, but if it’s what you’ve got, I can make pretty deadly with an ACOG.”

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •