Building a M4A1 clone so I'm trying to stick with either Eotech, Aimpoint M4, or an Acog.
The Acog is about double the price but I'm willing to pay extra. Have any of you used both? Which did you prefer?

Acog is a superior optic, it's clarity and light transmission is incredible.  However, if you're limited to a 50-100m range or enjoy doing closer/more rapid work, then an aimpoint might be more "fun" and useful for you.  4x is great on the battlefield for target identification and making hard shots over extended distances, but it can be a real pain to use in a more CQB setting.


PS.  I just finished an M4 clone a couple weeks ago and got eveything pretty much perfect; let me know if you have any questions about what parts are standard issue and where to get them.

I haven't owned or used ACOG's, but I have owned fixed power scopes and red dots. I love Aimpoint sights, if you can see it you can shoot it, like irons, but a lit red dot, I know, a revelation.
But the lighted dot isn't affected nearly as much as irons by available light and shadows.
I also feel that range estimation is more natural with zero magnification, obviously you are seeing the actual distance, not a magnified object making the distance seem shorter.
Magnified scopes are nice for target acquisition and identification, but for most uses, when your target is within 200 yards and identifiable your good to go with a red dot.
Of course scopes are better when you are trying to locate an obscured target in a general location.
It's all a trade off, that's why I went with a 1-4 variable scope on one of my rifles, I have the option.

A lot depends upon what you intend the weapon for primarily...one optic will be better at some things than the other...

For example I would rather have the Aimpoint for nighttime work and HD but the ACOG for daytime shooting at moving varmints...

A Variable is nice for reaching out if you live on rural land and can safely do so....

Other factors might be age,eyesight limitations, or just plain old personal preference....

If I were to buy an ACOG today I would probably go for the TA-33 with green horseshoe or if they ever make a TA-11 with Primary Arms reticle.
For my limitations and interests...I also like the 1-4 , 1-6 or 2-7 VXR

I have an M-4, T-1,T-2,ML3, and the Trijicon version...

Of these I prefer the ML3 due to its weight and I can find the dot quicker....the T-2 would be my second choice...

I am primarily interested in good optics $500-$1000 price range with illumination and a BDC for 55 grain mil surp. - 50 grain ranger of varmint bullets.

My shooting is <300 yes with some nighttime predator shooting close in....protection of livestock and garden as well as any two legged predators.

I have a lot of experience with both of those optics.  For CQB the M4 can't be beat.  For everything else the ACOG kicks the M4s ass handily.  

I have two personally owned TA31  RCO-2 (horseshoe dot) ACOGS and own NO red dots.  Irons come so close to a red dot for my limited (around the house) use that I just don't feel like I need one.  For small, moving, camo'd targets, the ACOG has every advantage.


I switched back to the ACOG after a year with a new Nightforce NXS 1-4 because the NF sucked at 1X and lagged behind the ACOG at 4X.  The clear edge to edge glass and wide field of view make the AGOC great for finding and tracking moving targets (most everything I shoot at is moving).

I'll echo what seems to already be the majority opinion here. I have used a lot of both in both my civilian and military life. For indoors out to short-range outdoors the aimpoint will be a little faster. Though honestly I feel about the same with irons both in precision and speed, I'm sure the red dot still edges them out if measured though.

For pretty much everything else, I prefer ACOGs. They strike an excellent compromise between red dots and traditional scopes, having the strengths of both. By this I mean they can be 90% as fast as a red dot while being 90% as precise as a scope. The FO illum makes for a bright fast aiming point, the tritium allows for limited night use, the magnification allows for great target acquisition especially for small/obscured/camo'd targets that would be very hard to see with naked eyes, and the BDC allows for surprisingly accurate shots at distance.

Really you need to ask yourself what range and purpose you'll use the rifle for and let form follow function. For HD/NVG/run & gun go Aimpoint, I love mine in that role. For anything you'll be using mostly outdoors, >100m, or for 'light' precision, the ACOG shines and I love mine in that role as well. They're both exceptional tools, but one needs to select the right tool for the job as with anything else.

I'm in line with what's already been stated.

I've owned 2 eotechs, currently have an aimpoint micro and an acog(ta11) on 2 rifles. Next optic I buy will be an acog.

My sbr/house gun wears the aimpoint, but when I finish my build on my next sbr it's getting a ta33 or ta31. Anything under 100yrds for my a rds is fine, I prefer the acog for 75+ yds. The glass is fantastic on the acog, and I domt regret the extra cost.

OP, have you thought about a variable 1-4x? The Triji Accupower offering with the segmented reticle looks very nice.

OP said he was going for an M4 clone.  Seems like he's set on either the Army issue Aimpoint or Acog.  I agree though, 1-4x is really a great type of scope.  Plan on getting one for my next serious build.

I've used EoTechs (552s and EPXS 3-0), Aimpoints (M2, M4, and T-1) and ACOGs (TA31RCO-M4 and TA31RCO-A4 (the A4 on an M4 with no adverse effect), as well as TA-31 and 33) extensively in the Infantry and as a recreational shooter.  

I also have a Colt built like my duty M4 and have swapped Aimpoints, EoTechs, and ACOGs on it periodically.  The only optic that I won't use again is an Aimpoint M2, which I've posted about failing me in Iraq.  

I'm currently running a Comp M4 on it, despite my preference for EoThings.  Of all of them, I feel best-equipped on the road or outdoors with ACOGs.  However, if you're primarily running the gun unsupported and within 50m or even 100m, between the two, the M4 will likely be more gratifying and useful.  If you will be shooting primarily from the prone, kneeling/standing supported, or from a bench, or if you live in an open area, the ACOG might be preferred.  

Like you, I plan on keeping this one Colt somewhat faithful my weapons in the OIF/OEF era and the choices you've mentioned will be good to go.  Since both the Aimpoint M4 and an ACOG TA31RCO-M4 are so useful, you might consider going with one or the other first based on whether you're shooting on the move/supported or primarily within/beyond 100m and go that way first, but getting both in LaRue or other reliable mounts when you can to switch between based on your travels or range time.  Plenty of duty guns have used LaRue mounts, so I don't think you'll be subtracting anything in terms of faithfulness to the clone.

If you plan on using this clone for HD, go with the Aimpoint.  Magnifiers, even though I own/use them, generally are not that amazing or as useful as folks anticipate,  especially with Aimpoints.  So if you are anticipating relying on one heavily to split the difference, just go with the ACOG and work on your BAC skills or piggy back a Docter or RMR.

If I could only have one and it was for serious social matters, it would be a 1x.  However, my eyes suck these days and magnification is nice.  I've got some other very nice variables from various manufactures and, in my opinion, the ACOGs have the nicest image quality.  If you're going to drop $1K on a combat optic, ACOGs are GTG.  I did have a RCO go tits up, and Trijicon took great care of me, for what it's worth.  

Of course, all that said, I'm using an M4 since I've always been more concerned about nearer threats, and even with aging eyes, I'm pretty dangerous out to a few hundred meters.

Build a M16A4, then you can get an ACOG and an Aimpoint M4 . Put the ACOG on the A4 and the Aimpoint on the M4A1 and swap em out if you want....

I've been having some eye issues lately, but I've found that for indoors the dot sights work fine and the magnification of the ACOG makes it real nice for outdoor >200 yd ranges, <200 and iron sights still work well.

What are you shooting, targets, varmints, gongs? That makes a difference too, especially if you're hunting. Bottom line is to pick the sight for the usage.

I own Aimpoint, ACOG (2) and a Kahles K16i and I have owned Eotechs. If I could only own one it would be Aimpoint as much as I absolutely love my ACOGs and and my new Kahles. Steer clear of Eotech.

What do you mean buy that?  It's hard for my mind to figure out how a 1x would suck at close range.  I have a 2x7 and I'm ALMOST comfortable using it indoors in my house.  Especially in the daylight.  But at night my brain gets a little confused when both of my eye are open.    I've come to the conclusion that for HD I'm just going to stick with irons.  But should've bought a 1x4 over the 2x7 I got.  I really wanted a 1x4 but thought the 2x7 would be good enough to do it all.  I think for a hunting scope, or  out of doors, the 2x7 does work really well.

It didn't really do 1X.  It Seemed like it was actually slightly less than 1X with fish eye and yellow tint.  It was optically decent at 4X, but with the smaller FOV, significantly larger footprint and weight, it just wasn't worth it for a scope that excelled at nothing.  

The ACOG has a short eye relief, but crystal clear glass and and a wide FOV (that's why the eye relief is short).  I think an ACOG with a Micro in an offset mount would be far more effective than the 1-4.   1X or 4X is all your really going to use.  If you have time to adjust the magnification either way, it goes all the way up or down.

How can your field of view be small with both of your eyes open?  OR did the fact that it wasn't a true 1x screw the both eyes open thing.  Like I say, I can do it with the 2x, but in low light it gets kind of wonky.  My eyes start fighting each other.  In daylight, no problem.  But for HD, I want it to work in low light.  But I would think the closer you get to 1x, even if it's not exact, it would still be a both eyes open affair.  I'm guessing you tried that and it just didn't work that well?

Having had both, the Aimpoint is probably going to be more versatile.

With a traditional 200 or 300yd zero on your AR, you're going to hit center mass with almost no holdover, so as far as getting hits on target is concerned, both are going to be a wash - both optics will allow you hits out to 300yds.

Where the ACOG is going to come in handy, contrary to popular belief, isn't precision shooting (it isn't a precision optic), but rather target ID. Want to see your bullet holes at 200 yards, or confirm that the 2-liter bottle you're shooting at is hostile? The ACOG's magnification will help with that. Additionally, if you want to shoot out past 300yds, where .223/5.56 begins to drop off substantially, the ACOG's holdover reticle will allow center of mass hits rather easily (something the Aimpoint would struggle with at that distance).

What an ACOG won't do well as is a precision optic; it doesn't have the external adjustments or magnification power to shoot small groups. The ACOG is NOT a target optic, and you'll be disappointed if you buy it thinking that. The ACOG is meant to allow center of mass hits on man-sized targets, quickly. The Aimpoint is meant for the same role; however, it does well from 0-300yds, but struggles past that distance, where the ACOG shines.

Buy the Aimpoint if you're shooting 0-300yds, buy the ACOG if you plan on shooting past 300yds at steel or man-sized targets regularly or if you want to be able to ID your target positively at distance; get an actual scope if you plan on shooting precision or for groups.

This, it's what I eventually did.

I own a CQT MK4, Aimpoint, ACOG and have used plenty of other optics.  The 2 I cant live without are the ACOG and ML3.  I have neve rlooked at a magnified aimpoint setup but Id think that would be awesome if it looked anything like a acog with a red dot.  I own a TA01 with the red BDC, love that reticle and wish I could get that one in a BAC type acog.  I think I will get a M4 jarhead issue one soon, I havent seen one in person but looks like it would work pretty well.

Going used will save you some $$ to be able to own both if you cant make up your mind.  The CQT is alright but I have the older circle dot one without a BDC reticle and it lacks good hold overs like the acog and its heavier.  I picke dit up for 6 bones and its ok for that price. Leupold wants less than 200 to rig up a new reticle in the CQT which I might do.

You can get a TA31 cross hair.  Same reticle as the TA01 NSN but with tritium and fiber optic.