User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/16/2004 1:30:56 PM EDT
I got the TacPoint red dot. Hopefully I will have a range this report this weekend.
First impression is that it is pretty solid. Nice coating on the glass. I can see the dot in sunlight no problem, it does not become washed out. $130 Rifle is Armalite M15A4(T) carbine with RRA NM Two Stage trigger, Hogue grip, and ACE stock. I had a set of BMAS flip up sights, but the scope is not high enough to use both....I need a riser.   
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2004 1:40:13 PM EDT
[#1]
I have one too and have been pleased. Since buying it I have discovered it is made by Hakko. I also noticed in your pics that you have the same issue I first had when I installed the flip up covers. The front one doesnt fit to snug. Well i soon discovered this is user error. If you look at the front of the scope, youll notice a groove all the way around it. You have to actualy force the flip up cover on farther and it locks into that groove with a ridge on the inside of the cover. Took me a day before I realized it. Let us know what ya think.
In the first pic you can see the groove im talking about  The second pic is after I discoverd my error...  Viper out................ |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2004 1:43:22 PM EDT
[#2]
AHHHH Thank You!!! I fixed it. Much better. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2004 1:46:02 PM EDT
[#3]
Holy Aimpoint ripoff Batman!
No offense, but is that an airsoft red dot? That's pretty shitty for one optics company to copy the appearance of another company. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2004 1:49:53 PM EDT
[#4]
Um, no, not made for Airsoft. Made for real guns. And yes, it looks a hell of a lot like an Aimpoint.....which is why I bought it. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2004 1:51:13 PM EDT
[#5]
Its not made for airsoft. Its actualy sold thru www.nightvisionweb.com and is made by Hakko. Yea it looks like the aimpoint and is built very well but it is not an actual clone of the aimpoint. It is a little different.. I actualy preferr mine to my BED-24 made by Hakko. Alot of guys around here will vouch for Hakkos quality. Also has a lifetime warrenty . Aimpoint only 10 years isnt it? Things that make ya go Hhhmmmmm
Edited to add URL scopesandmore.meridian1.net/s/scopesandmore/default.asp?S=503&A=E&PKV=RSR-HAKTAC1|0 |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2004 2:17:47 PM EDT
[#6]
Please keep us updated as to its durability and whether or not it hold zero after a few uses.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2004 6:21:58 PM EDT
[#7]
I can tell you, I have put about 1200 rounds thru my carbine with the Tacpoint and it hasnt moved yet. IIm pleased with it. Seems as durable as any other Hakko ive seen and looks better then most other red dots in the same price range.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2004 6:24:47 PM EDT
[#8]
Are there any parallax problems?
96Ag |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2004 6:28:24 PM EDT
[#9]
None that Ive seen so far. I actualy tested it out by dropping the dot onto a corner of a light switch cover about 30 feet away. And while holding it as steady as I could I moved my head /eye around in the glass and the POI stayed on the same corner of the switch cover with very little movement, probably due to my standing position. Re-zero hasnt been an issue either. Ive had it off my rifle about 4 times since I recieved it and have not had to adjust.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2004 7:29:41 PM EDT
[#10]
How bright is the dot in bright daylight and is it waterproof.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2004 8:08:43 PM EDT
[#11]
Other than not saying "Aimpoint" on the side, how is it different? According to scopesandmore.com it only has five brightness settings, other than that it appears to be exactly the same as far as aesthetics go. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 3:20:05 AM EDT
[#12]
Yes, it is waterproof. Did not get washed out in daylight. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 4:13:43 AM EDT
[#13]
I spoke to Aimpoint at the Shot Show about this optic made by HAKKO and they were a little pissed. I believe you may see some kind of legal action against them....
C4 |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 4:17:41 AM EDT
[#14]
Guess I better order another one. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 4:32:42 AM EDT
[#15]
The Tacpoint looke like it might be a good for my 1022 once I get the that stock that can take AR parts...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 5:31:00 AM EDT
[#16]
Hey Viper, what mount is that? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 6:07:37 AM EDT
[#17]
If you compair the two sights, Aimpoint and Tacpoint side by side youll notice a few differences. The tacpoint used a different battery set up. Used 2x LR44 batteries. The tube is actualy a little loger then the Aimpoint, actualy more noticable where the mount attaches. The Battery/switch modual on the Aimpoint I believe is bolted onto the side of the sight tube with 2 bolts for easy removal and replacement, the Tacpoint is not, its machines from one piece of aluminum and the dot/battery mechanisim is slid into the battery tube. It only has 5 setting compaired to the Aimpoints 11 settings. There are several differences. Yes the Tacpoint is waterproff and seems built well, but it only resmbles the Aimpoint. It has its own distinctions.
Edited: Ill get flamed for it, but the mount is a KAC clone I purchsed from a local airsoft dealer.After I got to look at it I decided Id rather spend the 40.00 on it instead of the 200.00 that KAC is asking for theres. so far so good............. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 6:29:46 AM EDT
[#18]
What is the KAC clone made of? Is it forged, cast or can you tell? just curious. Thanks |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 6:34:54 AM EDT
[#19]
You know...I have decided that if the damn thing works, and works well for your purpose then anyone that says its stupid can kiss off. I have a $30 BSA 30MM red dot that I have had on an SKS and an AR. Always holds zero, and has never failed me. But people look at me funny, and I feel weird posting pics of "Quality rifles" with what everyone says is "cheap" equipment. 1. I am not in battle conditions. 2. If going into battle conditions I will grab my A2 sighted rifle. so if it works...use it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 6:44:49 AM EDT
[#20]
Nice! I think I just found the optic I'm going to use on my .22 AR build!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 6:53:08 AM EDT
[#21]
Hakko makes good optics. Unless both have been subjected to a torture test, who is to say the aimpoint is better. The military does not ALWAYS choose the best product, just the one by the lowest bidder that will do the job. The replacement for the M1911A1 is case in point. Both Sig Sauer and Beretta put bids out for the new US military sidearm. EVERYONE know that the SIG P226 (the choice of the Navy seals) is a FAR better weapon than the Beretta model 92F, yet our government chose the Beretta over the SIG P226, because of a small price difference. BIG MISTAKE in my opinion. My point is that unless you have evidence, as in comparison testing and performance spec, saying the Aimpoint M series red dot scope is better than the Hakko Tacpoint is pure speculation. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 6:59:03 AM EDT
[#22]
well said |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 7:16:55 AM EDT
[#23]
I havent bought one of the cheap Japanese knock offs of an ACOG, but Im willing to stake the cost of my TA31 that its not the equal of the Trijicon product. Give me a break. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 7:18:56 AM EDT
[#24]
_DR, The mount I got is I believe is made from forged aluminum. Most cast stuff shows detailed sighns of the actualy casting process. The surface of this mount is smooth, with the telltale sighns that parts of it where machined . It fit onto my A3 upper with no problem and hasnt loosened up on its own since Ive have it. Will it hold up as well as the real KAC mount? I have no clue but its doing well in my hands for the moment.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 7:30:15 AM EDT
[#25]
Lumpy, I agree with you in the case of the ACOG. The cheap knockoff version is made of plastic and made for Airsoft. The Tacpoint on the other hand is made by a reputable sight/scope manufactuer and is made for live fire weapons. Its not made of plastic, its nitrogen purged to make it water tight, and it WORKS! It is made by Hakko! Ive seen on numerous occasions guys on this board asking where they can buy Hakko scopes and sights. They are built well and reliable. The Tacpoint seems to be no exception. The only issue I have with the Tacpoint is that it probably doesnt have the same battery life as the Aimpoint, but LR44 batteries are cheap.......Its built well, out of machined aluminum and stays on target thru many rounds. For 110.00 you could buy 3 of them with a lifetime warrenty for the price of one aimpoint with a 10 year warreny. Think ill take my chances on the Tacpoint...........Dont knock it till ya try it....... If ya do try it you may be knockin the Aimpoint and wondering to yourself why you paid 3x as much..... LOL this is kinda like compairing a Colt lower to a Mega lower. Colt was here first and has a good reputation, BUT id pick the Mega lower over a colt any day. Same part, same metal, differnt name and the Mega is 1/3rd the price of a Colt lower. Guess that makes the Mega lower junk? dont think so...............
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 7:38:26 AM EDT
[#26]
I dont take chances where my life, or anothers life, is in question. But thats just me. YMMV 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 7:39:17 AM EDT
[#27]
You are probably right, but it's not made by a reputable optics manufacturer. Sometimes you get what you pay for. Sometimes you get more than you paid for. Sometimes you dont get what you paid for. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 7:46:01 AM EDT
[#28]
I agree 100% with you there, if my life were to depend on the optics, it would be AIMPOINT or ACOG hands down (because it's been proven by the military in combat not because it costs less or is made in japan). But for a range toy(which is what it would be for me), that's a bit different. The weapon I would grab if in dire need is my Sig P220. The ARs might come in useful for SHTF, but for everyday home defense it's the SIG. The nagging thing that bugs me is, IS the aimpoint really better? I mean, where's the proof? You can pay $50000 for a Cadillac SUV, but is really better than the $35000 Chevrolet? mostly cosmetics and marketing. I can't just accept that because it costs more, it is automatically better. Is a Wilson AR15 clone better than a Colt? Probably not, just cost a whole helluva lot more. The other thing I would want to know is, who actually makes tthe optics for the Aimpoint. It it done in house, or are the components maybe imported from Japan or Germany or somewhere. I value yours and Lumpy experience in optics since I have little experience (always had irons), but surely there has to be more to it than it's just better because it costs more. 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 7:46:18 AM EDT
[#29]
I personaly dont see how useing a Hakko product is takeing a chance. The quality is there, and the durability is there, as is the decent price tag. 98% of what I buy is made in the USA and I make it a point to do so. But just because this optic is made in japan makes it junk? The japanese in many instances have exceeeded what the US can make as far as quality. My girlfrieds Honda has had one problem since we got it new in 98 and that was with the windshiled wiper motor. On the other hand my ford has had lets see, almost 2 dozen different problems ut I guess ts a better car cause it is made in the USA. not tryin to piss anyone off, but im not goa pay 3x as much for a aimpoint if I can get close to the same thing for 1/3 rd the price with a better warrenyy. JMO
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 7:47:31 AM EDT
[#30]
I just ordered a Tacpoint from scopesnmore.com to go on a 9mm upper. When I receive it I'll compare it to my ML2.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 7:51:21 AM EDT
[#31]
Uhhh, aren't the Springfield Armory scopes made by Hakko? Those scopes suk azz! I have seen them break easily, and there are a plethora of reports about the same throughout this and other boards. Hakko is fine if your just wanting to shoot at paper, but please don't expect to count on them if you need them. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 7:55:13 AM EDT
[#32]
Does any one know of or have a link to a torture test or extreme conditions testing for the Aimpoint? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 8:08:45 AM EDT
[#33]
Take it to Gunsites 223 or 556 course for a week of hard use. If it doesn't crap out THEN maybe well be believers. Can't afford a week at Gunsite? Try FIRE Institute's 3 day Carbine 1 course (they will hold it again in early September). Then see if it will pass the 'drop test' (if you dare). The drop test is when you toss your rifle over your shoulder so it hits the ground 5-6 feet behind you. Pete (the instructor) does this for every class with his Aimpoint equiped carbine. It has yet to be damaged or lose zero. Will the Hakko stand up to it? (hey you can do this test at home and not spend $1). |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 8:09:02 AM EDT
[#34]
Hakko also makes certain scopes sold under the Cmore name............... No one has ever said C-more is junk! www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=18&t=189974........
Every manufactuer has different lines of products with different amounts of qualitys to them. Ya, some people dislike Springfield scopes but whose to say springfield didnt ask for a cheaply made product from Hakko. On the other hand C-More has Hakko produce a good quality scope and they put there name on it. No where did I say that the Tacpoint is better then the Aimpont. I just think its a better deal for a similar optic. Hakko does not make junk. Ive owned a BED-35 and still own a BED 24 which is on my M4gery which has about 3k rounds thru it and has never had a problem. It still has the original battery in it. . I then got the Tacpoint for my CAR. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 8:14:54 AM EDT
[#35]
LOL would that drop test count if it the sight wasnt actualy mounted to a rifle. Im not to thrilled about the idea of tossing my rifle to the ground, but would consider mounting the tacpoint to a heavy weight piece of wood ( 4x4) or somthing and tossing it , then remounting the sight to check zero. not sure when i would be able to do it, but does sound kind of interesting.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 8:15:18 AM EDT
[#36]
I have - so have many others on this board. The C-More dot site is a POS - period! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 8:19:38 AM EDT
[#37]
No - sight must be mounted - it should be able to take the weight of the rifle (do you plan on removing the sight before you drop the rifle when you tripped?)
If you're rifle can't handle it now - how to you expect to know if it will handle it when things are 'for real and for keeps'. Better to find out about issues now (and have a chance to correct them). |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 8:28:13 AM EDT
[#38]
Just curious -- Under what real-and-for-keeps circumstances would I toss my rifle 6' behind me? Surrender? :) |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 8:38:38 AM EDT
[#39]
LMFAO!!! |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 8:43:53 AM EDT
[#40]
Sounds like a great course. too bad it's in pittsburgh. Know of any in Texas? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 8:43:54 AM EDT
[#41]
As I stated before. If it was SHTF....I'm grabbing my iron sighted rifle. This sucker is for punching paper and fun....not crawling in the mud getting shot at.
Even if I did have an Aimpoint, I'd grab the iron sighted for SHTF. Cause Irons just about don't fail. so: +1 IBTL I Like Pie Did the gun from Heat have a Tacpoint? all JBT's from DU can STFU and ES 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 8:44:29 AM EDT
[#42]
Actualy i was thinking about monting a rail to a 4x4 to simulate the weight of the rifle. The sight being zeroed to my rifle would then be mounted to the rail on the 4x4 and thrown several feet. The weight f the 4x4 would indeed simulate the impact the sight would have on the rifle. I would then re-mount the sight on my rifle and test fire to determin POI stability and re-zero ability. I dont like the idea of intetional trying to break a 900.00 rifle by throwing it on purpose. On the other hand I could see myself doing it to the Tacpoint to show others it is built well.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 8:51:01 AM EDT
[#43]
Forest, if you actualy looked at the link you would notice Hakko does not make the C-more DOT sight. They make the 4x21 scope for C-more which has good reviews.... Hakko also produced these 4x21 for COLT...ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=7&f=23&t=211429 ...... Things that make ya go HMMMMMmmmmm
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 9:40:11 AM EDT
[#44]
I think what the issue for me is that I use my AR for home defense and I need to trust my life with it. I don't want an optic that has not been fully tested by the Military. Putting this optic on a plinker is a different story and can see that it has value....
C4 |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 11:08:14 AM EDT
[#45]
You slip and fall - it happens in the real world (especially when you're under stress).
I like the idea but there is a flaw in your argument. If the mount loosens on the 'wood rifle' and you go and move the optic to the 'real rifle' and retighten you won't realize you had a problem with the opitc/mount/rifle system. You idea could validate the durability of the sight - but it would not confirm any ability on the mount.
Nobody does. But if you're $900 rifle can't take a little toss then I'd start looking for something that can. These things were intended for combat with Pvt Snuffy who can break just about anything. Better to find out now before you need it.
This is why people need to attend training - especially a course with a low light/night section. Tough to shoot when you can't see the irons. Red-Dots allow better shooting at longer range in low light (illuminated reticule scopes are even better). There is a reason why the Military is going to optics, and they don't have serious issues with durability. |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 11:10:13 AM EDT
[#46]
Isn't Thunder Ranch in Texas? (at least for now - IIRC it doesn't move north for another year). Hit the training section Tony_F has been through many such courses and he's the guy who would know if something shorter is out that way. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 11:11:56 AM EDT
[#47]
Viper,
Don't get me wrong - I think the optic has serious potential on 'fun guns', 3-gun matches, and possibly for training. If it survives your '4x4 test' I'd probably pick one up for my son's rifle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 11:14:24 AM EDT
[#48]
That is what spray and pray is for. yes I am kidding |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 11:41:35 AM EDT
[#49]
Do you HAVE to do the drop test??? Frankly, I’d tell the instructor to go F’ himself if he told me to do that. Don’t get me wrong, I understand the principle behind it, but I wouldn’t want to try it on a perfectly good carbine with goodies hanging off it. That’s too much money to be literally throwing around to prove a point. BTW, just because you can throw your rifle once, doesn’t mean it’ll last after several drops. I wouldn’t toss my rifle to prove that it will still work, because I’d be worried the NEXT time I dropped it, it would go tits up on me, because it's been structurally weakened or otherwised damaged from multiple drops. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2004 12:36:40 PM EDT
[#50]
i think somepeople here just like to hear themselves speak.
who really cares what you think people buy what they want, your not paying for it so if you dont have anything good to say start your own thread an bitch there |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
