AR Sponsor
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - The TACPOINT is NOT worth $100 (Page 2 of 3)
let me clarify.... I am on the OTHER side of the fence. I am not a Tacpoint basher. I am not a Tacpoint defender. I merely wanted to get one because I thought it must be a cool optic to stir up such a hornets nest!
Again... lets stick with what is actually POSTED. Noone is stating these are junk.
Has it been around long? I thought this thing was fairly new? I havent seen it until very recently.
Can you give supporting evidence? It very well may be true... I just dont know. My experience with those left me feeling they were both on par with each other, actually having owned and used both.
I disagree. The Tacpoint needs a $15 weaver spacer to co-witness. The BSA 30MM needs a $15 weaver spacer to co-witness. How is the tacpoint easier? The only advantage is that the Tacpoint *can* use a quality Aimpoint mount, in the $100+ range for the mount alone, which I pointed out in the original post. As to compactness.... hmmm... lets discuss that statement. They both are 30MM tubes. Both sit the same height over the weaver rail using the stock mounts.... so both have identical heights and widths. Now, on the length. The Tacpoint is 4.75" long, while the BSA RD30 is 3.82 inches long. I think that gives "compactness" to the BSA.
I agreed. I was just pointing it out for those who dont have one yet.
I stated exactly that in the review.
I stated that in the original post as a benefit of the Tacpoint. 
And I imagine it is on par with other budget red-dots.... which is why it hasnt come up as an issue.
And NOBODY said otherwise. |
|
FALARAK My post wasnt directed at you but to the same guys who come to every tacpoint thread trying to smear it as a airsoft piece of crap. Your post was actualy one of the btter ones on the issue. It just gets old when i come to the optics forum to see 2-5 topics on the tacpoint and most of them are hosted or drug on by the same people who are against the optic. My point is, if you dont like the optic dont read the threads. For the 100.00 price it is not a bad optic. In a years time I went thru 3 wally world BSA dot sights, either they couldnt take the recoil of 5.56 or they just flat out stopped working. I stopped buying BSA and started saveing towards an Aimpoint when the Tacpoint came along. I havnt stopped saving for the Aimpoint but the Tacpoint slowed down my rush to get one. In the past year I have had a Tacpoint and it has not failed me yet. Ive had the Tacpoint in the rain, Its been dropped attached to a rifle onto a gravel driveway( purly by accident ) . Its been pulled off my kitchen table by my dog who decided to grab my sling and run and it still has yet to break or lose zero. By my own experiance it has far exceeded the BSA line of sights. |
|
My apologies to those I have offended. I mearly find it annoying to see the constant bashing of the TP b/c it is not DOD approved. (hence the operator comments) There really isn't any proof out there that the scope is not a semi-quality optic. I dont think I have ever read anywhere that it is as good as the Aimpoint but many feel the need to say it isn't based on pretty nothing but price and place of origin. A mushy switch is poor quality? Maybe its a different design. Its either here nor there. Buy what you want and can afford and I will do the same. Im sure before to long ill have an AP but for now ill be happy with my TP> |
Awesome. Now thats the kind of info we are looking for! It may be that the Tacpoint is a better quality optic from a reliability perspective, than the BSA/budget optics out there. I made my observations mostly from the cosmetic observations, and my personal experience with the BSA line. That being said.... we need more posts like yours to really determine which is more bang for the buck! |
No, a mushy rheostat is a lower cost, and typically, that boild down to lower quality. Get your hands on the Aimpoint rheostat and you will see what I mean... and I guarantee you will decide the Aimpoint rheostat is FAR better (as it SHOULD be, at 3X the price!) It is OBVIOUSLY a different design.... it HAS to be a different design to lower the cost to make it an affordable optic. It doesnt mean it's crap or junk.... it's just worthy of pointing out the differences. The BSA rheostats are nothing to write home about either! Oh, and apology accepted. 
|
|
Some of this involves philosophy. Since even inexpensive optics now carry a "lifetime" warranty: You pay more money, an optic is likely to last longer and is less likely to fail. Money paid up front. You pay less money, an optic is more likely to fail. But is repeatedly replaced by manufacturer. So what's your philosophy on what's important? Paying more to have it on your rifle or paying less and chancing it'll be in the mail when you want it. That's the economy of the inexpensive optic: give good warranty and chance that it won't break, but send another if it does, over and over until the customer gets tired of the game. Not a slam, just make an informed choice. |
|
FAL, Thanks for further explaining your review, it makes better sense now..from your background and review. Your points on training and having one motor skill set for it are important...I can see this. I guess what I posted came from the other threads of bashing, and I didnt want to see this go the way of the Do-Do as well. Your post of the observations and evaluation between the AP and TP are good information. Thanks for taking the time. |
|
My 2 cents: I just got my TacPoint last week. I had to use a riser to get it high enough to use. The batteries it came with were dead, but the extra batteries that were supplied worked. I shot a couple hundred rounds through it on Sunday. I had the same observations with the flip up covers. The front one didn't quite flip. The dot was clear and bright and effective even for a sunny day. I don't agree with the comments on the BSA being better bang for the buck. At least not at this point. I had a $30 BSA that lasted about a month before the red dot began to flicker. I changed batteries, but the dot still worked intermittently. I never tried another BSA. The dot in the BSA I had was fuzzy and not very bright. It would wash out on sunny Florida days. I have only shot with the Tacpoint one day so far, but my impression is so-so. It isn't the best. I don't know if it is worth $100 yet. If it sustains the performance I experienced yesterday, I would say yes. If it lasts 3 times as long as my BSA, I am happy. |
|
First off, FALARAK I would like to say your original post was informative, thanks. Second off I would like to think Viper5194 for his post also, it was very informative as well. As for all the other shit on here I think it is childish, I too got into an argument with some of these peolpe over this optic and got bashed just for wanting to test one out, not very cool at the least. I own an Aimpoint (Comp ML2) and I use one at work (Comp M) but I wanted to get one of these Tacpoints just to do a review of. Seems to me that most of the anti-tacpoint folks on here are overly concerned with it failing you in combat, which is a valid point if you are going to use it in combat but most people, and I said most not all, that are looking at these is for useing them as a range beater. My question is that why does EVERY Tacpoint thread have the same people getting on them talking nothing but shit. I am not going to say names but I think you are provoking ALL of this crap, you may not be the first to out right talk shit but you damn sure provoke most of it. I have changed my mind about ever buying one of these optics and will stick with what I have but this is crazy, and no one does anything to you for it. I think you are running your mouth on here just for the sake of arguing and that is acting just like a child. I have seen plenty of people in Law Enforcement and in combat in the Military use cheap ass BSA optics because that was what they could get or because it was better than what was issued to them, I wish they would have researched better but what can you do, right? Well this would be an issue if this thing was as big of a piece of shit as a BSA is but from what I see it is not, the biggest issue I have seen brought up is it fogging (which ANY optic will do if given the right conditions) and battery life (which is no more worse that the issued Comp M battery life anyway) and the material it is made out of (good point on this) but people have been useing them and having good results out of them. Grow up and quit talking shit, dont post on here if all you are going to do is talk shit. Is it a game to you to see how fast you can get these threads locked? Let people get their test information out and share with everyone else. Are you just trying to keep people from shareing this info? Thats what it seems like to me. Whatever the reason, please, for God sakes, act like an adult... |
| I shot 500 rounds today with the Tacpoint. It held zero perfectly BUT after 300 rounds the dot would disappear and I'd have to mess with the knob to get it back. This could be the batteries maybe, I'll try new ones next week. This happened about 6 different times. My caps still flip up though. I'm still getting a EOTech on payday, I just wanted to try it out and see how it would hold up. If it's not the batteries that are the problem I don't think it's gonna last. |
| I fixed my front flip up cover by the way.... they are soooo cheap that the springs just flip to where they dont hold tension anymore. It will be hard to explain, but I heated a safety pin with a lighter, and made a small hole in the inside portion of the raised area for the flip cover.... for the spring to fit in. Then, using a small jewelers screwdriver, pryed the spring into this hole, where it will now stay put, and hold tension. Seem to work ok. |
Ditto. If I'm going cheap The BSA is great !! |
Is there a reverse echo on the forum? I seem to recall making this statement myself, only in reverse, a LONG time ago. Anyways ... The "review" was, in fact, a fair review - of the fit and finish of the product. If you purchase your products base solely on fit and finish, then I'd consider this a full enough review to make a decision. However, Falarak clearly stated "Thats about all I can describe. I cant give info on a torture test" (sic). This means that he did NOT test the performance of the optic. He did NOT test if/how well it held zero. He did NOT test durability. He did NOT test waterproofness. He did NOT test anything other than "gee, it doesn't LOOK good, because the paint peels off and it doesn't have a stop at the on/off stages of the switch. No, I'm NOT saying that it's on par with anything, so don't try to add some spin and make the claim. What I AM saying is that, based on a "review" that was clearly nothing more than an observation of the quality of the PAINT or the softness of the covers, one can NOT make a statement that something is or isn't worth the cost of the item. How can you claim it's not worth X dollars if you DON'T know if it will hold zero? How can you claim it's not worth X dollars if you DON'T know if it is waterproof? How can you claim it's not worth X dollars if have performed NO (torture) tests of ANY kind, and clearly admitted that you had not NOR would you? Yes, it's an honest review of the paint quality and the person's perceived opinion on the softness of the lens covers (what were the durometer readings? ... hahaha). But it in NO way was a full enough TEST to claim that the scope isn't worth X dollars, no matter HOW much it costs. And the rant about the mount being a POS: the AP doesn't even come with one, so it's a moot point. BTW: Yes, I own one. No, it's not "as good" as something else - nor have I ever claimed it to be. But if you're going to post a "review" that concludes with " ... it's NOT worth X dollars ...", you'd be better off to ACTUALLY test the PERFORMANCE of it, BEFORE making such a statement. |
Where is the "through and detailed review" (sic), HK? All I saw was "the paint this, the plastic cover that -- and the clear statement that he did absolutely NO performance testing (torture test). So ... if you think that telling me that the paint rubbed off or the plastic lens cover is softer = "thorough and detailed review", you're dead wrong. |
+1 |
|
<just_an_observation> I found this posted in another thread, and I didn't want to turn that thread (a non-TP thread) into a TP thread (and be called a troll), so I thought I'd bring it over HERE (an existing TP thread) and respond. Imagine -- me with a conscience! :) Chedderboy's original post about the ML2 was this:
Then, Lumpy replied with this:
(Note: The guy is/was referring to an ML2, which is a NON-NV model, which should be even brighter than the M2) I don't get it. We just spent months listening to reasons why the AP was superior to the TP, and one of those reasons constantly bantered about was the fact that the AP had more brightness settings than the TP -- yet, it's "normal" for you to NOT be able to see ~4 settings on the Aimpoint (??). Huh? What's the point in having it be "normal" to have 3-4-5 settings that you CAN'T see, not to mention the fact that it is/was being used as an argument in favor of the AP being "better" than the TP? </just_an_observation> |
You can see the dot on the ML2 at position 3-4-5 if it is night time. In full sunlight you cannot and will have to go to a higher setting. I believe that the first 1-2 positions on the tacpoint would be to bright for nighttime shooting (especially if you wanted to run a cheap GEN 1 NV device).... C4 |
Here are three ML2-specific responses to the original post, from three different AP owners: "My ML2 is hard to see at the lower settings, even in total darkness. In fact 1 and 2 position is invisible in total darkness. I even checked it with PVS-14's and I couldn't see the dot then either." "I can't see my #1 setting at all. #2 is VERY dim." "I could just barely see the 2nd setting in a totally black room. Aimpoint checked it out and said all was normal." Thanks for the comments, C4. |
I believe that to be correct. Position 1 is not visable and is 2 is very dim. That is why I said that positions 3-4-5 are suitable for night time viewing... C4 |
|
Thanks for the great review. Especially since you had something to compare against. I was considering a TP in place of a AP CompC. The price appeals to me but I did have to wonder if I would be dissapointed after spending about $200 total (TP + good mount). Guess I'll keep shooting my BUIS and wait to save some cash. By the way, I really liked your reference to the 'cheap-o' BSAs as a good alternative. I've had a 30mm BSA on my shotgun for years and it's still going strong. It's been rained on, snowed on, dropped, all that typical hunting stuff. Still going. I guess it's the energizer bunny of cheap stuff. |
I honestly do not believe you would be dissapointed with a TP. Besides, if you buy the mount you want you can always use it later if you choose to buy an AP. An TP is a viable choice if your funds are low and want to try something out. Im sure later on you could sell it here anyway. I just found out yesterday that our District has purchased AP CompM2's for all our AR's. We will recieve them once the new AR's (additional ones for each operational person) arrive. They will be mounted on an A3 platform with a riser for a co-witness setup. I do not have the specifics since I am not the one ordering the parts. One of our SOG (Special Operations Group, ONO'S an Operator) guys is doing all that and is out of town. When we recieve them we all have to qualify so I will take my personal AR with the TP and my work AR with the AP and let you know what I find. Peace and chicken grease |
I COMPLETELY agree with you. 100%. My review, also clearly stated, is not the "be all, end all" review. My *assumption* that it is not worth $100, is based STRICTLY on that it would *at least* hold zero, and be as reliable, as the BSA's. If, during some type of extended torture testing, proved to be more water resistant, last longer, handle recoil, hold zero better, etc..etc... than the BSA's, than WITHOUT QUESTION the Tacpoint would be worth more than the $40 budget class..... Since I was not able or inclined to conduct such a test, and also considering a sample size of *ONE* is not significant data to draw such conclusions from.... I can only point out the simplest of observations, and draw conclusions on them. The FACT remains, none of us know what the true quality of the optic is for the long term, until such testing is performed with an adequate sample size. I just went on the data I had available, and did draw a very large assumption that the internal durability and reliability would be at least as good as the BSA's, and probably less than the Aimpoints. And, I will bet that is a safe assumption. 
|
Even if you are disappointed with the scope, the mount won't go to waste. You can use it with an Aimpoint if you so desire (or sell it). |
Your report was a fair opinion. I just wanted to clarify the "looks" vs. "performance" aspect. As for NOT being worth $100 (versus the cheaper BSA's, etc.), I have read many opinions on the $30/40/50 BSA's (and others) NOT holding zero, while I have yet to read a single post about a TP not holding zero. Regardless of the paint job or plastic, a scope that CAN hold zero is worth MUCH MORE than a scope that CAN'T. Good job, though. Thanks. |
Let me be the first. Not exactly holding zero.... but the guy I bought mine from sold it because on his rifle, he could not get it to ZERO at ALL.... it ran out of adjustment. Might be the mount, might be a defect... I dunno yet. I havent sighted mine in yet..... until I get a spacer. |
|
I have a BED-30 and while it is NOT a Tacpoint it is made by HAKKO, cost was about $140US. It does have positive clicks on the power setting knob ans seems well made. I purchased it as a cheap optic. Is waterproof ( I often shoot in the rain), and does all I want of it. Was even easy to sight in. I know its not a AP or Eotech and I wouldn't stake my life on it, thats what (BUIS were made for). It does everything I need for my knockabout rifle. STI |
|
I have a Tacpoint and I'm not dissappointed with it. This is my 1st experience with a red dot site I was not prepared to go "all-in" for a top of the line model. The scope does everything I expected it to do. The sight holds its zero. While the scope is not as durable as the Aimpoint, Tacpoint still has the high-speed, low drag appearance of the Aimpoint. The similarities stop there, however. I agree that the scope may be a little over priced but it is still within an acceptable price range for us 'plinkers'. After toying with the red dot, I really wish I had a 3x-4x scope instead for the longer shots. I feel my 100 bucks wasn't a complete waste for trying out the Tacpoint. Beats the hell out of spending $350 and still ending up dissappointed. Just my honest opinion, take it for what its worth!  |
Still living in denial... Like I said... I have no bias, either way. Unlike you..... and you cannot refute the observations I posted. So why are you so compelled to defend this optic? I think anyone with a brain can draw their own conclusions... good or bad, without your attacking anyone who doesnt worship the Tacpoint as the greatest thing since sliced bread.
|
What exactly am i denying? I find the scope to be of good quality, maybe it is you who is in denial... Why are YOU so compelled to discredit it? I have drawn a conclusion therefore I must have a brain. You however are still unknown at this time. I dont expect people to worship the TP. I have always said 'to each his own'. It is many others who feel the need to bash it without any proof. You have compared the two so you are slightly above the rest. I do not worry about cosmetics, I worry about whether or not it will work when i want it to and so far it does. And if you had cared to notice the smiley's, 'anyone with a brain' could have figured out I am being sarcastic. I love you Fal. Marry me? |
Of course it is. It has the looks and features of a very high priced scope, therefore it is priced higher than the very bread and butter, not-very-tactical looking cheap red dots. |
Quite simply put.... you havent refuted anything I have said. The ONLY way you defend the Tacpoint, is by ATTACKING ME. Dont you get it? You havent used one fact in your argument. You only use the third grade mentality.... by not being able to speak in an educated manner on the actual subject, you simply personally attack anyone you disagree with. It's weak, its childish, and I am done responding to your posts. I tried. I'll let you have the last word.... because I know you will anyway. 
|
|
Edit: Apparently I have offended some people here with my foul language. Last I checked we were all grown ups and could handle it. However, some cannot tolerate the plain truth. Yes Grant, I post at GT.com. Window licker? I have something for you to lick. Kevin. You can get in line behind Grant. If you all like watching the pointless bashing of certain products for no other reason then to jump on a bandwagon then so be it. I have lurked here for a while before regging. I dont usually post as you can tell from my count, however, I do not come here to watch one group slam another based soley on their opinions (its not made in American and costs $300 less therefore it must be garbage) minus any hard proof. (other then Fals post in which he compared the 2 but his problems were cosmetic) I visit this sight to learn about the AR and look at all the eye candy. |
I am pretty sure that he is the window licker from GlockTalk (user name Nathan2003): www.glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=a7f45ee749c59e0a0505dec049fdd7e8&threadid=292228&perpage=25&pagenumber=2 C4 |
Nice fellow, can't wait to meet ya a local shoot  chill dude its just the internet. Oh yeah Welcome to the ARF
|
I'm surprised that you tought that the mount would co-witness on the AR-15  Mine didn't co-witness on my FAL or Mini-14 either. Unlike the Aimpoint you can go to full brightness in one click rather than 11  Rubber coating? My Leupolds or Aimpoints don't have rubber coating.  A rubber coating would make actually mounting the sight to a weapon difficult. I have seen some of the "delta" scopes with rubber coating  Soft aluminum? I have a whole rifle made of aluminum and plastic!
|
Ok... I do NOT want to spar with you Paul... only because I know I will lose!
I did not say I did. Did you see where I said I expected it to? No. I merely pointed out the supplied mount does not. Thats all. Just an observation.
Ok.
I can see how some would think that good. I dont... but I do understand the principle of different strokes.
I agree. And aimpoints dont have rubber coating either. Some scopes, like some of the *other* budget dot optics DO.... and use a mounting system where this isnt a factor. I merely was pointing out, that the aluminum used was not hard like T6 or anything close, and there was no rubber coating.... as an observation. I wasnt saying it *should* have it... I was merely drawing out the differences between other sights... both more and less expensive in class.
I should have borrowed a metal hardness tester... to demonstrate this. This aluminum is of very low grade, from the thread inspection to a scratch test. Not a big deal, just pointing it out. Kind of like the difference when using pot metal versus machined steel.... a significant different... might not matter at all, but worthy of observation. I say again, I am not knocking this scope... for all of you who are so emotionally inclined to defend it. I just pointed out some observations about mine, and made my own conclusions on it. You are free to make yours. I am not right, you are not wrong. It's just a freaking optic for crying out loud. |
|
Well, I have a Comp M, an ML2, 2nd gen Bushnell Holosights and Kobpas (that is how it is spelled on the boxes) Russian red dots for AKs. And Tacpoints, too. Forget the Aimpoint comparison for a minute. People who own TacPoints and have put them to the test say that they hold zero, handle the recoil and that they are happy with them. I paid MORE for the Holosights and the Russian red dots. Tacpoints have brighter dots and easier controls. I have to fiddle around with the Holosight controls and the Kobpa dots are not very bright. And neither have lifetime warranties. If my TPs hold up for me like they have for others, I will much prefer them over the other NON Aimpoint red dots that I own. Less money, better warranties, brigher dots and easier controls. |
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - The TACPOINT is NOT worth $100 (Page 2 of 3)
AR Sponsor