AR Sponsor
Posted: 6/10/2026 2:34:42 AM EDT
|
Evening, gents. Picked up a TA50 after our illustrious green bastard hyped it up so damn much, and the motherfucker is so out of center that you'd think Hellen Keller assembled it!  First thought I was losing my mind, but no, the reticle is high-left of center when you get tight enough on it to see the reticle information at the bottom. Checked it offhand and supported, it's a noticeable amount, not some minute fraction; got it mounted at the same centerline as my XPS and swapped it in place of the magnifier to check, trued it to the eotech and even by eyeball, the reticle is severely off-center from the ocular. Further, shifting behind the scope to center the reticle brings the prism edge halfway across my field of view. I know the compact ACOGs are a bit different from the TA31 in construction, but that can't be right, can it? Otherwise, to Odie-Green's credit... This thing is tits, especially the low version on an ADM cantilevered mount. Y'know, if it hadn't been assembled by a cross-eyed drunk on Friday afternoon.  It's also incredibly sweet behind a red dot or holographic, it kicks every magnifier on the market square in the dick. Maybe the fuckers in early GWOT using ACOGs behind eotechs were onto something. Already contacted Trijicon to see what they say. Looks like my shitty luck is holding for the time being. |
|
Had a similar problem with a TA47. Couldn't get it zero'ed on an AR, because not enough adjustment. Adjustment was max'ed out while the group was still 6" too high and 4" right at 25 yards. Took the scope off the rifle and counted the maximum adjustment clicks for elevation and windage, and divided by 2, to attempt to mechanically center the reticle. There was a noticeable cresent shape blacked out area at the lower left side when looking through the scope. So when centered, the prism wasn't looking through the center of the scope. Sent it to Trijicon for inspection. They returned it saying nothing was wrong.  |
|
Originally Posted By 1P29: Had a similar problem with a TA47. Couldn't get it zero'ed on an AR, because not enough adjustment. Adjustment was max'ed out while the group was still 6" too high and 4" right at 25 yards. Took the scope off the rifle and counted the maximum adjustment clicks for elevation and windage, and divided by 2, to attempt to mechanically center the reticle. There was a noticeable cresent shape blacked out area at the lower left side when looking through the scope. So when centered, the prism wasn't looking through the center of the scope. Sent it to Trijicon for inspection. They returned it saying nothing was wrong. That’s why I’m asking. ACOGs that are way off adjustment will look like you’re looking through a paper towel roll held askew. If you attempt to zero it and it’s like 14 yards off, this is why. |
|
I returned the first Ta01 I purchased around '98, because of similar things you describe. As it turned out, that was just the design. Got another one a year later, and have been using it ever since. They do have their quirks. |
And then, he arrives at the last item on his bucket list...
|
Originally Posted By doty_soty: Is the reticle offset within the field of view, or is the field of view offset from the ocular eyepiece? Reticle is offset within the field of view. Mounted for optimal field of view. Snap the gun up, your focus on the center; reticle is around 1.5-2 mils to the left, and slightly high. It’s probably useable, but for fuck’s sake, if asking for a centered reticle in a $900+ US made optic is asking too much, there’s a problem. |
|
My first TA33 was pretty bad. The reticle was way left and I was barely able to get on the edge of the paper at 50 yards. Luckily I bought it from a good dealer and they exchanged it without any hassle. The windage knob also was skewed so bad it looked like someone smacked it with a hammer. But then the replacement TA33 had huge artifacts. It looked like someone smeared their thumb across the black inside. *I know I’m using the wrong terminology here. I went back and forth on if I should exchange it again, and finally decided to do it. The third one was perfect, and it’s my favorite optic at the moment. But it is frustrating that a $1000 fixed power optic with little moving pieces and no electronics would have that bad of QC. ACOGs have been around forever now. There’s no reason these shouldn’t be 100% functional out if the box. |
|
Like: Being called illustrious green bastard. Don’t like: You getting a bad one. Hopefully they try to make it right. Optics being a little off center can happen, but usually you should have to be looking for it pretty hard. Most people don’t consider this can impact performance too. Your objective and ocular geometry are fixed. As soon as your exit pupil starts deviating to get aligned that’s how you get stuff like chromatic aberration and barreling on optics that have otherwise good glass. |
|
Originally Posted By -OdieGreen-: Like: Being called illustrious green bastard. Don’t like: You getting a bad one. Hopefully they try to make it right. Optics being a little off center can happen, but usually you should have to be looking for it pretty hard. Most people don’t consider this can impact performance too. Your objective and ocular geometry are fixed. As soon as your exit pupil starts deviating to get aligned that’s how you get stuff like chromatic aberration and barreling on optics that have otherwise good glass. Yup, already got an answer from Trij that it’s a lemon, working on getting it RMA’d now. This thing is tits, and after messing with it, I’m convinced this is 95-99% of the way to the perfect ACOG that folks really want, with a couple caveats. A) It needs a cantilevered mount, so you’re basically forced into the low height TA50 along with an ADM B2-C, S, or M mount for preferred centerline. The new Unity Kickr might work? Not sure about what height that would put you at. B) A piggyback mount on the front end of the optic would be great. I’m sure that would necessitate making it a battery powered model, probably a CR123 to save some of the weight of using a AA. C) Could use some more reticle options. A couple wind holds like on the Aurora, along with 62gr and 75/77gr BDC, would be nice. I’d really love it if they had 11.5” 5.56 BDC’s. Even if the first one was a lemon, I’m planning on getting one or two more to replace RDS/magnifiers, that’s how nice they are. Whole scope is lighter than a Sig Juliet magnifier, lol. Might try the Corvus piggyback mount for micro Aimpoints on the TA33, should fit the TA50, as well. Trijicon really could have made the perfect ACOG if they started with the TA50, upped the objective size a touch, and shifted its mounting to cantilever it backward from the factory, or just made their own cantilevered mount for it. |
|
Originally Posted By rb889: Yup, already got an answer from Trij that it’s a lemon, working on getting it RMA’d now. This thing is tits, and after messing with it, I’m convinced this is 95-99% of the way to the perfect ACOG that folks really want, with a couple caveats. A) It needs a cantilevered mount, so you’re basically forced into the low height TA50 along with an ADM B2-C, S, or M mount for preferred centerline. The new Unity Kickr might work? Not sure about what height that would put you at. B) A piggyback mount on the front end of the optic would be great. I’m sure that would necessitate making it a battery powered model, probably a CR123 to save some of the weight of using a AA. C) Could use some more reticle options. A couple wind holds like on the Aurora, along with 62gr and 75/77gr BDC, would be nice. I’d really love it if they had 11.5” 5.56 BDC’s. Even if the first one was a lemon, I’m planning on getting one or two more to replace RDS/magnifiers, that’s how nice they are. Whole scope is lighter than a Sig Juliet magnifier, lol. Might try the Corvus piggyback mount for micro Aimpoints on the TA33, should fit the TA50, as well. Trijicon really could have made the perfect ACOG if they started with the TA50, upped the objective size a touch, and shifted its mounting to cantilever it backward from the factory, or just made their own cantilevered mount for it. Good to hear. Which reticle did you end up getting? I’ve been debating another with the horseshoe but it’s hard to sway from how much I like the crosshair model I have. |
|
Originally Posted By -OdieGreen-: Good to hear. Which reticle did you end up getting? I’ve been debating another with the horseshoe but it’s hard to sway from how much I like the crosshair model I have. Horseshoe, for a less cluttered field of view. My favorite ACOG reticle is still the Aurora, I’ve never minded the chevron. |
|
I’ve got a lot of mini-ACOGs but no TA50. I want one and need another optics for a new 11.5 I just got. I’ve also gotten a few bad ACOGs out of the box - it’s infuriating when this happens and usually involves tons of wasted time and ammo jacking around before you make the hard decision to send the shit back. How is the FOV and Eye Relief on the TA50? |
|
Originally Posted By Brahmzy: I’ve got a lot of mini-ACOGs but no TA50. I want one and need another optics for a new 11.5 I just got. I’ve also gotten a few bad ACOGs out of the box - it’s infuriating when this happens and usually involves tons of wasted time and ammo jacking around before you make the hard decision to send the shit back. How is the FOV and Eye Relief on the TA50? The TA50 and TA33 likely use the same prism. The TA33 pushes the objective forward to restrict the FOV. The effect this has is extending the eye relief while restricting the FOV to remove objective shadowing. So essentially if you use the TA50 at the TA33’s eye relief, the FOV will be the same. The TA50 will have objective shadowing though, while the relocated front lens of the TA33 will create a crisp border at the same FOV. The TA50 at its peak FOV is shorter, but still longer than a TA31. I use mine as a TA33 with a tiny bit of objective shadowing, then move my head forward for peak FOV when I need/want it. Some people get really bothered by seeing objective shadowing, so in that case I’d recommend the TA33, but just know it’s all in your head and they function the same at that longer eye relief. Useless info time: Leupold also uses this blinder approach on their direct view LPVO’s. It’s what allows them to magnify 1.2-1.5X instead of demagnify and magnify 3X like other LPVO’s. It’s a cheap and easy way to do wild changes to an optics eye relief/FOV that actually works if you know what you’re doing with it. In Leupold’s case they also used it as a way to enhance durability as using the lens castle nut as a blinder makes it a seriously beefy unit. Attached File I wish more people would experiment with this method on LPVO’s. |
|
Originally Posted By Brahmzy: I’ve got a lot of mini-ACOGs but no TA50. I want one and need another optics for a new 11.5 I just got. I’ve also gotten a few bad ACOGs out of the box - it’s infuriating when this happens and usually involves tons of wasted time and ammo jacking around before you make the hard decision to send the shit back. How is the FOV and Eye Relief on the TA50? FOV is hard to quantify... it's significantly less than the TA31, but much better than a TA33, it doesn't feel like looking through a straw. Compared to a TA31, it's about an inch further from your eye, so no worries about clacking yourself in the eyebrow. If you get the standard height TA50, using standard micro ACOG mounts, you'll probably mount it as far back as you can, give or take a pic slot. Should work just fine for most folks like this, it's ever so slightly better than the TA31. With the low height TA50 in an ADM cantilevered mount, you'll have plenty of wiggle room to get it exactly where you want it. This is what I recommend, I went this route because I hate using a TA31 on an AR, I like a long LOP, so the 1.5" eye relief didn't work for me. I was able to get close with a Larue cantilevered RCO mount, but it still annoyed me. You can also get whatever mount height you want; 1.41" works perfect on a 416 height upper. 1.64" is more suited to AR15's, plus it'll fit overtop of a MBUS pro rear sight. They've also got 1.54, 1.93, and I think a 2.26, as well. Unity released a 1.54" mount for Eotech's mini 3-9 and 4-12, that might also work for the standard height TA50. |
AR Sponsor