Gents,

I wanted opinions on "bang for the buck" between these two scopes.  I lean toward the IOR just because I can get it for about 319.00 vs 619.00 for the TA01.  I'm not looking for BAC, I already have an Aimpont ML2 for CQB.  I'm just looking for somthing I can put on a ARMS QR mount and slap on for long range work.

Also, if I go with the IOR, should I get the nato mil dot and not the druganov style?

Thanks,

The Yuckman...

IOR blows the ACOG away as far as bang for the buck goes.  The reticle is a personal preferance I have known people who like the dragunov reticle and those who hate it.  Most hate it though.  I kind of like it.  Try to find a scope with the reticles in question before purchasing.

One nice thing about the IOR scope is the ability to adjust the rear to account for non 20-20 eyes.  Putting your glasses against the rubber mount will mess them up.

Don't forget you don't get any rings for that $318.

-- Chuck

Even at 318 dollars, the ring is only another 100 at the most.  That brings the total to 418 plus shipping. It is still a good overall value.  my opinion is to save the cash and buy an ACOG, it is a much better optic at twice of the price, but you will get what you paid for.  

I got an arrangement to pick up a NIB IOR M2 for 300, I think this will kick start my 91 project I had on the back burner.