Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 9/16/2004 7:10:09 AM EST
I have been reading and checking these scopes out for a while. And I do believe that they are awesome scopes and very rugged, but why the heck are they so dang expensive??? I could get 2 high quality red dot scopes for the price of 1 ACOG. Am I missing something here?
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 7:22:32 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 7:39:34 AM EST
Well so far every scope I have checked out has some magnification (however little) but what I meant is that you can get an EOTech for about $399.00, so times that by 2 and you got the price of an ACOG. Now I know there are advantages to the ACOG (not running on battery power) which is cool. Im just not sure if you are paying for the Trijicon name, or whether it really is worth the $900 bucks.... Oh well.....
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 7:46:42 AM EST
No, the ACOG is not worth 1K. Not in my book anyway. That's why I don't have one. The new illuminated low power variables are much more versatile than the ACOG for most users, IMHO. I don't throw my Accupoint equipped rifle out of helicopters so it's a better choice than the ACOG for me. Just my 02.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 7:48:49 AM EST
ACOGs are sweet pieces of glass. If you've ever looked through one, you'd know why other folks like them.

If you want a magnified battle optic, there is no better choice IMHO. If you want a red-dot, you probably don't want an ACOG. That being said, an ACOG is a better red-dot than a red-dot is an ACOG.

Seriously, you're comparing apples to oranges. They're designed for different jobs. If you're like most folks around here, you'll get both eventually.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 7:56:51 AM EST
$1k to one person is different from $1k to a different person.

A better quetsion is, what else is available with similar features?

Trijicon Accupoint: BAC, limited BAC reticle choices, no BDC, much larger, more fragile, requires more complicated mounting.

conventional 1-5X scopes: no BAC, much more bulky, more fragile, requires more complicated mounting

Aimpoint M2 / EOThing: no magnification, no BDC, requires batteries

Leupold C/QT: eats batteries, much larger, no real BDC

-z

Link Posted: 9/16/2004 7:57:48 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 8:45:15 AM EST
The rule: "You get what you pay for." applies 99.99% of the time when refering to optics. It has been proven over and over and over and....................................................
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 9:07:36 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/16/2004 9:07:57 AM EST by Zak-Smith]
With some range time, COM hits to 15-20 yards by just point-shooting the rifle are easy. Beyond this distance, an ACOG is really fast. If you can master BAC, you can use it from about 3' on out.

Having run through the house with a TA11 and then a TA31, I believe it's easier to use the non-magnified BAC (ie, not looking "through" the scope) with the TA31.

One thing to consider with any short-range sight (Doctor, JPoint, etc) is that if it's sighted in at a short range (< 25 yards), the trajectory will be very steep compared to the sight plane. For example, if it's 3" above the bore, and it's sighted in for 10 yards, then at 20 yards it will hit 3" high again.

-z
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 10:37:53 AM EST
Had a TA-31.

Sold it.

Bought an Eo.

Now I want another ACOG too.

Buy both!
dg
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 11:07:06 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/16/2004 11:13:55 AM EST by El_Roto]
You don't know what anything is really worth until you own it. (I know this sounds f*cking Zen but hear me out.)

List the features you're looking for, talk to others who have been there before and know what will do what you want, don't compromise, then buy the equipment that satifies those requirements. After your purchase you'll quickly see if you followed your heart or your wallet.

If you followed your wallet, you'll constantly have a nagging voice in your head that you settled for less and you'll soon be wishing you'd gone with your heart. Next thing you know you're looking to either dump the original purchase or stick it on a secondary rifle - but you'll still need to buy your originally desired item.

If you followed your heart, you will forget what you paid immediately!. You will revel in the joy of acquiring a wonderful piece of equipment and exploiting its features to their fullest.


To me, the ACOG was worth the money because I *wanted* a TA-31. I wanted combat glass that was battle proven and was specifically tuned to my rifle - a 20" barrel w/the optic mounted on the carry handle - that would allow me to work from 10 yards to waay out there. It had many more options than the red-dot sights and the reticle's brightness is self-regulated; no buttons is a big plus for an idiot like me.

I have used this setup in carbine classes doing close-up shooting and on a 1000 yard range engaging targets out to 600 yards and it's never dissapointed me. I never think about how much it costs.

Link Posted: 9/16/2004 11:16:31 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 12:23:09 PM EST

Originally Posted By El_Roto:
If you followed your wallet, you'll constantly have a nagging voice in your head that you settled for less and you'll soon be wishing you'd gone with your heart. Next thing you know you're looking to either dump the original purchase or stick it on a secondary rifle - but you'll still need to buy your originally desired item.





That observation, my friend, is right on the money. How many times do I have to experience this before I remember!?!?!?!

Buy once, cry once...
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 12:46:54 PM EST

Originally Posted By dogguy:
Had a TA-31.

Sold it.

Bought an Eo.

Now I want another ACOG too.

Buy both!
dg



There you go.

I second the opinion
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 12:54:24 PM EST

Originally Posted By Jivana108:
I have been reading and checking these scopes out for a while. And I do believe that they are awesome scopes and very rugged, but why the heck are they so dang expensive??? I could get 2 high quality red dot scopes for the price of 1 ACOG. Am I missing something here?



If you can find a BAC ACOG for $900.00 , Buy it , See if you think it's worth $900.00 , If it's not , Sell it for $950.00!
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 1:02:23 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 1:23:46 PM EST
every godd@m penny!!!!!!!!!!! imho.
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 1:29:32 PM EST
I scored my TA31 sometime ago for $600.00 (a princely sum at the time) and boy am I glad I did. Holy cow these things have gone up in price. Now I love mine it is just great. I recently neede cash for a quick gun purchase and was considering selling off one of three pices of glass. A Lupy 6.5-20 M1 long range, a Lupy 3.5 -10 M1 Long range and the TA 31. The Lup 6.5 -20 went way before the other two did.

IPSC_GUY
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 4:21:49 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/16/2004 4:22:40 PM EST by SHIVAN]
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 6:48:55 PM EST
paid almost that for mine a over a year ago.......would buy another if I could find one.....to answer your question YES!!!
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 7:04:21 PM EST
What MattB said. I love my ACOG. Wouldn't trade it and I'm happy I parted with the $. I bought mine 3 years ago when they were much cheaper. I paid $530 plus shipping at SWFA.com for mine. It's a 3X compact. Couldn't have made a better choice for the most versitile scope posible for the M4.
That being said, the current prices on ACOGs are something to be considered. The magnification is nice, but if I did it today, I'd go with an Aimpoint. My 2 cents
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 7:07:35 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/16/2004 8:47:11 PM EST
acogs are very awesome optics.... i feel though that they are not as fast at very close distances (25m and under) which happens to the be the distances statisticly most police engagement happen and civilian fire fights... thats why i choose an aimpoint for my optic... and yeah... i may not be able to hit 400m and further accurately... but i seriously doubt my need to ever do so will ever come about...

aimpoint is very fast from 150m... for the military though... acog's are just what the dr. ordered...

Link Posted: 9/17/2004 4:02:30 AM EST
In my opinion the ACOG is definatley worth the money. Over the last 8 or so years I have owned TA01's, TA01NSN's, TA11's, and TA31's.....I currently have (3) TA31's....

M4Guru posted some pics of a TA31 (earlier this week) that was on his M4 over in the sandbox....I can't remember the paticulars of the incident but his M4 was completely destroyed, but the TA31 suffered some damage did survive the explosion....



Semper Fi
Jeff
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 4:08:13 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/17/2004 4:08:59 AM EST by USMC03]
Here is the thread that I was talking about. Note that part of the upper receiver is still attached to the TA51 mount. If this doesn't make you a ACOG beliver, nothing will.

Pic of ACOG


Semper Fi
Jeff
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 7:31:05 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/17/2004 7:32:04 AM EST by CSGunWorkscom]
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 7:35:09 AM EST
No!
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 7:36:13 AM EST

Originally Posted By Jivana108:
I have been reading and checking these scopes out for a while. And I do believe that they are awesome scopes and very rugged, but why the heck are they so dang expensive??? I could get 2 high quality red dot scopes for the price of 1 ACOG. Am I missing something here?



It is worth every penny. If you need to make a shoot/don't shoot decision (non-military) and you need to see if the bad guy has something in his hand, and identify that object, you will not be able to do that with a 1X optical device in many cases. For that reason, the ACOG can be priceless. It also does not require batteries and it is battle proven.
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 7:38:06 AM EST
Originally Posted By USMC03:
Here is the thread that I was talking about. Note that part of the upper receiver is still attached to the TA51 mount. If this doesn't make you a ACOG beliver, nothing will.

Pic of ACOG


Im not sure what you mean. Why would that make me a believer? If the scope still worked, then thats one thing, but otherwise it just looks like scrap metal to me, the same way any other scope would be after something like that.....
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 9:12:39 AM EST

Originally Posted By Jivana108:
Originally Posted By USMC03:
Here is the thread that I was talking about. Note that part of the upper receiver is still attached to the TA51 mount. If this doesn't make you a ACOG beliver, nothing will.

Pic of ACOG


Im not sure what you mean. Why would that make me a believer? If the scope still worked, then thats one thing, but otherwise it just looks like scrap metal to me, the same way any other scope would be after something like that.....




Yeah the ACOG is f*cked up, but it faired a lot better than the M4 it was attached to.....But what do I know, I just play airsoft on the weekends....sorry for speaking out of turn

Link Posted: 9/17/2004 10:07:44 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 10:39:23 AM EST
Think of being in a combat zone, and the Walmart (and spare batteries) is a long walk away.

The ACOG (fiber opt and tritium) is automatically the right brightness, no matter what the lighting conditions. The brighter the day, the brighter the inverted V shaped "cursor". No tapping buttons or twisting knobs.

In near dark, the reticle (or cursor, I call it) is not too bright, but just right.

As you go into still darker conditions, the tritium takes over, to give a certain minimum lighting.

No matter what the light, the ACOG is just right, no knobs, no batteries, it is always on, always right brighness.

And probably 10x stronger than the M16 it is bolted on to. Built like a tank.

So, that is why it is worth every penny. You have to actually try one to see this. But then you know.
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 10:44:57 AM EST
I played around with a buddy of mines and it was pretty cool. I like how the fiber optic cable draws so much light into the scope. Tritium is cool, but wears out after years. So basically in 6 or 7 years I would have to replace the scope. I really like the ACOG the best out of what I have seen out there and tried, but cant bring myself to pay so dang much for it.... oh well. thanks for all the input fellas...
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 10:47:06 AM EST

Originally Posted By Jivana108:
I played around with a buddy of mines and it was pretty cool. I like how the fiber optic cable draws so much light into the scope. Tritium is cool, but wears out after years. So basically in 6 or 7 years I would have to replace the scope. I really like the ACOG the best out of what I have seen out there and tried, but cant bring myself to pay so dang much for it.... oh well. thanks for all the input fellas...



Trijicon can rebuild it.
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 10:48:48 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 11:18:54 AM EST
It will always work during the daytime utilizing the fiber-optic pipe. You can't see the tritium during dayime anyway.

There is a field-expedient way of making the lit reticle MUCH brighter, independent of sunlight and tritium: 100mph tape a keychain-LED on the top of the ACOG, over the fiber-optic pipe.

-z
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 11:59:01 AM EST

Originally Posted By Zak-Smith:
It will always work during the daytime utilizing the fiber-optic pipe. You can't see the tritium during dayime anyway.

There is a field-expedient way of making the lit reticle MUCH brighter, independent of sunlight and tritium: 100mph tape a keychain-LED on the top of the ACOG, over the fiber-optic pipe.

-z


i would like to know the results of the experiment. it is an interesting concept .



meat
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 12:03:50 PM EST
For the darkhouse stage at SMM3G earlier this year, I did something almost identical:

I took my pocket-carry Surefire E2E and taped it to the top of the ACOG, so about 2" of the fiber-optic pipe was in front of the Surefire's lens. With the Surefire turned on, the target was illuminated and the donut was extremely bright-- as bright as an Aimpoint M2's on the highest setting, easily.

This kind of setup (perhaps minus the target illumination) is nearly ideal for situations where your eyes do not have time to dark-adapt, or if there are intermittent strobes, or the light level is just low enough that the donut is dim and not very noticable.

-z
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 12:37:25 PM EST
I don't own one........yet, but from what I've read and heard I will definitely put one on the 20" BBL AR that I plan on buying or building soon.
*is smacked in the head by girlfirend who is reading over his shoulder shouting: You can only shoot one at at time! I want a house!"*

I bought a TriPower for now for the 16.x" BBL AR that I currently have because I wanted 1x optic for it.
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 2:33:51 PM EST
Earlier this year I bought a used (looked new) TA01 with an ARMS 19 for just over $600. I wear contact lenses & need reading glasses. I have other good quality magnified optics, but this is the ONLY one that works for me with the contacts, no reading glasses and has both the reticle & target in perfect focus. So, I've since bought another TA01, a TA01B and a TA31F. All used, all in perfect condition & the highest price $875 (for the TA1F). I've passed on a couple TA01s with mounts in the $600 range since then only because I have two. I recently just missed a TA01NSN for $699, which I would have bought. The lower end ones are definately worth this & can be had at this price if you wait & watch. ACOGs are GREAT optics.
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 3:44:46 PM EST
jsut got my first one and i believe it is worth every penny and some!!
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 3:57:59 PM EST

Originally Posted By Bucko:

*is smacked in the head by girlfirend who is reading over his shoulder shouting: You can only shoot one at at time! I want a house!"*




Just go ahead and buy her the house and move along. It'll be cheaper that way (no legal fees).
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 4:22:41 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/17/2004 4:27:38 PM EST by RAMBOSKY]
Forget about red dots for a moment. If you're talking about a compact magnified accruate clear glass, it's not really that much and in some instances less than other quality magnified glass, ie...Leupold, Swarvoski, Schmidt and Bender, Zeiss etc...................

PS If I spelled any names correctly is was purely by accident.
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 6:27:02 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 7:28:05 PM EST
No...

I can't see spending $900 on ANY optic...

I like the ACOG BAC reticle concept, and would be interested in a $200-300 version which ditched the tritium & fiber-optics for batteries.

But $900 is a whole 'nother gun... Too rich for an optic...
Link Posted: 9/17/2004 8:38:54 PM EST

Originally Posted By ipschoser1:
Just go ahead and buy her the house and move along. It'll be cheaper that way (no legal fees).



Alas, that may be true.

I'm still going to tell Armalite that you are telling me to buy a house instead of a gun though.
Top Top