Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 8/29/2005 12:34:13 PM EDT
I have a FAL with an integral acog mount slot. Its pretty accurate, and I am building it as a long range target gun. I have been considering the TA11E, but now I am not sure if I really want a TA55A. Both are BAC chevron reticle, but the TA11 is a 3.5x whereas the TA55 is 5.5x.. question is, is the TA55 going to be too much scope and not enough FOV? I am concerned that the 5.5x will be too much for a 100-200 yard shot, and the ta11 wont be enough for a 300-400 yard shot. help me out here.. is the BAC still functional with that much magnification? Anyone else have experience comparing these 2? thanks.

Link Posted: 8/29/2005 2:47:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/29/2005 2:51:41 PM EDT by edwin907]
I'm one of those here that actually like the TA55, it's an excellent optic, at least for a big 7.62 NATO weapon, but BAC for me is slower with it, it's huge and heavy and very tough, but I'd look at a variable/Dr Optic setup (my AR-10 plans).

For your rifle with ACOG slot, I think you'd be hard pressed to go wrong with the TA11.
Link Posted: 8/29/2005 5:24:42 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/30/2005 3:39:58 AM EDT
my vote would go towards the ta11
Link Posted: 8/30/2005 5:05:03 AM EDT

From the two choices you have given, I would recommend the TA11.

If you are truly going to make this rifle a "long range target gun", I would recommend you consider a variable power optic of some kind. If BAC is a must you could always go with the Accupoint. IHMO you will have better results at 400 with something more than 3.5X.
Link Posted: 8/30/2005 5:19:43 AM EDT
I like the TA11 series on my AR10's. I have both a TA11E and a TA11C.

I like them both, but only need one.

I have a TA11E for sale right now.
Link Posted: 8/30/2005 6:25:54 AM EDT
I love my TA55 on my AR10A4.
Top Top