Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 4/8/2006 4:34:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/8/2006 5:20:15 PM EDT by swenis]
Hi guys,

I recently ordered a TA31RCO-M4 ACOGs from a popular supplier, and I was curious about something. Is it normal for ACOGs to have a fair number of surface scratches on the body of the product if they are new in box? It's nothing terribly major, but I want to verify that I'm getting what I paid for, etcetera. It would be simple enough to send it back and get a replacement in 2-3 weeks considering my upper hasn't arrived yet. Considering the price of these awesome products, I just want to make sure I get every penny's worth.

I know it seems vain, but I would rather put the scratches there myself. This is fine if it is to be expected; I'm just trying to verify that I received mine in the proper condition, so to speak. Please post your ACOG pics, too! Good glass quality, for sure.
Link Posted: 4/8/2006 6:54:35 PM EDT
if they are white marks they wipe right off but the ones i have had slight handling marks but nothing major.


you have pics of your "scratches"?
Link Posted: 4/8/2006 7:08:03 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/8/2006 7:12:36 PM EDT by swenis]

Originally Posted By eklikwhoa:
if they are white marks they wipe right off but the ones i have had slight handling marks but nothing major.


you have pics of your "scratches"?



Hmm, I don't remember them being white. I'm heading back to the house tomorrow after work so I will get pictures of them then. Do you have a picture of your ACOG so that I could compare until then, by chance?
Link Posted: 4/8/2006 7:34:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/11/2006 6:55:03 AM EDT by optionstrader]
Yes, there may be some minor surface scratches on a NIB acog. Acogs are generally pretty rough overall on the finish. They are built like tanks, not caddys. You will also notice machining marks.

These little finish imperfections are to be expected.
Link Posted: 4/8/2006 8:17:00 PM EDT
The TA31RCO-M4 I received looked like what you are describing. The box looked like a troop of midgets jumped on it until the scope pouch fit in. The scope worked perfectly so I didn't worry about it.

Link Posted: 4/8/2006 8:30:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ian187:
The TA31RCO-M4 I received looked like what you are describing. The box looked like a troop of midgets jumped on it until the scope pouch fit in. The scope worked perfectly so I didn't worry about it.




Haha, my box looks the same way. I'm beginning to think this is normal for ACOGs to have handling scratches on the surface. The reticle is perfect, which I'm pleased with.
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 2:40:32 AM EDT
I got one recently too, but being cross dominant my eyeballs just can't do BAC. I can see the reticle just fine imposed 1x and 4x, but POI between the two is not even close...even inside 20yds. I love it though and might try the Doctor thing. I got mine used and the light tube looked cracked to hell. The finish was about what I'd expect to see on a lower receiver. Surface handling marks etc.
Link Posted: 4/9/2006 5:43:07 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/9/2006 8:26:10 AM EDT by swenis]
Judging from the ACOGs I see for sale in EE, mine has a lot more wear than them, if that gives any of you all an idea.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 5:19:13 AM EDT
What are these going for?
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 8:44:40 AM EDT
Well it sounds like you're not happy. Thats the only excuse you need to send it back. I'm sure any reputable dealer will do whatever it takes to satisfy you. Some folks might not mind the scratches, but you don't need anyone on here to tell you if you're satisfied or not. Send it back now before your upper gets done and sits lonely!
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 8:52:54 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/10/2006 10:50:59 AM EDT by mr_wilson]
YMMV, but my ACOG came in a plastic case and had no-marks, scratches or dings whatsoever.

It was "new" and it looked "new" outta the box.

Mike
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 10:20:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By FlyNavy:
I got one recently too, but being cross dominant my eyeballs just can't do BAC. I can see the reticle just fine imposed 1x and 4x, but POI between the two is not even close...even inside 20yds. I love it though and might try the Doctor thing. I got mine used and the light tube looked cracked to hell. The finish was about what I'd expect to see on a lower receiver. Surface handling marks etc.



The POI is never the same using BAC. It is quite impossible for it to be the same. This is the weakness of BAC vs. a seperate 1X dot like the Dr Optic or a true 1-4X variable. Your eye dominance issue has nothing to do with this and the closer the target the wose it gets so "even inside 20 yards" is not a suprise. Cracks in the fiber opric are also common and is OK uless your tube starts leaking. Your experience with the ACOG is just like anyone elses.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 10:36:34 AM EDT
its part of their quality procedure...they drop them..kick them, and roll them on the ground. if they still work they ship them
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 11:36:26 AM EDT

Originally Posted By FlyNavy:
Well it sounds like you're not happy. Thats the only excuse you need to send it back. I'm sure any reputable dealer will do whatever it takes to satisfy you. Some folks might not mind the scratches, but you don't need anyone on here to tell you if you're satisfied or not. Send it back now before your upper gets done and sits lonely!



Thanks, I believe I'll do that.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 12:43:52 PM EDT
Normal. I have seen many many issued ACOGs and they were all like that. It is a tool for the user, not a showpiece. I don't think you will ever be truly happy with a military wepon bc they are not designed to be pretty. Perhaps you should buy a Weatherby and put it in your safe.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 1:11:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/10/2006 1:12:26 PM EDT by swenis]

Originally Posted By FedDC:
Normal. I have seen many many issued ACOGs and they were all like that. It is a tool for the user, not a showpiece. I don't think you will ever be truly happy with a military wepon bc they are not designed to be pretty. Perhaps you should buy a Weatherby and put it in your safe.



I think you're wrong. I just feel I should get the most bang for my buck considering the thing cost a grand. Why the belligerence?
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 4:39:32 PM EDT
No beligerance. You have an ACOG with scratches. That is a non issue. It is not about bang for the buck, it is about a tool. Does it work or not?

When you go to the hardware store to buy a hammer, do you take it back because there is a scratch on the head? No, you go home and drive nails with it. The ACOG is the same way. It is not designed to be pretty, it is designed to work.

There are waaaaaaay too many people that obsess with the finish on their battle rifles and optics. They are tools just like the hammer. Not to be abused, but function is their form. That is their purpose and they do it well.

Like I said, I have seen several hundread issued ACOGs and all had handling marks. It is normal.

Link Posted: 4/10/2006 4:50:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/10/2006 5:01:48 PM EDT by swenis]

Originally Posted By FedDC:
No beligerance. You have an ACOG with scratches. That is a non issue. It is not about bang for the buck, it is about a tool. Does it work or not?

When you go to the hardware store to buy a hammer, do you take it back because there is a scratch on the head? No, you go home and drive nails with it. The ACOG is the same way. It is not designed to be pretty, it is designed to work.

There are waaaaaaay too many people that obsess with the finish on their battle rifles and optics. They are tools just like the hammer. Not to be abused, but function is their form. That is their purpose and they do it well.

Like I said, I have seen several hundread issued ACOGs and all had handling marks. It is normal.




Ok, I see what you're saying now - I'm sorry. I'm not obsessed with the finish on my rifles or anything. If they get worn from use, that's fine. It was surprising at first because it took me forever to save for one of these awesome gadgets with it finally arriving in worse shape than any of the others I've seen. I'll give it a better inspection once I get back from campus. I inspected it fairly quickly, and for all I know the marks may just wipe offwith a rag. Thanks for the input, and for being cordial. :) I'll likely end up keeping this one; I just wanted to make sure that it was normal.

I was pleasantly surprised to find out that the TA31RCO comes with a killfash already installed. Is the main purpose of this just to prevent giving away one's position due to lens glare? Any other uses?

Now all I have to do is wait for my BCM midlength upper to come in and I'll be set!
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 1:53:09 AM EDT
Tool vs. show piece has been beaten to death around here. Everyone's needs are different. Its your equipment and your money. Don't be pressured into letting someone else tell you what you're happy with.

As far as the Killflash you are correct, it reduces/eliminates forward visible lens glare. Keep in mind this is a Milspec piece so they gave the USMC what they wanted. How useful it's features are to a civilian is debatable. But who cares? This is the USA and we can buy whatever we want for any legal reason! We can keep these tools shiny and unused on a bed of down pillows if we want. I guarantee you there is a soldier beating the crap out of his more silver than black M4 right now so we can have the freedom to keep ours in a padded safe.

Link Posted: 4/11/2006 3:17:31 AM EDT

Originally Posted By FlyNavy:


I guarantee you there is a soldier beating the crap out of his more silver than black M4 right now so we can have the freedom to keep ours in a padded safe.




Very well said!
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 5:33:09 AM EDT

Originally Posted By FlyNavy:
Tool vs. show piece has been beaten to death around here. Everyone's needs are different. Its your equipment and your money. Don't be pressured into letting someone else tell you what you're happy with.

As far as the Killflash you are correct, it reduces/eliminates forward visible lens glare. Keep in mind this is a Milspec piece so they gave the USMC what they wanted. How useful it's features are to a civilian is debatable. But who cares? This is the USA and we can buy whatever we want for any legal reason! We can keep these tools shiny and unused on a bed of down pillows if we want. I guarantee you there is a soldier beating the crap out of his more silver than black M4 right now so we can have the freedom to keep ours in a padded safe.




I agree with you that it is your money and you should be happy. Here is the problem though. Companies like Trijicon, Colt, etc. don't make products with the Civy market in mind. They make products for the Military. The Military doesn't care about the outside appearance. They DO care that it functions 100%. This is where we see problems IMHO. The Civy market want's gear to be perfect on both the inside and out. Most manufacturers that supply the DoD are only interested in the inside.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:30:24 AM EDT
It's not aesthetically pleasing but it's entirely normal. I have three ACOG's and only my compact looked "new".
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 12:20:35 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/11/2006 12:21:37 PM EDT by JosephR]

Originally Posted By FedDC:
No beligerance. You have an ACOG with scratches. That is a non issue. It is not about bang for the buck, it is about a tool. Does it work or not?

When you go to the hardware store to buy a hammer, do you take it back because there is a scratch on the head? No, you go home and drive nails with it. The ACOG is the same way. It is not designed to be pretty, it is designed to work.

There are waaaaaaay too many people that obsess with the finish on their battle rifles and optics. They are tools just like the hammer. Not to be abused, but function is their form. That is their purpose and they do it well.

Like I said, I have seen several hundread issued ACOGs and all had handling marks. It is normal.




For him it's NOT a battle rifle, get it? If he's like me, he might want to try it out, shoot with it and then might decide he didn't need. He might then want to sell it on this beautiful thing we have called the EE where it would be nice to NOT have those scratches. If it's going to be scratched, it should be becuase he scratched it.

These things come in Retail boxes which shows they are for the retail market. Are you saying they should come with fine dust and sand all over them too just because that is how the troops use them daily?

Point being is this guy wants to know what to do about the scratches. Your opinions about tool versus showpiece obviously fall on the far end of the scale and don't really need to be expressed more than once in this thread.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 12:47:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JosephR:
For him it's NOT a battle rifle, get it? If he's like me, he might want to try it out, shoot with it and then might decide he didn't need. He might then want to sell it on this beautiful thing we have called the EE where it would be nice to NOT have those scratches. If it's going to be scratched, it should be becuase he scratched it.



Thanks, JosephR. This was what I was trying to get at. I already talked to Trijicon, and they said they would take care of me if I decide to send it back. I'll give it a final look-over this Friday and decide what to do from there.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 1:33:02 PM EDT
I look at it both ways sometimes.

If you say you got a scratched "anything" and don't mind someone will tell you to grow balls and return it.

If you say you don't like the scratches, someone will tell you to grow balls and shut up.

I'm usually the mean one who has to make a comment to be contrary and chose not to this time.


Link Posted: 4/11/2006 3:13:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DevL:

Originally Posted By FlyNavy:
I got one recently too, but being cross dominant my eyeballs just can't do BAC. I can see the reticle just fine imposed 1x and 4x, but POI between the two is not even close...even inside 20yds. I love it though and might try the Doctor thing. I got mine used and the light tube looked cracked to hell. The finish was about what I'd expect to see on a lower receiver. Surface handling marks etc.



The POI is never the same using BAC. It is quite impossible for it to be the same. This is the weakness of BAC vs. a seperate 1X dot like the Dr Optic or a true 1-4X variable. Your eye dominance issue has nothing to do with this and the closer the target the worse it gets so "even inside 20 yards" is not a suprise. Cracks in the fiber optic are also common and is OK unless your tube starts leaking. Your experience with the ACOG is just like anyone elses.



Mine too came this way - with the spider-webbing.



Being obsessive-compulsive on such things, I called Trijicon CS on it.

He asked if it was leaking? I said- No, I don't think so, but I paid around $975 for it.

He said......You want me to give you an RA for it, don't you?

I said, Yes.

I got it back, and it looks like brand new tube, and overall - perfect

But with a new pristine tube, the reticle isn't as bright.

Serves me right!
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 4:54:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/11/2006 4:57:26 PM EDT by zak2427]

Originally Posted By swenis:

Originally Posted By FedDC:
Normal. I have seen many many issued ACOGs and they were all like that. It is a tool for the user, not a showpiece. I don't think you will ever be truly happy with a military wepon bc they are not designed to be pretty. Perhaps you should buy a Weatherby and put it in your safe.



I think you're wrong. I just feel I should get the most bang for my buck considering the thing cost a grand. Why the belligerence?



It is a COMBAT optic designed and built to be used in COMBAT. You got your money's worth when you bought it. PERIOD. Has anyone else noticed a huge trend on this board to have the general approval of the board before taking action? Dude, if you're not happy with it, then return the thing!
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 5:16:41 PM EDT
ok smartass, what do you own as far as AR15-related gear and equipment and how much of it do you use in COMBAT?

Are you part of an online car forum? Do you want to be told that you have to race your car before you can ask how to improve the horsepower?

You've given your opinion so I'll give mine- you are an idiot.

Nevermind. I take it back.

The ACOGs are not only meant for combat. Get a life.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 5:33:31 PM EDT
LOL

Seriously, do some of you just buy shit to not take it out of the shrink wrap? The term 'safe queen' tends to get used a bit, but is oh so fitting in some situations.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 7:04:58 PM EDT
You're another one.

You probably had a safe queen until you accidentally dropped it. Now you call it "battle damage" huh?
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 7:58:28 PM EDT
No, not really. I purchased a new AR a few years ago, it is far from being a safe queen now. Its called wear and tear.

FWIW, my issued M4 was brand new also, incidentally, my issued ACOG was new also, both are pretty beat up now with under a year of use.
Link Posted: 4/11/2006 8:11:20 PM EDT
then to answer your question, yeah, i think some do. but, not everyone so i don't think it's fair to get shitty with someone who has a question.

now, if trijicon was selling them as used surplus at a discount, noone would be complaining about scratches.
Link Posted: 4/12/2006 5:51:45 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/12/2006 5:54:37 AM EDT by FlyNavy]

Originally Posted By redfisher:

Originally Posted By DevL:

Originally Posted By FlyNavy:
I got one recently too, but being cross dominant my eyeballs just can't do BAC. I can see the reticle just fine imposed 1x and 4x, but POI between the two is not even close...even inside 20yds. I love it though and might try the Doctor thing. I got mine used and the light tube looked cracked to hell. The finish was about what I'd expect to see on a lower receiver. Surface handling marks etc.



The POI is never the same using BAC. It is quite impossible for it to be the same. This is the weakness of BAC vs. a seperate 1X dot like the Dr Optic or a true 1-4X variable. Your eye dominance issue has nothing to do with this and the closer the target the worse it gets so "even inside 20 yards" is not a suprise. Cracks in the fiber optic are also common and is OK unless your tube starts leaking. Your experience with the ACOG is just like anyone elses.



Mine too came this way - with the spider-webbing.

img.photobucket.com/albums/v400/redfisher19/ACOG377x503.jpg

Being obsessive-compulsive on such things, I called Trijicon CS on it.

He asked if it was leaking? I said- No, I don't think so, but I paid around $975 for it.

He said......You want me to give you an RA for it, don't you?

I said, Yes.

I got it back, and it looks like brand new tube, and overall - perfect

But with a new pristine tube, the reticle isn't as bright.

Serves me right!



Funny! Luckily I banged mine up against a concrete Jersey barrier the day after I sighted it in and am now liberated from any concern for its prettiness. Don't cry guys...now it "matches" the rifle...and the red chevron is still immaculate!
Link Posted: 4/12/2006 7:41:00 AM EDT
That's a good way to get yourself out of that "new and pretty" rut...

I was worried about a chip starting to form on the underside of my duracoated upper until I installed a LaRue Eotech mount. After taking it off and putting it on twice, I'm not going to worry about chips. I'd have too much to worry about!!!

So basically you should have pointed out your relevant story instead of knocking him right away.

Telling him "hey, you are better off getting it with a scratch so you won't get into the whole 'oh my God, it's got a scratch' frenzy when you first scratch it."

Which is true- if you are not going to sell it to someone on these boards who wants a perfect ACOG then you are better off with a few flaws in some ways. Any scratches you have now will save you from wanting to kill yourself the first time YOU scratch it up!
Top Top