AR Sponsor
Posted: 3/6/2016 8:08:56 PM EDT
|
I just got a new Compact ACOG TA44. I've never owned a Compact before (never looked through one either as my LGSs have never stocked them, ever), so I have nothing to compare this one I just got to.
I'm not fully convinced this wasn't a return. I ordered it new from Optics Planet and as soon as I opened the plastic box and picked this up, I just didn't get that "new" feeling about it. No smudges on the glass or anything, but the outside anodizing just looked kind of "handled". Anyway, I heard that eye relief is really good on these things. With mine, as you can see in the first picture, it's only good with the ACOG ALL the way back on the upper and nose to charge handle. Only then do I get a full, centered reticle with an unobstructed picture. If I move my eye back even an inch the scope tunnel totally comes into the sight picture from the top left as pictured on the bottom two pictures below. It's really bad. If I keep the reticle perfectly centered and move the camera back just a little bit, the top left goes to hell. This is not typical $1,000 ACOG performance IMO, but without any previous Compact TA44 experience, I don't know if it's just a design thing. I think I'm going to ship this back for an exchange. What do you all think? Any TA44 owners see similar performance? EDIT: I think I just found my answer. :) After some Google-fu it looks like this is the nature of this ACOG. NTCH is required. I've had one other ACOG in the past and don't remember the eye relief being this short. It was many years ago. I will deal with it because I love this little sight. EDIT 2: see my posts below. Figured out the issue. Duh. 
|
|
Quoted:
^^ thanks, and yeah. Something I will get used to. Wasn't sure if this was a defective unit - apparently not.  I got a 1.5x ACOG during the amazon liquidation last year for 200 bucks. It was advertised as a crossbow sight. It was all fucky when I tried to put it on an AR, but I looked up the spec and mounted it on a .22 I had. Worked great. Sold it, but I regret it. |
|
I've owned multiple 1.5x ACOGs to include 44/26/45 models, and they all have greater eye relief than the 31s that are noted for their short eye relief. The 44/26 could be mounted roughly 2/3 down the receiver without sacrificing FOV or anything. The 45 could legitimately be mounted on the rearmost slot of the quadrail. Yours shouldn't require being placed fully rearward w/ NTCH to get full FOV.
The correct procedure is to shoulder rifle naturally w/ eye closed, then open eye to determine if you have the correct ACOG placement. Generally you want it as far forward as allowable without sacrificing FOV/edge clarity/etc. Height can also be adjusted by using varying height mounts (TA-60, LT, tall/short Bobro, etc). Not to insult intelligence, but is the camera centered to the optic? It appears the camera is lower and to the right of the centerline of the optic, which would coincide with the resulting image loss. If everything is perfectly centered (or even close), I have never seen anything like what you describe or show from any of my examples. As an aside, mini-ACOGs are pretty awesome, and highly underrated. Outdoors I prefer them to red dots, and I can definitely appreciate red dots. |
|
^^ yes, it is fully centered. That's the exact problem I'm trying to describe.
Typically with an eye relief issue, it's a pretty even/centered narrowing of the sight picture (the tunnel gets smaller, if you will, but evenly centered as it gets smaller) in the case of this one, it always comes from the top left no matter where my eye is at in relation to center. I've even flipped it upside down in my hands, and then the blackness encroaches from the bottom right. I've gotta have my cheek weld freakin PERFECT or else I get that top left nonsense. In fact, even NTCH, if I move the dot to the left or up in the slightest from center, the sight picture goes to crap. Whereas I have some leeway if I move the dot to the right or bottom from center. It's extremely sensitive on the left and top area of the sight picture. That's why I'm wondering if some lenses are not perfectly aligned internally. I mean as soon as I looked through it the first time I noticed the top left blackness until I brought my eye right up to it. That, and the dang thing looks like it might have been an exchange or something.. |
|
Ok, I think I figured it out, lol.
I popped the turret caps off and sure enough both of them were cranked like 90% to one corner. Once I cranked them both to what looked like the center of their travel, sure enough, the reticle and eye relief centered perfectly. Eye relief actually looks very livable now! Let's hope it doesn't take 10 boxes of ammo to get my rifle on paper tomorrow! Do all ACOGs come all jacked up like that? Most optics in general that I've bought in the last 10 years were pretty darn close out of the box - certainly all were on paper at 50yards. 20 years ago was a different story. I think the MRO I just bought took literally 6 clicks total to get perfect from out of the box. Makes me wonder if this was an exchange? Does Trijicon not attempt to at least center the adjustments somewhat close for you when new? Now that I look at my top picture, I can tell how far off POA/POI really was! |
| All my examples have been at least on paper at initial zero. Hopefully it wasn't cranked far enough over to damage anything. Was there difficulty cranking either direction before roughly centering it? I was going to suggest that the prism wasn't set correctly, but I suppose the adjustments being wildly off would lead to the same symptoms. Glad it got diagnosed and/or corrected. |
|
It sounds like someone had a shitty rifle that needed a tremendous amount of adjustments on the optic, which lead to the problem you originally described, which caused them to think the optic was bad, and they returned it. I am not thinking that based on the finish, but on the fact that it was already adjusted so far off. Trijicon does center them, it states so in the users manual. It says something about them being zeroed at the factory.
If it was purchased as an open box or demo model, that could be why it was already adjusted. I could see someone messing with the adjustments at the warehouse, or something like that, but I would think they would put a couple of clicks here or a couple of clicks there, not all the way out to the extremes. |
|
Quoted:
Thanks guys, sending this one back to Optics Planet for an exchange. Don't like $1K brand new scopes not being brand new. They'll prolly just throw this one back in a box for someone else too. Ugh. That's Optics Planet for ya! I really like my TA45, i have it about 4-4.5" instead of the 3.5" recommended eye relief and it works great. 
|
AR Sponsor