User Panel
Posted: 7/6/2008 6:00:50 PM EDT
Vote!
Don't answer "Well, it depends on the situation and blah, blah, blah...". It's as simple as you're going to Asscrackistan, what optic do you want on your rifle? ETA: If you chose something other than an Aimpoint or an EOtech, would the addition of a 3X magnifier make you choose the Aimpoint or EOtech? |
|
Trijicon ACOG. PERIOD.
Only reason I don't own one is because I'm still $aving. |
|
S&B
end of thread wait a minute , when I answered there were no choices |
|
my post got in before the edit too |
|
|
Iron sights is not an 'optic' , that said I'll go for a Trijicon TriPower GTG out to 400yds.....
|
|
I voted for the aimpoint as I have not used an ACOG so I can't comment but I have heard great things about the ACOG
|
|
When given a choice, I'll take an AimPoint everytime. I am still using a CompM2 that I was issued in 1999. It has outlasted 3 Mk18's, and survived 4 deployments. It is good to ranges far beyond the effective range of the weapon, so magnification is not all that necessary. Maybe if I had an M16 I would consider magnification a worthwhile feature....but I don't, and don't see much need for it.
But honestly, as long as it is not an EOTech or Chinese, I am open to most anything, so long as it is sighted in, will hold a zero, and won't break or fall of the gun. |
|
ACOG. While you can effectively engage targets out to 300 meters with a red dot, you can't really see what the bad guy has in his hands. Powered optics allow you verify your target and make better shot placement at distances.
I s BG carrying an AK or a shovel or piece of wood. Hard to tell sometimes due to the distances or lighting. |
|
Though Iron Sights are not "optics" I voted for them, always dependable!
|
|
I have 2 31Fs and 1 31. I don't feel that the RCO mil lines provide any useful feature other then cluttering the FOV. The new ECOS and 31H models are interesting, but I'm not going to replace what Ive got any time soon. |
|
|
The ACOG is a pricey little bugger I see.. |
||
|
You guys are going to get me in trouble with my wife, I just bought a Aimpoint 2 months ago and I am tempted to get an ACOG also since I have never used one before.. |
|
|
ACOG
Disclaimer: I have no combat experience of any kind whatsoever. |
|
EOTech 556?
Don't know how many of those have seen combat (yet). I know that the 552 built a damn good reputation though... So has the Aimpoint M2/M3 and I assume the M4 is doing quite well... I wouldn't take a TA31F if it was given to me...other than to make an A4 clone to hang on the wall. Tough optic, but it handicaps you inside a certain distance. Horrible eye relief too. TA33, now, that's a better optic than the TA31... If I had it to do all over again, and it was 2005 and I was getting ready to deploy...I would buy less gear...a lot less....but one of the few things I would not change is the optic I bought. EOTech 552. |
|
Buy them used off the EE for 650 a piece.
The ACOG isn't for everyone. The eye relief does suck on the 01/31 series, and its not good for CQB. However I will gladly take those handicaps for the toughest small 4x scope around. I've messed with the 3.4 power elcans, and the adjustments suck, their not as durable, and much larger and heavier. However they have a larger FOV and nice glass.
Yea, I would had bought much less kit too. I'm glad to hear the eotech works well for you. I lost my faith in mine, had a battery compartment fail. |
|||
|
I am about to find out how well a Meopta holds up in Iraq.
I have an issued Aimpoint and ACOG, so if it shits the bed, I'll have something for backup. Of the two, I like the Aimpoint better. I had irons the first time around (this was before the Corps adopted the RCO) |
|
I had an Elcan (MGO?) on my SAW...It did have nice glass but it was just too bulky...And for civilian purposes...they are way too $$$. |
|
|
I voted Eotech 556, but I think the 552 is the better choice. None of the new Eotech models come close to the reliability of the 512/552 series. If the poll was intentionally limited to that model, then I would have gone for the Aimpoint. Funny thing is, I've never used a magnified optic on an AR, so I'd stay away from those options simply out of my own in-experience.
|
|
IMHO, puting elcans and acogs on saws is a poor idea. I think with area weapons like the SAW and 240, Eotech are the best way to go. Large field of view, no eye relief problems. Allows for quickly putting rounds on target. You can easly aim a little low and walk rounds into the target. They guys in my company with SAWs were issued ?M145? Elcans, and while there an ok optic, I don't think magnified optics are best for machine guns. |
||
|
It was one of those "we are the CO's jump team so we will get every piece of gear we want" things. Everyone had M4s, everyone had M9s, everyone had PVS14s, we were the first to get side SAPIs, switch from MARPAT to flight suits, a pallet of HK mags, thermals, etc etc. We had 2 of the first MGLs too...and managed to break one... I saw an EOTech on a SAW and thought it was weird until I fired one. I think you are right about that. |
|||
|
ACOG all the way
Especially if going to the desert/open Mt. terrain. -Mark. |
|
That's what I would pick for Afghanistan, where it seems shots would be longer. But ACOGs seem to be a disadvantage in "across the room" distances that you'd have while clearing buildings. So, I'd take an Aimpoint with magnifier. I really like the Mk4, but how would a conventional scope hold up to getting banged around inside a vehicle? I am not .mil so this is entirely conjecture. |
|
|
Don't understand the question, the Aimpoint M4 is being used (ok M2) overseas and it is tough |
|
|
"Mk4" is Leupold's Mark 4 scope line; totally different than Aimpoint's M4 line of optics. |
||
|
yes sorry I thought he said M4...yes the MK4 is nice also....
|
|
I have owned all of these except the Leupold.
The Eotech 556 or 557 combined with a 3x is perfect in my mind. The only advantage an Aimpoint would have is its battery life and the ACOG is great but you cant switch between magnifications. With the Eotech 3x you can go from a medium distance optic to a close quarters with a flick of your finger. I myself have bought a brand new Eotech 512 to take on deployment with me even though we will be issued Aimpoints. I plan to buy a 3x before I leave. I cant believe that people are voting for iron sights over an Eotech. Either they havnt used an Eotech or theres some kids on here playing jokes. You guys do realize that when an Eotech goes dead that you can simply look through it and use the iron sights. Or if your like me just flick your GG&G Accucam and toss it in your pocket. |
|
ACOG.
The aimpoint is great for puching holes in paper on a 50m square range and thats about it IMHO. Everybody says that clearing rooms is easier too in the low light but I never felt at a disadvantage with the ACOG. We were issued both and could run whichever we wanted. Alot of guys started with the aimpoint cause they shot well with it on the ranges. When we got to Iraq and had to PID some guys at a distance they saw the limitations of the aimpoint and went back to the ACOG. I do run an aimpoint on my civilian M4 BTW, for that application its what works. As far as COMBAT optic, the ACOG is the one. On a side note we did run EOTECHS on the 240's. worked extremely well in that application. |
|
|
I love my 552. I also love the ACOG. For my current mission profile the 552 is tits. You can't have 1 single optic be the best for every situation. An ACOG with a Doc in tandem is probably the best you can do for the ultimate package.
|
|
I guess a lot of folks experiences in Astan and Iraq were at long range...
I would go to Irons before I went back to another ACOG. It isn't that they are bad...its that they lack flexibility. They flat out SUCK at CQB distances and from moving vehicles. Plus, I can get the same hits with my Aimpoint out to 300 yards... Target ID has merit but that should not be done with a rifle optic unless you have no other choice IMO. Aimpoints are my choice. |
|
ACOG
Didn't take many long range shots, longest that I took was 300m. But it's nice in that you can id targets at a longer range and determine if that thing they are carrying is just a tool or a weapon. Never really had a problem using it in CQB either. But I also like Eotechs, thats why my backup M4 has one. |
|
i had an eotech 552 in astan and wished id had an acog, bought one and realized i didnt like it for CQB (sold it), started looking at a MK4 cqt didnt like the small field of view and the fact you have to have a good cheekweld to see anything kinda threw me off it, im sloppy sometimes, then i found out im going to be in the middle of baghdad (urban) so i got an eotech 556 with the money i got from selling my 552 and acog. thinking about getting the 3x magnifier. thoughts?
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.