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.

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.

my vote would go towards the ta11

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.

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.

I love my TA55 on my AR10A4.