http://www.trijicon.com/na_en/community/whats_new_item.php?whats_newID=news_122

Mount fail.  I wonder if the illum is day visible and what the weight is. I can't believe they used that mount design, some Bobro levers would've been better.

Overall, it looks like it does have a lot of potential though.

I like it.

Hmmm. I'm liking it, but it looks like it's heavy and lacks the normal Trijicon illumination methods.

Odd they chose the old "Wide" reticle as the primary option too. Actual ACOG reticles would have been more appealing IMO.

No reticles for M855 or M80.

"... The segmented circle reticle with a centered crosshair can be matched with 175-grain 7.62, 55- and 77-grain 5.56, or 115-grain supersonic 300 BLK loads. The popular horseshoe/dot reticle is available in each of the 5.56 and 7.62 offerings."

It looks nice overall.

But to be honest, I was hoping for more when I wished for a VCog several months ago.  

The main thing missing is a Fiber Optic Illumination system.  I really expected either a illumination system like the traditional Acog Fiber Optic/Tritium or what is on the SRS (Fiber Optic/Battery).

And having a non-changeable mounting system that is a Quick Release version is also a minor letdown.

Probably no fiber to keep costs down.

Product info page
http://www.trijicon.com/na_en/products/product1.php?id=VCOG

Bobro mount is available

link to PDF of the VCOG section in 2013 catalog
http://www.trijicon.com/resources/downloads/2013_TrijiconBrochure_VCOG.pdf

link to a press release from Trijicon
http://tacticalgunreview.com/blog/2013/05/press-release-trijicon-vcog-variable-powered-1-6-acog/#more-17319

23.2 ounces with the mount removed and no battery. Fucking ouch.

At a cursory glance, it appears that it uses a relatively standard TA51 ACOG mount with an integrated mounting base in the sight housing. If so, it would mean that any existing QD ACOG mounts would work with it.  Even if it is not the TA51 mount for the 4x32 ACOG, it doesn't look too different, and it should be easy for QD mount companies to make one for it.

Invariably if it had been released with Bobro levers, some would complain that they weren't LaRue or ADM mounts and complain that they shouldn't have to pay for a mount they won't even use. The relatively low cost Trijicon thumbscrew mount allows them to keep the overall price down and allow consumers to choose their own QD mounts, but still include a useable mount for those that do not want or need a QD mount.  

~Augee

Man, I hope this comes in at a more affordable price than the TARS. Any idea on MSRP?

MSRP of VCOG is $2,270.00
I'm not interested at that price.  We'll see what street price will be.

If you are willing to spend that kind of money, I'd say look at the US Optics SR-8C.
The SR-8C has 1-8x magnification, FFP Mil ranging reticle, and SFP red dot.

-Absolutely on all counts

At that price I'm looking for a Elcan Spectre.

I agree and with a MSRP of close to $2300!

It ain't gonna happen for me!

BigDozer66

I like the concept (variable zoom ACOG, built-in mount, FFP), but it is HEAVY!

HUGE SWING AND A MISS.

Over 2k for a Trijicon that does not have tritium/ fiber optic illumination. Covered moa turrets. The reticle choices suck. They should have done a mil/mil setup.

PASS.

I would be interested around $1,500. I wonder if they developed this optic in conjunction with the TARS for a military contract rather than aimed at the civilian market.

It will use any mount for the acog

Yes it's daytime visable
And it's not that bad on weight and balanced out my gun well

Street price should be about 1800-1900

Played with one and thought it was very disappointing, for the same reasons as stated above (price, lack of fiber optic, reticle choice).

Trijicon VCOG vs ELCAN Specter DR 1.5-6x

Price: $2300 vs $2500 w/ QD, the Bobro mount version the VCOG will probably add another $100
Weight: the same
Length: 10" vs 7.2"
FOV: ELCAN's prism design will have significant bigger FOV
Battery: AA vs DL 1/3 n
Daylight illumination: unknown vs daylight visible
Battery life: 700 hr vs 600 hr at daylight visible or 2000-3000 hr at low

the VCOG has 1x lower magnification, AA battery and slightly cheaper.

like'ing the AA battery instead of the coin types.. buuuut....

unless it was applied within the acog's base housing's(for the win),  it's just another scope as any other's in my eyes.. and a waste..

as others have stated.. even the lack of fiber included into this also diminishes any probable gains of the optic..

out of

Glad i went w the mk6.  

The weight and that mount.  

Yea... that isn't looking too promising to me.  I don't see too many intelligent people choosing that over an ACOG or Accupoint

Same here.

Trijicon shit the bed on this one.

Yeah,

I'm not seeing how this Vcog is in any way better than the Leupold Mark6 1-6x.  

Although I applaud Trijicon for bringing new products to market,  I think they need to listen to what the market is asking for in a 1-6 vari.




































 
 

I'll go this way for a 1-6 and stick with my accupoint and acogs for the 4x range (tritium and fiberoptic are what sells me)

the vcog is and I own quite a few trijicon products

$2200?  no thanks.

and this is coming from a guy who LOVES his ACOG

I love trijicon, but have to agree.

The carry handle mount and AA battery are truely odd choices, esp since they already have tube scopes in the accupoint line with fiber illum.

However it looks like the entire lone of acog reticles will be available and thats a huge plus.  If they make the right sacrifices on the optics (optimizing for clarity and eyebox at 4 or 6x and sacrificing some 1x), then they could still be a good choice.  A 6x acog you can dial back to 1x would be pretty sweet.

Moa + calibrated reticle is a viable setup... SFP is fine for a 1-6x, and moa turrets are fine for an SFP scope.

The high MSRP price tag should not be a suprise from the people who brought you the $1000 fixed 4x scope and more recently the $1k red dot.

I want to see it in person

My initial thoughts.....

1)  Heavy, yea. The TARS they put out last year was significantly heavier than all competing scopes. On that count this one is not quite as bad as the TARS. It is lighter a few of the competing optics but on the whole it is definitely heavier than I would like. One of the big selling points the ACOG has is it's light weight. This is especially true given its fairly large objective.

2) Reticle - There was a time that I thought the ACOG's shoulder width lines were the most brilliant idea ever. However, after doing the testing in my scale vs stadia rangefinding article I came to the conclusion that range cannot be reliably determined with this method beyond about 400 yards. Given that range is not really even important with a 5.56mm until 300 yards that is not much of an achievement. I still consider the drop lines quite useful but the range-finding method now seems more wishful thinking than useful tool. As for the close quarters aspects of this reticle, less has proven to be more in my testing. I do not consider the crosshairs on the edges to be a good idea. I also consider the broken circle or horseshoe features to be a crutch for outdated illumination systems that do not belong in a scope of this price range.

3) Speaking of illumination, I like the use of a AA battery. I loved this in the CQ/T and I am happy to see somebody else do it as well. I am sad to see no fiber though. This is especially true since this is Trijicon's thing. One of their main selling points was the bright, always on, daytime fiber illumination. Really the power source of the VCOG illumination is not the big problem though. The diagrams in the spec sheet seem to indicate that these are neither illuminated in flash dot fashion nor full scale illumination. This means that you don't get the speed advantage of bright dot illumination or the low light long range shooting advantage of full scale illumination. Virtually all the scopes close to the VCOG's price point are dot illuminated this optic appears to use an significantly less desirable scheme.

4) The optics numbers - The exit pupil numbers, if honest (and they look to be) are fine though certainly not blowing anyone's mind. The field of view, however, is lacking. 95ft at 1x is not great. Most High end variables do much better. The Elcan, an interesting comparison given the price and heavy military focus of both companies is the champion in this area boasting 146ft but almost anything near this price point and most stuff not near it will better 95ft. Now, for all that can be said about stat sheet numbers they really don't matter near as much as the actual experience of using an optic and assessing its clarity, how comfortable the eyebox is, and how much distortion there is but these numbers aren't stand out all the same.

5) The mount - I am happy to see Trijicon adapt a variable with an integrated mount. It appears that the mount is even compatible with flat top adapters from the ACOGs. All wins on that front. Of course, one of the main reasons I like the idea of an integrated mount is to save weight and they obviously didn't do that but I still think it will make for a more rugged package with nothing to loosen up.

All in all I'll have to see the VCOG to really know if I like it or not but I'm not immediately blown away by the numbers or features. I am also not blown away by the price but given that this company is heavily supported by Uncle Sam I really didn't expect to be. Actually, given that Uncle Sam has been kicking the tires on 1-6x scopes lately, I expect the VCOG has mostly to do with that.

Absolutely huge fail.......Constant eye relief of 4" will not allow for any currently available ACOG mount to work with the AR15 platform.  Unless you are running a monolithic upper or are OK with mounting the optic on the handguard, you are screwed.

What a disappointment.

really that's funny cause the one I shot/ tested  has sat in a larue acog mount and has been on about every ar I own without issue...

I gather you haven't actually shot or handled this item

if they release one later with fiber optic and tritium illumination, as well as horseshow and chevron reticles, that will be a winner for sure. until then, i'll keep waiting.
oh, and trijicon, where's our scout scope? my M1A needs one!

Don't worry, everyone on arfcom is an expert and can do a 30 minute youtube review of products after only reading the description.

No fiber optic on a Trijicon = Fail

On top of that, for $2,000 I would get a Specter DR

The fiber optic (or lack thereof) is the only thing that makes me go hmm.  I'll reserve judgment until I get to play with one though.

hahah nice

For that price I would rather have a ACOG and a brand new mid length to go with it!!!!!  

My read on this thing is that they were going for the US Army's squad common optic program and didn't care what the civilian market wants. It comes across as a variable powered acog, with all the limitations that entails.

I can live without fiber optic, as it can wash out in the dark or bloom too much in the bright sun. I can deal with the weight. But offering it for that price (even going down to the $1800-$1900 expected "street" price) just puts it too far behind other scopes in that price range with similar specs. The scope is clearly meant to appeal to agencies who get to spend other people's money on equipment, and get issued their weapons and ammo in a standardized configuration. That is Trijicon's market.

If this had come out with a mil or moa reticle, so that I can use it effectively on any of my 3 ARs of varying barrel length, or a 6.8, or a .308, or a 6.5, then I'd think there be a lot more interest- even at the higher price point (Trijicon does have a reputation as far as durability that works in their favor). But, as it stands, it looks like it's an ACOG that's twice the price and twice the weight that relies on electronics, for only a marginal gain in performance.

So Stick and RSF - no sarcasm or BS intended towards you guys with this question - but what is your honest opinion and review of this new optic?  

What is it's strengths and weaknesses compared to other scopes in this magnification range?


thanks

I had the opportunity to handle a couple of these this past weekend at the NRA convention in Houston. I was able to compare them with the Leupold Mk6 1-6 scopes by running back forth between the Trijicon and Leupold displays. I like the Trijicon optic.

The VCOG is built pretty sturdy.I looked at both the segmented circle and the horseshoe reticles and both were pretty visible. The 1x setting was a true 1x with no distortion.

The illumination was bright but not as bright as the Leupold Mk 6 illumination at their respective illumination max settings. . The one question I couldn't get answered to my satisfaction was whether the VCOG illumination was daylight visible. I asked a couple of Trijicon associates and either they weren't sure or didn't understand what I was asking.

For me, I think the price and whether the illumination is daylight visible are the deciding factors between this and the Leupold Mk6.

Have to play with one to make an informed decision, but it's not looking good.

I played with one at NRA yesterday and I was thoroughly unimpressed. I liked the mk 6 a lot better and even the Bushnell elite I thought was solid. Of course all of them exhibit one main flaw. On 1x with the illumination off the reticle is almost non existant. With the illumination on it is great but without it it's very hard to see be size it's so small.