- May 22, 2005
- 122,883
ACOGs Rock
- Thread starter smg1231
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
- Jul 29, 2014
- 50,025
Every time I get the money saved up, I buy a new gun instead 
Really shooting for an ATN Thor
Really shooting for an ATN Thor
- Aug 17, 2011
- 26,177
I'm eyeballing that VCOG. Talk about a kick in the pants.
Too rich for my blood...
**Why do they only offer .223 BDC reticles in 55gr or 77gr? Have they forgotten how prevalent 62gr and 69gr rounds are??
Brent
#2ALivesMatter
Is this the vcog?my ta31rco is a 62gr reticle
- Aug 17, 2011
- 26,177
Yep, was referring to the VCOG. Struck me as an odd choice, 55gr and 77gr.
sailskidrive
Legalize the Constitution
Nice collection.
I have a TA31F, my only complaint is the poor eye relief. As far as durability it's hard to beat....
I have a TA31F, my only complaint is the poor eye relief. As far as durability it's hard to beat....
zipzopboop
Member
- Jul 14, 2014
- 9
This is pretty much 90% of discussion on firearm forums. No recreational or home defense shooter really needs features like lightweight polymers, rail systems, optics, grips, lights, lasers, IR devices, etc., etc., but they want them and might pay for them for the marginal benefit.
Those who won't pay for them question why others would pay so much for feature X until feature X becomes commonplace and feature Y is now the new trend.
"Why would you buy [Device]?! You don't even need [Feature]."
Hell, I remember back when the device was ANY kind of optic. When it comes to the ACOG, however, the features have a very clear benefit. The cost and someone else's willingness to pay is irrelevant to an individual.
I see where you are coming from, but need to make a point. The new Primary Arms prism scopes are optically comparable and have better reticles. The only missing ingredient is perceived durability and tritium... and Triji has been moving away from tritium lately. I've seen torture tests of the new PA prisms and I think they're up to at least LEO style abuse.
I still own a TA01NSN for other reasons, and some ACOGs have compelling value propositions, but their absolute monopoly on that market segment will be over within five years, if not sooner. I expect that the second or third ACOG I buy will be my last.
Last edited:
BenL
John Galt Speaking.
For me with ACOGs, the issue is eye relief. Theirs are very shallow.
I'll have to look at some of the PA scopes. I have always just stuck with iron sights, but now that I have a whole bunch of AR's, I'm going to put some glass on them.
- Aug 17, 2011
- 26,177
That's one of mine as well. I don't go nose to charging handle when I shoulder, and moving the unit that far back on the rail to make it work for me just doesn't work.
Not all ACOGs are quite as bad on the eye relief issue.
I really could not believe how close the PA 2.5x came to my TA01NSN in terms of glass quality. Functionally, they are basically equal, maybe a bit of edge to the TA01NSN for low light conditions.
LEDs work nicely, sans the battery life issues. But, again, plenty of non-FO ACOGs out there that are de facto just etched reticles during the daytime. Tritium backup is great, fiber optic lighting is handy, but I sometimes feel like people just get a bit too fixated on corner cases...
dreadpirate
Ultimate Member
I'm happy with an Aimpoint PRO
Users who are viewing this thread
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
PG County getting some Liberty Doll love over a bill that would ban computers for minors- Started by jc1240
- Replies: 6