Rifle Scopes 1-6x vs ACOG

[Glocksteady]

I was just thinking about Toe42's thread about CQB optics but I didn't want to hijack it. What are some examples of the benefits and drawbacks between a 1-6x type scope and an optic like an ACOG? For CQB, wouldn't an ACOG be more suitable in this situation, or would it limit you in some way that a 1-6x wouldn't?

TIA

 

[Pappasniper]

Re: 1-6x vs ACOG

I don't think an ACOG IS more suitable. At 1x you might like the scope better. I think it would come down to training with one or another. How much your eyes like binary vision with the ACOG. After all, one eye 3 or 4x and the other none. Some people's eyes adapt better than others. I would choose an ACOG over a 1-4 scope, but 1-6.5, I like mine a lot.

I would try to borrow a friends and decide. You should be able to tell quickly.

 

[42769vette]

Re: 1-6x vs ACOG

the 1-6 easily wins. what can a straight 4x do that cant be done between 1 and 6 (nothing). then ask yourself what can be done between 1 and 6 that cant be done on 4x (alot) seams like a easy choice to me

 

[Glocksteady]

Re: 1-6x vs ACOG

I don't like the idea of both eyes open either. Just me. I think 1-6 is a win as well.

 

[Ghogs Nightmare]

Re: 1-6x vs ACOG

Both have positive's an I've owned both. I'm now down to one acog the other rifle now wears a 3-9 firedot. Figured on the low end its only just a bit below my 4x acog but can do much more when turned up, this was on a 308. The 223 still has the TA01 on it.

 

[SpinDrift338]

Re: 1-6x vs ACOG

One huge plus for the 1-6 is usually eye relief. 3.5-4" is much better than the 1.5" razor thin relief on a TA01 or similar ACOG... like the one that kissed my eye pro when sitting ontop of my LMT MWS

 

[Kodiak61]

Re: 1-6x vs ACOG

I have and Elcan 1.5x OR 6x on my POF and love it.

Have run several different optics before settling on this, I am very happy with how it performs.

Only complaints are cost and weight, to which I have answered/convinced myself of two answers...

Quality costs, cry now and cry only once. Quit being a pussbag and whining about a few ounces.

 

[hewlett260]

Re: 1-6x vs ACOG

I personally don't trust the ACOG. I've gone through four of them in the last two years on my M4. The first one wouldn't zero and almost cost me a rifle qual, the second wouldn't hold a zero longer than a week and the third one was the same as the first. I would understand this if it were old and beat to shit when it was issued to me but this one was brand new. My unit finally replaced it while we were in country and came to find out that one wouldn't hold an adjustment either. My iron sights held from the beginning of the work up all the way through Afghanistan and still haven't let me down.

 

[Glocksteady]

Re: 1-6x vs ACOG

Holy crap that is terrible! I have my irons zeroed for 100 yds and like the clear field of vision I get. I would like to get something for night. Afraid of red dot battery failure. I think Troy makes some tritium sights I may look into. I could then use quick detach optic if needed.

After all the good I have heard about ACOG, I am shocked. Eotech was my second pick but these guys are really swaying me towards a 1-6x on cantilever mount. My current cantilever rings are 1 inch so I should be good to go.

Thank you for serving and putting your butt on the line for good and freedom, even if it is for some other country's freedom. God Bless you and I will pray for you and your family.

 

[USACS]

Re: 1-6x vs ACOG

I ran an ACOG TA01 for a long time during my stint in the Iraqi sandbox. In the DMR role, it worked okay for short and intermediate ranges out in the open for short periods of time. My biggest complaint with the ACOG was the infinite parallax, which relies on your own eye to adjust to the sight. This is foolproof and reliable, but it's also a recipe for eyestrain and a headache. I spent a lot of time in LP/OPs in Indian country watching goat farmers and random cars drive around. We only had one set of binoculars in the truck, so I used my ACOG. I got a lot of headaches and it was difficult to do long stints behind an ACOG with its parallax setting. Other than that, it was uber reliable. The eye relief on it sucked terribly though. 1.5" is annoying.

I've messed with the BAC models, and they work much better for CQB. The standard non-BAC models of ACOGs are pretty worthless indoors in CQB conditions.

If you want a good 1-6x, there are three excellent options out there with SWFA, Bushnell and Leupold. I would personally opt for the new Leupold Mark 6 1-6x, which is what I'm going to do when I pick up a SCAR 17S. Having 1x is great for CQB and rapid fire, and having 6x is excellent for long range. There is a drastic difference between 4x and 6x in terms of what you can see.

I say get the 1-6x.

 

[Pappasniper]

Re: 1-6x vs ACOG

If you decide on an ACOG, my clear choice is the 3.5X35. Eye relief MUCH better and just so much more enjoyable to shoot. The 4x32 works OK, but sight picture is night and day IMHO. I have both.

 

[42769vette]

Re: 1-6x vs ACOG

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Glocksteady</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> My current cantilever rings are 1 inch so I should be good to go.
</div></div>

no 1-6 that ive ever heard of works on a 1 inch tube. you will have to buy a new mount unless some fancy engineering has happened recently that im unaware of

 

[Glocksteady]

Re: 1-6x vs ACOG

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 42769vette</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Glocksteady</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> My current cantilever rings are 1 inch so I should be good to go.
</div></div>

no 1-6 that ive ever heard of works on a 1 inch tube. you will have to buy a new mount unless some fancy engineering has happened recently that im unaware of </div></div>

LOL I'm sure there has been no magic machining. I just took a wild stab as I am at least a year out from doing this. I appreciate the heads up so I can factor in more money. Seems to be a common factor with guns so far. There is no telling what will be available in 1-6x a year from now but after looking at a few this morning, I'm willing to bet a 1" tube will not be an option. I think when I get ready for an optic, a 1-6x sounds very good. My friend has the Nikon 223 with the BDC for 55gr which I don't like. The 62gr stabilize much better and are more accurate out of my platform. He tried several 55s out of his and now runs 62s. I guess I'll just have to research everything in a year after I crawl out of my current hole.

 

[leprechaun]

Re: 1-6x vs ACOG

I have been doing the operator thing for a long time now. Have used the ta01nsn 4x version of the acog NEVER a problem adjusting or holding zero have never heard of it either but with as many units are out there there are sure to be problems with a few
With that being said the acog is NOT for cqb
A 1-3 like the leupold cqt or a 1-6 or 1-8 would be what I would go with