Hey guys sorry if the title id misleading but I am at an impasse I have two .308 rifles that I really enjoy, an M1a scout and a para FAL with 16 inch bbl. I currently have no optic on the M1a and a vortex red dot on the FAL which works good at my range about 50-60 yards and sometimes out to 100 yards. However I would like to be able to stretch it out to about 500-600 yards at my buddy's range. I was looking at an ACOG the .308 model with the doughnut style recticle because it has a large non- battery powered adjustable brightness recticle for fast 50-60 yard snap shots but also has holdover points out to 600 yards, but have heard that the hold over points will be off for both my rifles because the ACOG is designed for the 240 series of mmg's with much longer bbls. I am also intrigued by the elcan but its nearly twice the cost of the ACOG and to my knowledge has no ability to illuminate but it looks tougher than the ACOG as I've broken two that were issued to me Im sure that I wont be putting <span style="text-decoration: underline">my</span> stuff through the same rigors but it just kinda left a bad taste in my mouth. does anybody have any info on the elcan I think its the specter? and as to the holdover points being true for my rifles? Im not looking to have moa accuracy with it just to hit some steel at range. thanks in advance
Rifle Scopes ACOG or what?
- Thread starter jmsvickers
- Start date
Re: ACOG or what?
Your holdover points will be slightly off with most BDC reticles because of difference such as barrel length, and type of ammo used. I don't think the differences are enough to ruin the holdover marks. Someone else might be able to chime in on this.I have handled my buddies Elcan a few times, and shot my brother in laws ACOG at the range, and hunting. Both are really good optics.
Can I ask why your not considering something in a variable power scope? If your considering things in the price range of an ACOG or Elcan, you could easily step into a Nightforce in 2.5-10 which would probably cover your needs, and then some. If it was my money, I would be looking at NF.
As to the Elcan being tougher looking than an ACOG. Those ACOGS are built like a tank, and have been known to save lives.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1269790/posts
Your holdover points will be slightly off with most BDC reticles because of difference such as barrel length, and type of ammo used. I don't think the differences are enough to ruin the holdover marks. Someone else might be able to chime in on this.I have handled my buddies Elcan a few times, and shot my brother in laws ACOG at the range, and hunting. Both are really good optics.
Can I ask why your not considering something in a variable power scope? If your considering things in the price range of an ACOG or Elcan, you could easily step into a Nightforce in 2.5-10 which would probably cover your needs, and then some. If it was my money, I would be looking at NF.
As to the Elcan being tougher looking than an ACOG. Those ACOGS are built like a tank, and have been known to save lives.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1269790/posts
Re: ACOG or what?
You can put an ACOG on an M1A but it's too tall to have anything like a normal cheek weld without a huge cheek pad. You'd be much better off with a low-power variable scope. You'll still have to use a cheek pad (that's normal for a scoped M1A) but it'll be at a more natural height.
You can put an ACOG on an M1A but it's too tall to have anything like a normal cheek weld without a huge cheek pad. You'd be much better off with a low-power variable scope. You'll still have to use a cheek pad (that's normal for a scoped M1A) but it'll be at a more natural height.
Re: ACOG or what?
I kinda like the simplicity of a fixed power optic they (in my mind) seem more reliable plus I'm used to the idea of just using holdovers and estimating distance with it. I guess its kinda like an AK vs AR argument one is just built to work no mater the operator while the other might work better but requires more training. The ones I was issued in Iraq were tough but the rear lens popped and they got real foggy at first i thought that's just how they were but during an inspection by my Lt he freaked out and sent me to the armory for another(and another)The ELCAN just looks retard strong and simple but IDK about how the switch power works
I was intending to get a sage stock as well that should provide enough height for the acog with the cantilever (spl?) mount correct? and my FAL has the railed dust cover from DSA and had is great with med rings and the red dot.
I am more worried about the hold overs being true than anything but thanks for the consideration and response on this fellas
I kinda like the simplicity of a fixed power optic they (in my mind) seem more reliable plus I'm used to the idea of just using holdovers and estimating distance with it. I guess its kinda like an AK vs AR argument one is just built to work no mater the operator while the other might work better but requires more training. The ones I was issued in Iraq were tough but the rear lens popped and they got real foggy at first i thought that's just how they were but during an inspection by my Lt he freaked out and sent me to the armory for another(and another)The ELCAN just looks retard strong and simple but IDK about how the switch power works
I was intending to get a sage stock as well that should provide enough height for the acog with the cantilever (spl?) mount correct? and my FAL has the railed dust cover from DSA and had is great with med rings and the red dot.
I am more worried about the hold overs being true than anything but thanks for the consideration and response on this fellas
Re: ACOG or what?
I've used both the ACOG and the ELCAN extensively and I've found the ACOG to be much more durable than the ELCAN. I've actually never heard of an ACOG braking on someone. The ELCAN on the other hand has given me issues with holding a zero even after a slight impact.
As far as the BDC on the ACOG, if you determine the MIL value of each holdover line you can determine the holdover ranges of each line to whatever gun you use it on. I've successfully done this with both the ACOG and the ELCAN on various guns.
All in all my vote will always go to Trijicon.
I've used both the ACOG and the ELCAN extensively and I've found the ACOG to be much more durable than the ELCAN. I've actually never heard of an ACOG braking on someone. The ELCAN on the other hand has given me issues with holding a zero even after a slight impact.
As far as the BDC on the ACOG, if you determine the MIL value of each holdover line you can determine the holdover ranges of each line to whatever gun you use it on. I've successfully done this with both the ACOG and the ELCAN on various guns.
All in all my vote will always go to Trijicon.
Re: ACOG or what?
ok I suppose I will lean t'ward the ACOG if you say the elcan is that sensitive, at least my ACOG's were true even though they were foggy as hell. Yea Ive broken them before Im not going to say I was gentle but I didn't use them as a hammer either
ok I suppose I will lean t'ward the ACOG if you say the elcan is that sensitive, at least my ACOG's were true even though they were foggy as hell. Yea Ive broken them before Im not going to say I was gentle but I didn't use them as a hammer either
Re: ACOG or what?
I just got the TA01B which has .308 BDC reticle, no dual illumination but I didn't want the fiber optic tube on top.
http://www.trijicon.com/na_en/products/product3.php?pid=TA01B
I just got the TA01B which has .308 BDC reticle, no dual illumination but I didn't want the fiber optic tube on top.
http://www.trijicon.com/na_en/products/product3.php?pid=TA01B
Similar threads
