Rifle Scopes Browe BCO vs. ACOG

[Cobracutter]

The exact same thing could be said about you....in almost every thread your in, as nothing you post really doesn't have any supportive facts.

Really? I laid out the reasons. if you took the time to READ the actual thread and digest the content, that would be obvious. I can't force you to understand, you might have to do a bit of thinking here....sorry to tell ya.

If I say something is shit, bad or not good, there is a reason. I don't just pick random items to condemn. Hopefully people who are on the fence will get good info and not shit parroted by people who have a very narrow view.

Ive owned, trained and Deployed with ACOG'. Ive maintained them (not that they needed much) and dealt with warranty work on those that were destroyed or had issues.
Ive shot a couple BCO's, and laid out why it is an inferior product, overpriced and out of principle not a good buy.

Do do you have ANYTHING to add about either of these optics, or are you just jumping in here to fling shit? Yea, You don't like me, join the club. But you can't prove me wrong and deep down you know I'm right. Must really burn deep for you to follow me into every thread and take pot shots.

 

[dangerdan87]

So this thread has gone from seeking feedback on optics to a shit storm....

Honeslty, I would go with the ACOG, only because of familiarity.

I haven't heard of anything bad about the BCOs, but I cannot comment on them as I haven't used one. I'd like to try one out.

I worst thing I have had go wrong with an ACOG (TA31), was that something broke on the inside and it looked like you were looking through heavy fog. I've only seen this in 2 TA31s. I think the rough use finally got to it.

 

[09cs]

what "maintaing" do ACOGs require?

 

[09cs]

Honeslty, I would go with the ACOG, only because of familiarity.

I haven't heard of anything bad about the BCOs, but I cannot comment on them as I haven't used one. I'd like to try one out.

I worst thing I have had go wrong with an ACOG (TA31), was that something broke on the inside and it looked like you were looking through heavy fog. I've only seen this in 2 TA31s. I think the rough use finally got to it.

That's what I'm thinking, but may also like to try something new aka the BCO. I'm going to go to my local LGS and look through them and try and mount them to see if I can stand the eye relief. If not then going with the TA11

 

[dangerdan87]

what "maintaing" do ACOGs require?

Keep the glass clean is about it..

When you make an adjustment, be sure to hit the optic a few times with you hand to set the reticle.

 

[Cobracutter]

what "maintaing" do ACOGs require?

Sometimes the tracking would bind up and would have trouble rezeoring. Whack it on the side with a rubber hammer to free up the turrets so they would "take" the adjustments.

It wasn't common, but when you are dealing with 150+ optics for each unit, even the best stuff will fail. You shoulda seen my box of broken and dead M68 CCO (Aimpoints).

Military and especially deployed tempo tends to trash gear at a very fast rate.

 

[diverdon]

More like Trijicon decided to come out with the LED to put Browne out of business for stealing its design (which is pretty fucking low on browne).

If Trijicon failed to get their top people to sign non-compete contracts prior to hiring them whose fault is that?

 

[Cobracutter]

That's what I'm thinking, but may also like to try something new aka the BCO. I'm going to go to my local LGS and look through them and try and mount them to see if I can stand the eye relief. If not then going with the TA11

If you don't need the FOV, take a look at the TA33. Its MUCH lighter, cheaper and IMO faster than the TA11. The downside is 3x vs 3.5x and a smaller FOV, which really is insignificant when looking at the weight/size/cost savings. The Green Horshoe is tits. Bobro makes a mount for it as well.

With practice , its amazing how fast you can acquire and get accurate shots off with the ACOG.

 

[09cs]

Keep the glass clean is about it..

When you make an adjustment, be sure to hit the optic a few times with you hand to set the reticle.

Sometimes the tracking would bind up and would have trouble rezeoring. Whack it on the side with a rubber hammer to free up the turrets so they would "take" the adjustments.

It wasn't common, but when you are dealing with 150+ optics for each unit, even the best stuff will fail. You shoulda seen my box of broken and dead M68 CCO (Aimpoints).

Military and especially deployed tempo tends to trash gear at a very fast rate.

So just smack it a couple of times on the turrets to set them?

 

[09cs]

If you don't need the FOV, take a look at the TA33. Its MUCH lighter, cheaper and IMO faster than the TA11. The downside is 3x vs 3.5x and a smaller FOV, which really is insignificant when looking at the weight/size/cost savings. The Green Horshoe is tits. Bobro makes a mount for it as well.

With practice , its amazing how fast you can acquire and get accurate shots off with the ACOG.

I've looked through the TA33 and felt like I was looking through a toilet paper roll lol

 

[Cobracutter]

If Trijicon failed to get their top people to sign non-compete contracts prior to hiring them whose fault is that?

Non compete is one thing...... Stealing the design is another.

Non competes keep someone from working in that industry/sector for a period of time, so they don't lose their R&D advantage.

Patents tend to protect things like design. I have NO idea why Trijicon has not sued them into oblivion, but there has to be a reason. No one lets someone go startup their own company stealing their product and then competing against them.

 

[09cs]

[MENTION=81220]padom[/MENTION] does the BCO have finger adjustable turrets or do you need a coin?

 

[Victory]

09cs, after you make an adjustment, you just tap the side of the sight with something to seat it. If you don't, you really didn't make an adjustment and will be fighting your zero for a while.

 

[dangerdan87]

So just smack it a couple of times on the turrets to set them?

Just give it a few moderate whacks on the side to set the reticle. ACOGs have a floating reticle. If you make an adjustment and don't beat the optic, you will be chasing your zero. Shooting it after adjustment will settle the reticle after several rounds, but you would be wasting ammo.
I used the palm of my hand to hit the optic.

Also don't forget that each click on the turret is 1/3rd of an inch. At least on the TA31s and similar models. Not sure if the TA11 is the same

 

[Guest]

[MENTION=81220]padom[/MENTION] does the BCO have finger adjustable turrets or do you need a coin?

Sealed caps with knobs underneath that need a coin.

 

[09cs]

09cs, after you make an adjustment, you just tap the side of the sight with something to seat it. If you don't, you really didn't make an adjustment and will be fighting your zero for a while.

Thanks!

 

[09cs]

Just give it a few moderate whacks on the side to set the reticle. ACOGs have a floating reticle. If you make an adjustment and don't beat the optic, you will be chasing your zero. Shooting it after adjustment will settle the reticle after several rounds, but you would be wasting ammo.
I used the palm of my hand to hit the optic.

Also don't forget that each click on the turret is 1/3rd of an inch. At least on the TA31s and similar models. Not sure if the TA11 is the same

Thanks for the info!

 

[09cs]

Sealed caps with knobs underneath that need a coin.

Hm that's seems like a step backwards for an "improvement" over the ACOG.

 

[dangerdan87]

Hm that's seems like a step backwards for an "improvement" over the ACOG.

Some of the ACOGs have finger adjustment knobs under sealed caps. Some need a coin or something to turn. I think the older ones need a coin and the newer ones are user friendly.

 

[09cs]

Some of the ACOGs have finger adjustment knobs under sealed caps. Some need a coin or something to turn. I think the older ones need a coin and the newer ones are user friendly.

I thought all of the new(er) ones were finger adjustment knobs

 

[355sigfan]

Why would you NOT buy the ACOG?

Its not like the guy decided hey I want to make a better scope so I'll quit my good paying job to bring the market this scope. While I'm at it, im going to steal 90% of the design and make it just like an ACOG, but since I can't get tritium, its going to be powered by a LED.

If Trijicon was really that concerned about foriegn exports (ITAR and Nuclear reglatory compliance) they would have came out with their LED acog back then.

More like Trijicon decided to come out with the LED to put Browne out of business for stealing its design (which is pretty fucking low on browne).


The TA11 and TA33 are the best combat optics made, period.

I like the TA 11 and TA33 as well but their are far better optics out there now. A fixed power optic is never going to be the best combat optic period. There are better choices in 1-6 scopes now that are far more versatile. Anyway tritium is a drawback on ACOGS not a blessing. ITs expensive to replace and its not adjustable for lighting conditions. A battery powered LED is a far better choice. I do like how Trijicon used solar power on its SRS that is a neat concept.

 

[Cobracutter]

The issue is, the 1-6 are not durable enough, and there are enough problems to keep them from widespread use.

There are issues with just about ANY 1-x powered, and only a handful have features needed to actually be useful.

When your battery runs out, your screwed. Bomb proof optic that does not even require BUIS and a 15year+ energy source you never have to change.

 

[InkedIan]

The issue is, the 1-6 are not durable enough, and there are enough problems to keep them from widespread use.

There are issues with just about ANY 1-x powered, and only a handful have features needed to actually be useful.

When your battery runs out, your screwed. Bomb proof optic that does not even require BUIS and a 15year+ energy source you never have to change.

I'm sorry that has to be one of the stupidest statements i've seen you type yet... Saying that there are no durable 1-6x scopes and that they all have "issues" is just completely asinine... You only succeed in making yourself look more and more foolish with each post.

 

[MCSO1357]

I've run with ACOG and liked it, except eye relief, which has been covered. I've never heard of the BCO until this gem of a thread popped up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Guest]

Hm that's seems like a step backwards for an "improvement" over the ACOG.

This is a zero issue in my book. I zerod my BCO and have never touched the knobs again in 2 years.

I have the Leupold Mark4 1.5-5x20 CM-R2 on my Recce and its been a solid scope that has taken a beating without issue. The illumination in bright sunlight is its only drawback but is tough as nails.

 

[InkedIan]

OP, I'm not sure if you're interested in a variable power but you may want to look into the VCOG also. Expensive though...

 

[rmfield]

I haven't tried a BCO, but I've been using ACOGs of various types for since about 1995. They are great scopes, but the tritium is a big downside for those of us who buy scopes with our own money and want to keep them for years. I actually do shoot in low/no light conditions and the tritium becomes pretty worthless in 10-12 years - depending on the scope model. Sending a scope back to Trijicon and paying them $500 to replace the tritium (when they get around to it) is not a realistic or economical option. Your only choice is to keep it as a daylight-only scope or sell it. I'm now down to one 7 year old TA01 with the JP reticle. When its tritium gets too low, I'll sell it and not buy another. No more tritium scopes for me unless they can be serviced economically.

FWIW, I'm glad to see Trijicon getting some competition. Perhaps they will start taking the long term owners of their scopes more seriously. Maybe they will start using LEDs.

 

[09cs]

This is a zero issue in my book. I zerod my BCO and have never touched the knobs again in 2 years.

I have the Leupold Mark4 1.5-5x20 CM-R2 on my Recce and its been a solid scope that has taken a beating without issue. The illumination in bright sunlight is its only drawback but is tough as nails.

Thank you for your feedback! I'll be sure to pm you if i have more questions!

 

[09cs]

OP, I'm not sure if you're interested in a variable power but you may want to look into the VCOG also. Expensive though...

Not really interested in variable power

 

[09cs]

One thing I just learned about the scope is it has an "Etched reticle" so even with no power, the chevron/horseshoe/crosshair will be visible (in the day time atleast)

 

[09cs]

I haven't tried a BCO, but I've been using ACOGs of various types for since about 1995. They are great scopes, but the tritium is a big downside for those of us who buy scopes with our own money and want to keep them for years. I actually do shoot in low/no light conditions and the tritium becomes pretty worthless in 10-12 years - depending on the scope model. Sending a scope back to Trijicon and paying them $500 to replace the tritium (when they get around to it) is not a realistic or economical option. Your only choice is to keep it as a daylight-only scope or sell it. I'm now down to one 7 year old TA01 with the JP reticle. When its tritium gets too low, I'll sell it and not buy another. No more tritium scopes for me unless they can be serviced economically.

FWIW, I'm glad to see Trijicon getting some competition. Perhaps they will start taking the long term owners of their scopes more seriously. Maybe they will start using LEDs.

Me too, maybe they'll make some changes/updates

 

[Guest]

One thing I just learned about the scope is it has an "Etched reticle" so even with no power, the chevron/horseshoe/crosshair will be visible (in the day time atleast)

That is correct, it has an etched reticle. I dont illuminate the reticle for longer range precision shots and zeroing the optic. I use illuniation when training 100yds and in because quick snap shots are quick and accurate when placing illuminated chevron center mass.

 

[samnev]

I have to agree with Cobra on choosing the ACOG over the BCO. While the BCO may be a fine scope it is still the new kid on the block with no proven long term combat use. For that reason alone I'd go with the ACOG. My favorite is the TA31F of the 4 I own which is over 10 years old now and just a bright as it ever was. Additionally the BCO with electronics is just another thing that can go wrong. I believe in the KISS principle and the auto dim feature maybe useful it just adds more complexity to the design and another point of possible failure.
Cobra certainly has strongly held opinions and sometimes is a vehement in his postings. But most often what he posts has a ring of truth. Additionally if BCO did steal ACOG's patten I find that distasteful.

 

[09cs]

That is correct, it has an etched reticle. I dont illuminate the reticle for longer range precision shots and zeroing the optic. I use illuniation when training 100yds and in because quick snap shots are quick and accurate when placing illuminated chevron center mass.

I like that it has an etched reticle, so if the battery ever does go out its still visible

I have to agree with Cobra on choosing the ACOG over the BCO. While the BCO may be a fine scope it is still the new kid on the block with no proven long term combat use. For that reason alone I'd go with the ACOG. My favorite is the TA31F of the 4 I own which is over 10 years old now and just a bright as it ever was. Additionally the BCO with electronics is just another thing that can go wrong. I believe in the KISS principle and the auto dim feature maybe useful it just adds more complexity to the design and another point of possible failure.
Cobra certainly has strongly held opinions and sometimes is a vehement in his postings. But most often what he posts has a ring of truth. Additionally if BCO did steal ACOG's patten I find that distasteful.

That is one of my concerns with the BCO, that it seems it has a lot of things that can possibly go wrong with.


I'm going to try and look through the TA31 and see if I can stand the eye relief, and if I can't then the BCO and 31 are out of the question adn will end up with an 11 most likely.

 

[Cobracutter]

I'm sorry that has to be one of the stupidest statements i've seen you type yet... Saying that there are no durable 1-6x scopes and that they all have "issues" is just completely asinine... You only succeed in making yourself look more and more foolish with each post.

You have NO idea what your talking about. Point Blank PERIOD

All of the variables have issues, Including the tried and true S&B 1.1-4 that was the gold standard for years. Even the S&B's have their own set of issues.

NONE of them have a durable enough reputation to be taken into combat and trusted with the same reliability as an ACOG.

The NXS 1-4 and the 2.5-10 are just about the only ones that have been proven. It's illumination leaves something to be desired.

Most of them fail on features alone. Daylight Bright Dot, with a usable reticle and a reliable optic.

There is some new shit out there, the USO 1-8, CQBB 1-8, Bushnel 1-8.5, Stiener 1-5, but ALL of them have had issues. All you have to do is read this forum to see it clear as day.

All of those scopes require BUIS, and ACOG doesn't.

 

[samnev]

Here's a good review of the TA11, TA 31, and TA33. It might help you decide which suits you best. For me if your mounting it on a 556 the TA 31F is find. It's easy to get use to the nose to charging handle weld. But If it's on a 308 i'd want as much eye relief as possible so I would not chose an ACOG with a 1.5" eye relief.

Trijicon ACOG Comparison: TA11 vs TA31 vs TA33 - Firearm Reviews

 

[Cobracutter]

I like that it has an etched reticle, so if the battery ever does go out its still visible



That is one of my concerns with the BCO, that it seems it has a lot of things that can possibly go wrong with.


I'm going to try and look through the TA31 and see if I can stand the eye relief, and if I can't then the BCO and 31 are out of the question adn will end up with an 11 most likely.

Why are you ignoring the TA11 and 33. They are MUCH better choices than the 31. They eye relief is like 2-3 times better which makes heads up shooting much faster and easier.

 

[09cs]

Here's a good review of the TA11, TA 31, and TA33. It might help you decide which suits you best. For me if your mounting it on a 556 the TA 31F is find. It's easy to get use to the nose to charging handle weld. But If it's on a 308 i'd want as much eye relief as possible so I would not chose an ACOD with a 1'5 eye relief.

Trijicon ACOG Comparison: TA11 vs TA31 vs TA33 - Firearm Reviews

I've read that article about a dozen times now lol but it is very helpful.

Yes it is going on a 556

 

[09cs]

Why are you ignoring the TA11 and 33. They are MUCH better choices than the 31. They eye relief is like 2-3 times better which makes heads up shooting much faster and easier.

I'm not completely ignoring the 11 and 33. I mentioned I was between the BCO the 31 and 11. I have nothing against the 11 and like the eye relief better. I've looked through the 33 and felt like I was looking through a paper towel roll.

 

[355sigfan]

The issue is, the 1-6 are not durable enough, and there are enough problems to keep them from widespread use.

There are issues with just about ANY 1-x powered, and only a handful have features needed to actually be useful.

When your battery runs out, your screwed. Bomb proof optic that does not even require BUIS and a 15year+ energy source you never have to change.

The VCOG, Leupold MK6 and the Vortex Razor 2 are more than durable enough. Furthermore on the battery issue even if the batteries die you still have a usable optic just with a black reticle.

 

[Hole Punch]

I've got the TA11 on my 5.56 RRA Coyote. As samnev says the relief is not bad, but I would like it less on my .308. And as Cobra says you don't want to be depending on batteries when you really need your rifle to work. So I put a non-illuminated variable on my .308. Those are my "go to" rifles. I've never had issue with the green reticle in my ACOG. People talk much about brightness, but it seems to be a non-issue with the ACOG. If it's bright out the brightness is fine. And in lowlight such as dusk or dawn it's helpful to have a nice visible crosshair to see against your target. Black or white it's visible. Inhale, exhale, hold, squeeze. Hit. No problem. ?

 

[355sigfan]

I've got the TA11 on my 5.56 RRA Coyote. As samnev says the relief is not bad, but I would like it less on my .308. And as Cobra says you don't want to be depending on batteries when you really need your rifle to work. So I put a non-illuminated variable on my .308. Those are my "go to" rifles. I've never had issue with the green reticle in my ACOG. People talk much about brightness, but it seems to be a non-issue with the ACOG. If it's bright out the brightness is fine. And in lowlight such as dusk or dawn it's helpful to have a nice visible crosshair to see against your target. Black or white it's visible. Inhale, exhale, hold, squeeze. Hit. No problem. ��

I don't get the logic on not relying on batteries. So many life saving items today depend on batteries and we think nothing of it. With variable scopes the worst thing that can happen if the battery dies is you lose your illumination and your stuck with a usable black reticle which is what you are doing by choice anyway. Tritium does die and when its time to replace it it is very very expensive. With a battery powered LED that can last for years like Aimpoints when the battery finally does die its cheap and simple. Also in an end of days situation that so many love to fantasize about batteries will be easier to find that tritium to reinsert into your ACOG. I would prefer a fiber optic system backed up by a battery powered LED for night shooting.
Pat

 

[Hole Punch]

Just a side note. I have a couple EOTech's on other rifles. And they are red "reticles" if you still call them reticles in a holographic site. The adjustable settings are nice with the red color. It can be a little much in some situations. But the green of the ACOG, to me, seems to be less bright. Or more easy on the eyes. Whatever the proper term, I've always preferred green in an optic over red. It goes on target just as quick as the red, with less harshness to the eyes. IMO

 

[Hole Punch]

For 355sigfan, I'm not opposed to battery powered optics. But I feel it's good to cover your ass. So having a non-battery option or options in your selection is a good idea. As I said adding to a previous post, I have a couple EOTech's that work well. But if the batteries are dead all you have is a spendy picture window through which to see Advancing Opponents. Back up sites can get your ass out of a jam, but if we all preferred back up sites, or iron sites, we'd have no need for optics.

 

[Bevan]

There's room for improvement in all of the optics of this type.


Ultimately I'd like a 1/4x Elcan SpecterDR style optic, with a fiber optic/led lit reticle, in a size/weight similar to an ACOG with internal adjustments and choice of mounting systems - preferably mount in a 34mm ring a la Aimpoint M2, Browe BSO etc so it can be used on non-AR guns, with decent eye relief and a housing that allows use of flip up caps

 

[Hole Punch]

........and since this was a BCO vs. ACOG thread I was trying to stay on point, not entering into end of days discussion. But sice you mentioned it, the tritium will last long after all the batteries have been looted. And then eventually everyone will be back to black crosshairs without batteries. The ACOG crosshairs will still be visible minus illumination. But I'm okay with having non-illuminated crosshairs, versus none.

 

[09cs]

........and since this was a BCO vs. ACOG thread I was trying to stay on point, not entering into end of days discussion. But sice you mentioned it, the tritium will last long after all the batteries have been looted. And then eventually everyone will be back to black crosshairs without batteries. The ACOG crosshairs will still be visible minus illumination. But I'm okay with having non-illuminated crosshairs, versus none.

Thanks for trying to stay on point lol

If the tritium in the ACOG does go dead eventually, will there only be the BDC visible or will the chevron just be black?

 

[Bevan]

The tritium is fucken useless in an ACOG anyway except in pitch black??? unless the 3 I've had have all had dead tritium

 

[BravoSierra]

Non compete is one thing...... Stealing the design is another.

Non competes keep someone from working in that industry/sector for a period of time, so they don't lose their R&D advantage.

Patents tend to protect things like design. I have NO idea why Trijicon has not sued them into oblivion, but there has to be a reason. No one lets someone go startup their own company stealing their product and then competing against them.

Point of interest. Perhaps the patent on the design is expired. The basic and aesthetic design of the ACOG was patented in the 80's. Or, perhaps Browe designed a solution that the customer had requested, and Trij didn't want to pursue the design, and he left with the design to go into business himself. Ive seen this happen in aerospace too, and they don't sue either. Or there was an exchange of technology, but that doesn't seem likely in this case. but there is a powered TA01 now. Who knows, but i did look up Trij's patents, didn't see Browe listed on any of them.

USPTO Assignments on the Web

 

[09cs]

Just a side note. I have a couple EOTech's on other rifles. And they are red "reticles" if you still call them reticles in a holographic site. The adjustable settings are nice with the red color. It can be a little much in some situations. But the green of the ACOG, to me, seems to be less bright. Or more easy on the eyes. Whatever the proper term, I've always preferred green in an optic over red. It goes on target just as quick as the red, with less harshness to the eyes. IMO

I thought about going with EOTech + magnifier, but didn't like the weight of it and how fuzzy the reticle looked through the magnifer