I am currently in the process of building a new intermediate 556. Building a mega .556 and going with a precision 18" barrel for this build. The sole purpose of this build isn't necessarily to be a tack driver, but do want it to be an above average accuracy wise all around reliable AR platform. My question is in regards to the optic for this build. I am leaning towards a new ACOG with a back-up doctors on it. But then I started really thinking about a new 1X4 with the same doctors on it. I will come straight out and say that I am unfamiliar with both set-ups, and could really use some real world advice. Thanks in advance for any info given. This set-up will primarily be used to hunt with, target shoot with, and I will probably carry it on duty if it turns out to be as accurate as I hope it will.
Rifle Scopes Need some help ACOG, or 1X4???
- Thread starter gathumper
- Start date
I think a low power variable would serve you better than an ACOG for your stated purposes. Have you thought about a 2.5-10 power optic with an offset mini red dot sight? That would give you more magnification for precision/longer range shooting and down on 2.5X with a MRDS you could be quite quick at close to intermediate targets. Variable power optics are going to allow you to have a wider range of mounting solutions, better eye relief, better adjustments, and better reticles. ACOG's are good bomb proof optics but in my opinion they've been surpassed by other carbine optic options that have more versatility .
I have both ACOG's and variables. I am not sure how deep your pockets are but the Kahles K16i 1-6x is my favorite and will eliminate the need for a back up RDS like the doctor. They also make a K15i 1-5x that is a bit cheaper, both would be an excellent choice and would be worth looking into.
Very good point Trigger Monkey. I really would like to go with a 1x4, or x6. Just don't really need the 10 power, have other builds for that purpose. But really do like having the ability to dial back on the power instead of being stuck with a fixed 3x, or 4x. Nemain, I'll have to look into the Kahles, have not had a chance to grope one yet.
My vote goes to a small variable. I have used many acogs ovable. I almost always end up swapping out to a 1 or 1.5 to 4 or 5 power. I like the acogs for hard combat or patrol use. I would rather have the versatility of a variable for anything else. I do not feel a red dot would be much faster over a properly set up low power variable.
9 out of 10 Acog owners sold them
I have 4 ACOG's 4X scopes. Great combat scopes. If I had it to do over again I would have gotten a 1-4X variable. Which is what I did for my next 2 AR's. I choose the Nightforce NXS 1-4X24. Sport Optics is having a $200 off sale going on now. I also bought a Leupold Mk 6 1-6x which I like a lot.
Last edited:
And those of us that get them issued for duty lack confidence in them as they are not durable as they are made out to be. Trust your life to an optic that loses zero, cracked fiber optics leak tritium and the reticle loses self illumination properties, slower than a Red Dot up close and doesn't give edge to edge clarity(the internals work based on a tensioned wire putting the right half of the image slightly out of focus with no way to adjust focus) for long distance target ID.
It was meant to fill the role as a general purpose optic. It does. There are also variables that fill this role a lot better and cost about the same.
Sounds like a variable is the way to go! There are some killer lower power's on the market that should fit the bill just fine. Thanks for the advice, really makes the choice easier hearing real world experience.
I'm currently using a NF 1-4x on my AR-15. My only complaint would be the illumination could be a little brighter. I have the FC-2 reticle and can easily hit a 8" plate at 300yds with XP193. It also works well closeup on 1x both eyes open. It's just a simple solid scope.
Now there is some bullshit.
Here we go again.
Not as durable? As what, a ball pean hammer? Shit I've been issued, owned and seen used hundreds of them and never seen one break. From Iraq to local shooting.
Hey you, cop that did the original posting. Take a few optics out and try them. Depending on where you plan to use this for "duty" will
dictate the best type of optic for that rifle. You don't want a tack driver, but your going with an 18 inch barrel in the first place. Yeah, probably not needed.
Slower than a red dot. Yes for very close in CQB work it is (Like every other magnified optic out there)
Doesn't have the edge to edge clarity you want. God damn it's not a schmidt and bender.
I think you sir need to learn to shoot better, because I smoke dudes with my 4x no matter the setting. Though I'd consider a 2x acog more than enough.
Once again, people out there trying to use optics for purposes other than intended, with pockets too deep to know what they are talking about.
Is a variable optic more versatile, yes. Are they more prone to breaking, yes.
Last edited:
I shoot just fine with them. Have the badges to prove it to. However, I have had eight(8) go tits up on me between two different units in the last six years(with two breaking on deployment). My current unit has had around 20 shit the bed in the last six months alone and as my experience with them goes has been a regular occurrence for the past few years. Do they see abuse? Yes, however no more than what is expected from a grunts perspective.
They serve a role as I stated above, however there are options out there that are just as strong or stronger, have the internal mechanical strength the ACOG should have, and better warranty than Trijicon.
As a side note, out of the two models we use(3.5x and 4x) the 3.5 is night and day better than the 4x. When I was an Automatic Rifleman I had the 3.5x ACOG for two months before becoming a team leader and getting the 4x back. The only issue with the 3.5x I have ever seen was four out of twelve had the Tritium stop illuminating the reticle.
Variables are not immune to breaking either, but if you take care of your gear they should last(main example that comes to mind is NF 1-4x)*
Ok. what is better for equal or lesser price? So we are comparing apples to apples.
Ya wasn't really looking for advice on what barrel my build needs, pretty sure I know what I need! This also isn't going to turn into a pissing contest, I'm looking for opinions on optics for "my rifle". I really like the ACOG, would still like to have one at some point, but I agree with everyone else that a variable is the way to go with my build. Again, thanks to those of you who took the time to contribute.
Apology for getting off track. What's your budget? If leaning more toward a duty weapon, Nightforce1-4 or USO 1-whatever they have now and Leupold Mk 6. If more for recreation, lower end, Vortex PST, SWFA HD 1-4/6x, Burris XTR II 1-5x. More competitive, Swaro 1-6, Kahles, Vortex Razor 1-6. Figure your budget, the one that falls in there with the options you like and you are set.
It's no problem bro, and I really don't have a budget. I am really leaning towards the Mk6 at this point. I got to shoot one today, and really liked it. I have a lot of experience with higher mag scopes, but I have never owned one on an AR, so this is all new to me. I own several NF's "higher mag" and you can't go wrong with them, but I really felt at home with the Mk6 today.
No pissing contest. But why do you need an 18 inch barrel? why not a 16? why not a 20?
Since you have never owned an AR. I'd question the choice!
I have a Leupold Mk 6 1-6X20 it's a nice scope but I fid the center dot a bit small and when illuminated the eye box is not very forgiving andI must keep my eye in the same position or the center dot seems to fade in an out.
I own a TA31F ACOG, Vortex PST 1-4x, and the SWFA 1-6x optics and the ACOG is my least used optic... Its nice but the low power variables offer so much flexibility / versatility.
I haven't tried one yet, but if I were to consider another Trijicon optic I would look at the VCOG. I do like exposed turrets on the Vortex and SWFA, I have dope sheets made for the loads I use and it makes short work of shooting out at distance without dealing with holdover points.
I haven't tried one yet, but if I were to consider another Trijicon optic I would look at the VCOG. I do like exposed turrets on the Vortex and SWFA, I have dope sheets made for the loads I use and it makes short work of shooting out at distance without dealing with holdover points.
Suckit, I never said that I have never owned an Ar, fact is I own 8 of them. I said that I've never owned a scoped AR, I have a reason for running a 18" barrel and I'll leave it at that.
Samnev, would you recommend the Mk6, or would you advise another scope? I only got to shoot it from the bench, but liked the features.
Maxload, which do you like better the Vortex, or SWFA?
Samnev, would you recommend the Mk6, or would you advise another scope? I only got to shoot it from the bench, but liked the features.
Maxload, which do you like better the Vortex, or SWFA?
NXS Compact 1-4x
I have a TA31F, and it has been great, but if I were going to buy all over again it would be a variable power optic for sure.
I like the SWFA more than the Vortex…
Seems to be better built / construction
Illumination is brighter so I get more daylight visible settings than the PST
SWFA is FFP so 1x vs 6x you get two very different reticles to use.
Optically the SWFA is very good, almost at ACOG level.
Turrets are great, so are the Vortex turrets, but SWFA also supplies caps if you want to make it a bit more tamper proof. I cap my windage turret and hold over, and keep the elevation turret exposed.
Lots of options on the market… I picked the SWFA and Vortex because I prefer graduated MOA/MIL reticles, and don’t like hold over reticles as much. I can easier hold or dial correction with those systems.
Considering the price difference, both Vortex and SWFA are solid picks.
That was the first 1-4x that I used... It’s a solid scope, but its old, and in today’s market there are soo many more options and players than you can get more scope at a more competitive price.
I'm heading out to shoot one of the newer razor's tomorrow, wish I could get my hands on a SWFA!
gathumper,
It is a very nice scope with excellent glass and tracking. But on the expensive side. The only negative I have is the tiny center dot in the CMR-W reticle which I have trouble seeing but then my eyesight isn't what it used to be even though it's still corrected to 20/20. It's probably due to my astigmatism. The tiniest movement causes center dot when the illuminated causes the illuminated portion to shift some. Again probably due to my astigmatism. I think if I had it to do over I would opt for the TMR-D reticle then I would have no complaints. That is what I would recommend.
It is a very nice scope with excellent glass and tracking. But on the expensive side. The only negative I have is the tiny center dot in the CMR-W reticle which I have trouble seeing but then my eyesight isn't what it used to be even though it's still corrected to 20/20. It's probably due to my astigmatism. The tiniest movement causes center dot when the illuminated causes the illuminated portion to shift some. Again probably due to my astigmatism. I think if I had it to do over I would opt for the TMR-D reticle then I would have no complaints. That is what I would recommend.
Last edited:
I will defintely go low power variable. Even with a cheap millett dms I could tell the difference over an acog. I could shoot both eyes open with the illumination at full bright at 1x and had good accuracy at 400 yards.
That was my intro to low power variables. My next one will be the swfa ss 1-6x ffp scope. It's around the same price as an acog but I believe it is a better optic.
That was my intro to low power variables. My next one will be the swfa ss 1-6x ffp scope. It's around the same price as an acog but I believe it is a better optic.
The Vortex Razor is a solid scope... I prefer the 1x of the Razor to the 1x of the SWFA 1-6x. Less pincushion / fisheye effect and easier to use with both eyes open.
Its not until they came out with the Gen II Razor scopes with the VMR (MOA/MIL) reticles I expressed any real interest. Unfortunately they are still 2nd focal plane vs the FFP of the SWFA which still seems to deliver a better reticle. Optically the Razor is better than the SWFA but its more noticeable at 1x. The 1-4x SWFA on the other hand has amazing 1x performance.
I haven't tried them or seem them in person, but I hear good things about the new higher end Bushnell low power variables. I would also look at those before making a final decision.
I own 13 ACOGs, and love everyone of them. It is a great urban combat mall terrorist advanced optic. I also hear that it performs superbly in movie theaters, concerts, and sporting stadiums. I spare no expense when it comes to killing.
suckhismother approves
Most people prefer the flexibility of the low-powered variable optic, but I actually prefer the simplicity of the ACOG. I started out with a couple of the better LPV optics, the Leupold VX-R Patrol 1.25-4 and the Trijicon TR24 green triangle, but I sold them both in favor of a TA33 green horseshoe and a TA11 green crosshair. I found that I always left my LPV scopes on max magnification anyway, that I really liked the ACOG reticles, that I didn't want to rely on battery power, and that the ACOGs took up less real estate on my ARs. For me, the ACOGs just made more sense.
Similar threads
