What kind of glass does the ACOG use? And who else uses the same glass?

[YetterIsBetter]

The clarity of the ACOG is mindblowing. I don't think I've ever had glass that matched the clarity and illumination.
I've heard that Schott glass is what is inside of them. Does anyone actually know? What other options use the same glass. Either other prisms (Like Bowe BCO) or LVPOs.
Is there even better glass?

 

[Jgunner]

Really? I have owned like 10 acogs and never been blown away by them. I liked trijicon 1-8 and thought it was bright but still seen brighter. Maybe different people’s eyes see things differently.

 

[YetterIsBetter]

Really? I have owned like 10 acogs and never been blown away by them. I liked trijicon 1-8 and thought it was bright but still seen brighter. Maybe different people’s eyes see things differently.

Well my NX8 is disappointing when I compare it to the ACOG. But it is also a LVPO and not a prism sight.

 

[ken226]

My TA01 Acog has really good glass. I have no idea who makes it though.

But it's not as good as my US Optics 3.2-17 scope, when set to the same 4x magnification. Of course, it's apples to oranges. A 50mm objective vs 32mm, just to start.

 

[BigHat]

I've never been more than just satisfied with ACOG glass, but we all have a different frame of reference.

 

[YetterIsBetter]

My TA01 Acog has really good glass. I have no idea who makes it though.

But it's not as good as my US Optics 3.2-17 scope, when set to the same 4x magnification. Of course, it's apples to oranges. A 50mm objective vs 32mm, just to start.

USO, isn't that just chinese junk now?

 

[ken226]

USO, isn't that just chinese junk now?

If so, Id be seriously disappointed in my Acog, considering the superiority of the Chinese glass..

USO is like all the rest. They have high end scopes and low end scopes. Mine is an FDN17. I've never put hands on the TS scopes, so I know little about them.

Their TS line is imported from Japan and China, depending on which one. The FDN series are made in Connelly Springs, NC.

Kinda like, even though Vortex and Bushnell sell alot of chinese junk, they have some pretty good stuff too.

Here's some threads with 1st hand info, reviews, tracking tests, etc.

Rifle Scopes - US Optics Foundation series

It appears that US Optics is persisting with US made scopes. It seems they renamed B-series into foundation series. Some cosmetics are different. I do not know if there are any internal changes to mechanics or optics. FOV specs appear to be the same, so low magnification tunneling should be...

www.snipershide.com

FDN 17X owners, chime in.

I have my eye on (pun intended) on a FDN 17 (3.2-17x50) scope and the longer I look at it the more I've gots to have it. I'm currently running a B25 (5-25x52) on my AICS/r700 and although the b25 is a great scope, it's just a little too much (size, weight and magnification) for my limited range...

www.snipershide.com

 

[shoobe01]

ACOG is nice but never thrilled anyone I know more than top tier German/Austrian brands. Usually seen as American so good but can't be German quality

Also useless to me and many others as no diopter adjustment. Even with good glasses, I need to adjust it, and many (most?) people past their 20s get tired, dehydrated enough, fatigued enough, that for maximum clarity you need to tweak it over the day. I ran a TA01 for a couple years, never could be fast enough with it because of the delay/fatigue forcing my eye to do extra work.

 

[Huskydriver]

Lol you need to look through a TT or ZCO if acog glass is blowing you away.. hell maybe just a gen 2 razor

 

[YetterIsBetter]

ACOG is nice but never thrilled anyone I know more than top tier German/Austrian brands. Usually seen as American so good but can't be German quality

Also useless to me and many others as no diopter adjustment. Even with good glasses, I need to adjust it, and many (most?) people past their 20s get tired, dehydrated enough, fatigued enough, that for maximum clarity you need to tweak it over the day. I ran a TA01 for a couple years, never could be fast enough with it because of the delay/fatigue forcing my eye to do extra work.

The lack of adjustable diopter is a big drawback. That and the short eye relief are probably the only two real major flaws of the ACOG

Lol you need to look through a TT or ZCO if acog glass is blowing you away.. hell maybe just a gen 2 razor

Maybe the ZCO and TT. I've had a razor though and was not too impressed with it. Razor is less hazy than the nx8 though.

 

[roostercogburn98]

Acogs and a dogs asshole seem pretty close in comparison.

 

[canezach]

If you wait until midnight and say Schott glass three times in a mirror, Philip appears

 

[Jason280]

That and the short eye relief are probably the only two real major flaws of the ACOG

Try a TA33 or TA11, and the eye relief is just about perfect...they just don't have quite the field of view as a TA01 or TA31.

 

[ToKeepAndBear]

The clarity of the ACOG is mindblowing. I don't think I've ever had glass that matched the clarity and illumination.
I've heard that Schlott or Schott glass is what is inside of them. Does anyone actually know? What other options use the same glass. Either other prisms (Like Bowe BCO) or LVPOs.
Is there even better glass?

I made the mistake of buying Hensoldt scopes early on and that kind of ruins a person’s perspective. Having said that, I still find the image of the TA11 Acog in particular very impressive for a rugged battle optic. It is extremely easy to get behind, bright, and very sharp to the edges of the field of view. The view reminds me of my Swaro SLC 7x42s. Not sure why some equate Acogs to dog poo. I certainly don’t feel that way.

In fact, I have had a love affair with Acogs lately. Have them on a couple PCP air rifles, Ruger 10/22 pretty KIDDed out, couple 300 Blk AR pistols, and 16-18” ARs. Practice with the BAC and it works pretty good up close. Go out and shoot 600 yards with a TA11, it’s pretty easy. The weight of some LPVOs is getting ridiculous. The “heavy” TA11 weighs 18oz with the included mount. If that’s too heavy I use the TA33, it actually subtracts weight from your bare rifle.

That reminds me, I need to buy another Acog for my turkey gun. The Eotech crapped out sitting in the safe the last year. I have not had a problem with any of my Cogs.

If I had my druthers, I’d have Acogs and Hensoldts on everything.

 

[ken226]

Not sure why some equate Acogs to dog poo. I certainly don’t feel that way.

.

Bear pit dwellers dropping in with a silly one liner isn't worth the time it takes to read. Acogs work fine.

However, I can see how they would come to their conclusions I guess. The glass in the Acog they use on Call of Duty, Modern Warfare, probably sucks

 

[YetterIsBetter]

I made the mistake of buying Hensoldt scopes early on and that kind of ruins a person’s perspective. Having said that, I still find the image of the TA11 Acog in particular very impressive for a rugged battle optic. It is extremely easy to get behind, bright, and very sharp to the edges of the field of view. The view reminds me of my Swaro SLC 7x42s. Not sure why some equate Acogs to dog poo. I certainly don’t feel that way.

In fact, I have had a love affair with Acogs lately. Have them on a couple PCP air rifles, Ruger 10/22 pretty KIDDed out, couple 300 Blk AR pistols, and 16-18” ARs. Practice with the BAC and it works pretty good up close. Go out and shoot 600 yards with a TA11, it’s pretty easy. The weight of some LPVOs is getting ridiculous. The “heavy” TA11 weighs 18oz with the included mount. If that’s too heavy I use the TA33, it actually subtracts weight from your bare rifle.

That reminds me, I need to buy another Acog for my turkey gun. The Eotech crapped out sitting in the safe the last year. I have not had a problem with any of my Cogs.

If I had my druthers, I’d have Acogs and Hensoldts on everything.

If you like ACOGS you might have heard about the Browe BCO / BTO. A battery powered ACOG with supposedly better glass (Schott) and an actually usable auto brightness reticle.
I just looked and Hesnolt. They have their own ACOG that about as expensive as an ACOG. I am too poor to even look at their other scopes though.

.

Bear pit dwellers dropping in with a silly one liner isn't worth the time it takes to read. Acogs work fine.

However, I can see how they would come to their conclusions I guess. The glass in the Acog they use on Call of Duty, Modern Warfare, probably sucks

I don't think there is really any reason to doubt the ACOG as being reliable. It is one of the most issued magnified optic. I don't think there exists another magnified optic with that kind of track record.

 

[BigHat]

I don't think there is really any reason to doubt the ACOG as being reliable. It is one of the most issued magnified optic. I don't think there exists another magnified optic with that kind of track record.

I don't think anyone doubts the track record of the ACOG as a durable and highly reliable optic, but that's not really germane to the discussion here about optical quality, particularly the OPs assertion that it's "mind-blowing." The reality is that it has VERY acceptable glass, especially for the niche it fills. But to think that it's some sort of peerless glass is just silly. Any top-tier optic blows it out of the water, especially during low light conditions as anyone exposed to both ACOGs and a range of high-end optics (TT, ZCO, S&B, Hensoldt, March, etc) would say instantly. It's a solid piece of gear that deserves the $$$ it commands and there's no doubt it has been designed to be tougher than woodpecker lips over optical perfection. The glass used certainly doesn't get in the way of its mission.

 

[Twistid]

The Steiner S and T series prisms are made in Germany and use Schot glass.

 

[roostercogburn98]

.

Bear pit dwellers dropping in with a silly one liner isn't worth the time it takes to read. Acogs work fine.

However, I can see how they would come to their conclusions I guess. The glass in the Acog they use on Call of Duty, Modern Warfare, probably sucks

Nobody said they didn’t work. They said it was like dog poo. Two different subjects.

 

[phlegm]

I don't have any knowledge of the actual kind of glass or source for ACOGs. Being prisms, I imagine that the glass is similar to that found in many binoculars. Here's an article describing generalities of the glass used in many binoculars, which could be presumed to be relevant in guessing what's used in the ACOG.

Optical Glass For Binoculars - What Is ED Glass, Crown- or Flint Glass

Optical glass used binoculars is crucial to image quality. Combining Crown glass and Flint glass in lense systems reduces aberration and provides clear and sharp vision

bestofbinoculars.com

On the idea of finding another optic that has similar optical quality just by buying a scope with the same glass, its not that simple. There are a lot of other factors that contribute to the final optical properties of any scope or prism sight that more directly affect how they look.

 

[ken226]

Nobody said they didn’t work. They said it was like dog poo. Two different subjects.

In a post about the Acogs glass (I'm pretty sure that's what the title of this thread indicates that the thread is about. Specifically, the glass),

"They" said "

Acogs and a dogs asshole seem pretty close in comparison.

So according to "them", replying in a thread about glass, a scope who's glass is like a dog's asshole, works fine? Can YOU aim through a dog's asshole? Have you tried it? If so, could you see the dog on the other side of the gate?



To the OP. Like I said, consider your source. Some of these bear pit dwellers just want to start an internet tard fight.

 

[YetterIsBetter]

I don't think anyone doubts the track record of the ACOG as a durable and highly reliable optic, but that's not really germane to the discussion here about optical quality, particularly the OPs assertion that it's "mind-blowing." The reality is that it has VERY acceptable glass, especially for the niche it fills. But to think that it's some sort of peerless glass is just silly. Any top-tier optic blows it out of the water, especially during low light conditions as anyone exposed to both ACOGs and a range of high-end optics (TT, ZCO, S&B, Hensoldt, March, etc) would say instantly. It's a solid piece of gear that deserves the $$$ it commands and there's no doubt it has been designed to be tougher than woodpecker lips over optical perfection. The glass used certainly doesn't get in the way of its mission.

My experience with glass is mostly Razors, NX8s, and ACOGs. Of those three the ACOG has by far the best glass in my experience. The ACOG in low light has been phenomenal for me too.
I have very little experience with some of the high end optics. I've sat behind a SB and that was about it. It was a good scope but not worth the 5k.= although I don't doubt the glass' quality.

 

[roostercogburn98]

@ken226
I can open beer bottles with a hammer. Does the beer still come out, yes. Is it efficient and effective, probably not. Does it get the job done? If you said yes, then it works, which nobody is denying about the ability to “work”. My personal preference and opinion of them from carrying them in call of duty is mine though. My 4K UHD tv makes my view through it crystal clear and I’m qualified to make my opinionated statement.

 

[samnev]

My TA01 Acog has really good glass. I have no idea who makes it though.

But it's not as good as my US Optics 3.2-17 scope, when set to the same 4x magnification. Of course, it's apples to oranges. A 50mm objective vs 32mm, just to start.

I also have a TA01 and really like it. It's mounted with a TA51 on my old Noveske N4 Afghan. It's 15 years old now and the Illuminati still works fairly well.

 

[1911hombre]

Razor is less hazy than the nx8 though.

You must have gotten ahold of a bad NX8. My C599 with properly adjusted diopter is bright and crisp. It is in no way hazy. I have had several TA11's and TA31's and a couple Elcans to boot and all were clear but I wouldn't say clearer than my little NF. I do hit mine with a lens pen under decent light every now and then, though.

 

[BigHat]

My experience with glass is mostly Razors, NX8s, and ACOGs. Of those three the ACOG has by far the best glass in my experience. The ACOG in low light has been phenomenal for me too.
I have very little experience with some of the high end optics. I've sat behind a SB and that was about it. It was a good scope but not worth the 5k.= although I don't doubt the glass' quality.

You're comparing the ACOG to budget optics as I guess you're acknowledging. You said you find it to be "mind blowing." Others with top-shelf optics shared that it isn't. Aside from the insults about ACOGs that aren't warranted IMHO, most simply shared that you need to experience a broader spectrum of optics before declaring the ACOG as special optically. It's a great optic if it meets your need. Can you just say you're happy with the ACOG? I own them, they do a great job. As a Marine, I know we selected them as our RCO (Rifle Combat Optic) in I think 2000 or 2001 when I had a tangential link to the acquisition guys. Good gear for what it is, but they were selected for durability and simplicity. I recall taking Congressional staffers to the Weapons Training Bn in Quantico. The demo conducted with the ACOG was to unmount it from the rifle, slam it repeatedly into the ground, toss it into the parking lot, etc, and then mount and shoot it. They weren't bragging about the glass. Why would they? They had top-shelf optics they were exposed to daily on sniper and DMR rifles.
I would also agree with the folks above that noted aspects of an ACOG design impact overall performance, aside from the glass used. One could look at the Trijicon traditional variable optics to assess their performance vs other traditional variables. Again, good stuff, but clearly second-tier and it's reflected in the price.