Survivalist Forum

Advertise Here

Go Back   Survivalist Forum > Firearms and Other Weapons Forum > Military Weapons Forum
Articles Chat Room Classifieds Donations Gallery Groups Links Store Survival Files



Military Weapons Forum AR15, AK47, SKS, H&K, Galil, CETME, FN/FAL, Tanks, Ships, Jets, Helicopters....

Advertise Here
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-16-2011, 05:52 PM
iloveguns111 iloveguns111 is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default acog vs variable scope



Advertise Here

I'm trying to decide between a fixed 4x acog scope vs a variable scope start from a low power 1-4.5x to what ever lets just say 17x.

I want to be able to shoot up close and far.
What do you guys think I should get for a shtf optic?
Old 03-16-2011, 05:58 PM
munchie3409's Avatar
munchie3409 munchie3409 is offline
Hiker
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: SEPA
Posts: 650
Thanks: 82
Thanked 491 Times in 278 Posts
Default

I am a huge fan of Trijicon products and I have owned a few over the years. While I like the ACOG, I find that the fixed magnification isn't great at anything in particular. I like Trijicon because you do not need to concern yourself with an electronic failure such as a battery going down. The tritium is nice and bright and it will last a good amount of years.

I don't know what type of firearm you are planning to use the optic on, so it's tough to make any sort of recommendation.

I can tell you that I have a Leatherwood CMR 1-4x optic on my RFB in .308...when I get to my BOL in a few weeks, I am going to stretch it's legs and go out to 600 yards. The CMR has hold over built into the reticle and it's calibrated for 62gr 223 and 168gr 308. The hold over hash marks are on at 200...my range limit is 200 yards.

You mention shoot close and far...care to explain what close and far means to you? It seems that some folks consider 100 yards long range, so just trying to clarify your statement.

You don't need a ton of magnification to reach 1,000 yards. As I stated many times, the military for years only used a straight 10X to shoot to 1,000.
Old 03-16-2011, 06:02 PM
iloveguns111 iloveguns111 is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Its for a flat top ar15 16" barrel close/far to me means, from 1 yard all the way out to 600 yards
Old 03-16-2011, 06:17 PM
NHP1127's Avatar
NHP1127 NHP1127 is offline
I sell US Military MRE's
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 5,194
Thanks: 939
Thanked 6,053 Times in 2,454 Posts
Default

Hard to beat a Trijicon on an assault or battle rifle. 4X lets you see close to 300M - 500M very well. I have one and love it. As mentioned above, guess it depends on how far out, what caliber and type shooting. Hard to do quick close in shooting with high power scopes, hence not generally used on assault / battle rifles in general combat. Magnifications is good to have for really long shots. Nothing beats seeing the target and be able to make corrections at distance. My 2 cents.

Edit: I see you said out to 600M. Then Trijicon.
Old 03-16-2011, 09:35 PM
Watchdog's Avatar
Watchdog Watchdog is offline
planner and prepper
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: AZ
Posts: 403
Thanks: 83
Thanked 192 Times in 115 Posts
Default

Leupold Mark AR 1X4, great optic, specifically for the AR platform. 1X good for close, 4X if you can shoot you can do a lot.
Old 03-17-2011, 06:56 AM
Herd Sniper Herd Sniper is offline
American fearmaker
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 11,504
Thanks: 11,529
Thanked 19,914 Times in 6,770 Posts
Default

If you are in a SHTF situation, your need to shoot 600 meters isn't going to normally be that great. I seriously doubt if you will ever need to shoot 300 meters. Most of your combat shooting is done below 100 yards. The idea is get close and dump the ammo into your target at high speed. Over the years the Army has calculated that the overwhelming majority of infantry shooting distances involved ranges of 20 yards or less. For a number of years the European military forces had it figured that their average infantryman did not need to be able to shoot over 300 meters because they couldn't see that clearly that far. The modern guess is that the European concept was based off the idea that combat in that area involved all sorts of smoke from their old style cannons and rifles, lots of trees, hills, ridgelines, buildings and all sorts of dust in the air. In this day and age, a good tactical scope, like an ACOG, works well to meet the vast majority of shooting needs for most people in tactical situations. An ACOG would be the quickest way for you to engage targets with a scope because there is no fuss or muss when using one. With a variable power scope you have to get the distance right, allow for wind and all sorts of other issues. The best idea is to keep it simple when it comes to doing anything in a survival situation. So that means an ACOG would probably be better than most other scopes.
Old 03-17-2011, 09:22 AM
NHP1127's Avatar
NHP1127 NHP1127 is offline
I sell US Military MRE's
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 5,194
Thanks: 939
Thanked 6,053 Times in 2,454 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herd Sniper View Post
If you are in a SHTF situation, your need to shoot 600 meters isn't going to normally be that great. I seriously doubt if you will ever need to shoot 300 meters. Most of your combat shooting is done below 100 yards. The idea is get close and dump the ammo into your target at high speed. Over the years the Army has calculated that the overwhelming majority of infantry shooting distances involved ranges of 20 yards or less. For a number of years the European military forces had it figured that their average infantryman did not need to be able to shoot over 300 meters because they couldn't see that clearly that far. The modern guess is that the European concept was based off the idea that combat in that area involved all sorts of smoke from their old style cannons and rifles, lots of trees, hills, ridgelines, buildings and all sorts of dust in the air. In this day and age, a good tactical scope, like an ACOG, works well to meet the vast majority of shooting needs for most people in tactical situations. An ACOG would be the quickest way for you to engage targets with a scope because there is no fuss or muss when using one. With a variable power scope you have to get the distance right, allow for wind and all sorts of other issues. The best idea is to keep it simple when it comes to doing anything in a survival situation. So that means an ACOG would probably be better than most other scopes.
The European concept is to put both hands in the air and surrender..... LOL
The Following User Says Thank You to NHP1127 For This Useful Post:
Old 03-17-2011, 09:35 AM
Jeffrey's Avatar
Jeffrey Jeffrey is offline
Opinionated old fart.
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: South Carolina
Age: 47
Posts: 8,044
Thanks: 1,261
Thanked 6,983 Times in 3,331 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by iloveguns111 View Post
I'm trying to decide between a fixed 4x acog scope vs a variable scope start from a low power 1-4.5x to what ever lets just say 17x.

I want to be able to shoot up close and far.
What do you guys think I should get for a shtf optic?
If you aren't familiar with the benefits of either platform, and do not know what you want, then it doesnt matter since you dont have the skill to begin with.
Old 03-17-2011, 09:37 AM
Axles of Evil Axles of Evil is offline
Target Shooter
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 449
Thanks: 154
Thanked 353 Times in 189 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NHP1127 View Post
The European concept is to put both hands in the air and surrender..... LOL
Same thing for American progressives
The Following User Says Thank You to Axles of Evil For This Useful Post:
Old 03-17-2011, 10:31 AM
corndogggy's Avatar
corndogggy corndogggy is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,378
Thanks: 228
Thanked 4,628 Times in 2,532 Posts
Default

I just borrowed an ACOG, I didn't like it nearly as well as I had expected. The trick is that you HAVE to find your target with both eyes open. If you treat it like a normal scope it will be out of focus and look like a crappy red dot. When you do this you can find far-off targets quickly and in focus, but for closer shots, even like 50 yards away, with both eyes open I ended up superimposing the red chevron that my right eye saw over the landscape that my left eye was seeing. Which, makes your gun point in the wrong place. You're close, but you have to get close like this then close your left eye to get exact. Much slower than I had expected, although I admit I would probably get used to it.

So, I am just going to get something like a Leupold 2.5-8 then a second red dot.
Old 03-17-2011, 10:38 AM
Jeffrey's Avatar
Jeffrey Jeffrey is offline
Opinionated old fart.
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: South Carolina
Age: 47
Posts: 8,044
Thanks: 1,261
Thanked 6,983 Times in 3,331 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by corndogggy View Post
I just borrowed an ACOG, I didn't like it nearly as well as I had expected. The trick is that you HAVE to find your target with both eyes open. If you treat it like a normal scope it will be out of focus and look like a crappy red dot. When you do this you can find far-off targets quickly and in focus, but for closer shots, even like 50 yards away, with both eyes open I ended up superimposing the red chevron that my right eye saw over the landscape that my left eye was seeing. Which, makes your gun point in the wrong place. You're close, but you have to get close like this then close your left eye to get exact. Much slower than I had expected, although I admit I would probably get used to it.

So, I am just going to get something like a Leupold 2.5-8 then a second red dot.
The purpose is not that you "have" to use both eyes, but that you "can". It's always better if you "can" have both eyes open. Thats kinda behind the whole scout scope, forward optic concept - that you can see more than whats in the ocular. It may seem slower, but if you closed your left eye and found the target with right eye using a stopwatch, you will find that its actually faster with both open. True, it may seem "weird" having your eyes show different magnfication, but once you get used to it its more accurate and faster.
The Following User Says Thank You to Jeffrey For This Useful Post:
Old 03-17-2011, 11:53 AM
corndogggy's Avatar
corndogggy corndogggy is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,378
Thanks: 228
Thanked 4,628 Times in 2,532 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffrey View Post
The purpose is not that you "have" to use both eyes, but that you "can".
For me, I actually had to, not for target acquisition, as yes I could find the target either way, but unless I had both eyes open and focused on the target, the red chevron just turned into a fuzzy blur, and the black ballistic markings could not be seen. At that point I had to try to force myself to focus correctly, and it often took a very long time before the chevron was clear. I simply could not make myself focus correctly and quickly with one eye shut. This is different than a normal hunting scope. The issue I am speaking of is actually very similar to an Eotech, except with magnification, so it seemed even less natural.
Old 03-17-2011, 12:55 PM
Herd Sniper Herd Sniper is offline
American fearmaker
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 11,504
Thanks: 11,529
Thanked 19,914 Times in 6,770 Posts
Default

If you don't like the ACOG, don't get it or use it. Get something else that works for you. But if you do work with the ACOGs for awhile, you learn to use them like a regular telescope too. You have to train yourself on how to use something. Kind of like computers and typing. It takes time. But, by all means, get what you feel comfortable using.
Old 03-17-2011, 02:05 PM
corndogggy's Avatar
corndogggy corndogggy is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,378
Thanks: 228
Thanked 4,628 Times in 2,532 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herd Sniper View Post
If you don't like the ACOG, don't get it or use it. Get something else that works for you. But if you do work with the ACOGs for awhile, you learn to use them like a regular telescope too. You have to train yourself on how to use something. Kind of like computers and typing. It takes time. But, by all means, get what you feel comfortable using.
Like I said before, I fully admit I'd probably get used to it. I've simply used the same 3x scope exclusively for the past 25 years and I'm rather quick with it, I've shot a deer in mid air from 10 yards away as it jumped a fence with my old 3x. The way that you aim in that situation simply doesn't work with an ACOG, and I've done it so long that my first experience with an ACOG didn't turn out too well.
The Following User Says Thank You to corndogggy For This Useful Post:
Old 03-17-2011, 03:00 PM
Watchdog's Avatar
Watchdog Watchdog is offline
planner and prepper
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: AZ
Posts: 403
Thanks: 83
Thanked 192 Times in 115 Posts
Default

Other option to throw out there, which I use and like is an Aimpoint with the option of using a QD 3x magnifyer. I use the 2moa dot ML2 and have loved it since I got it. A buddy who does A LOT of competitive shooting (is sponsored and is damn good) uses an Aimpoint with a magnifyer so I gave it a shot and it is great. You can get mounts that are easy on/off, or flip to the side mounts and such. I can do most shooting out to 100 yards easy with the 2moa dot alone, and can add the magnifyer for further distances or if I want to "see better" what I am shooting at. I have 2 setups 1 running the Aimpoint ML2 with magnifyer and am in the process of building a new rifle that will use a designated marksman type 1X4 setup.
Old 03-17-2011, 06:52 PM
NavigatinCollapse's Avatar
NavigatinCollapse NavigatinCollapse is offline
Dirty or clean.Wet or dry
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,000
Thanks: 5,826
Thanked 1,870 Times in 858 Posts
Default

Trijicon TA 33 It's light, has great eye relief, thin and light. It's like a magnified Aimpoint T-1. It's obviously slower at close range but the magnification if adds is a good trade off. You can always offset an Aimpoint micro or Trijicon RMR for close engagements as well.
Old 03-17-2011, 07:23 PM
tomboyy's Avatar
tomboyy tomboyy is online now
Thread Killer !
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 2,696
Thanks: 6,064
Thanked 5,955 Times in 2,052 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffrey View Post
If you aren't familiar with the benefits of either platform, and do not know what you want, then it doesnt matter since you dont have the skill to begin with.
Great value added post !
Old 03-17-2011, 09:02 PM
MisterPX MisterPX is offline
Prepared
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: SE WI
Posts: 330
Thanks: 25
Thanked 144 Times in 99 Posts
Default

I prefer teh ACOG for teh aforementioned reasons. Both eyes open for upo close is not an issue, just don't spend time trying to focus in, that's what's getting you. See teh chevron/donut on target, pull trigger.

What hasn't been mentioned yet is teh durability factor. I have no problem throwing my acog across teh street to you, would you have a problem throwing your variable back to me?
Old 03-17-2011, 09:34 PM
Hud556's Avatar
Hud556 Hud556 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 56
Thanks: 30
Thanked 38 Times in 23 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterPX View Post
I have no problem throwing my acog across teh street to you, would you have a problem throwing your variable back to me?
I wouldn't go that far, I've seen alot of broken ACOGs. But I'm talking about a sample size of 300 or more. Good optic but I think their durability might be a little oversold...
Old 03-18-2011, 12:48 PM
MikeK's Avatar
MikeK MikeK is offline
Walking methane refinery
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 51
Posts: 48,172
Thanks: 86,020
Thanked 95,213 Times in 31,446 Posts
Awards Showcase
Outstanding Member 
Total Awards: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herd Sniper View Post
If you are in a SHTF situation, your need to shoot 600 meters isn't going to normally be that great. I seriously doubt if you will ever need to shoot 300 meters. Most of your combat shooting is done below 100 yards. The idea is get close and dump the ammo into your target at high speed. Over the years the Army has calculated that the overwhelming majority of infantry shooting distances involved ranges of 20 yards or less. For a number of years the European military forces had it figured that their average infantryman did not need to be able to shoot over 300 meters because they couldn't see that clearly that far.
That's military conflicts. Things can be completely different in a post SHTF civilian world. Since nobody really knows how it'll play out, keeping our options open, especially in areas with wide open spaces, makes the most sense to me.
Reply

Bookmarks



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Acog Inbound!! Indiana Camper Firearms General Discussion 20 01-17-2011 11:15 PM
Acog for an ar? Which ACOG? Sniper shooting made easy for a novice with one? FloridaState Firearms General Discussion 18 04-15-2010 10:36 PM
Scope Comparison ACOG vs 'generic' isopsycho Firearms General Discussion 17 10-19-2009 03:50 PM
ACOG anyone??? ryan679 Military Weapons Forum 4 04-11-2009 06:10 PM
ACOG Lighting Macguyver Disaster Preparedness General Discussion 2 03-24-2009 05:35 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright Kevin Felts 2006 - 2012,
Green theme by http://www.themesbydesign.net