I’ve been thinking about this concept for awhile now. I’ve found a few post of guys that tried it including Alaskapopo. Then, I came across this quote:
If you’re going to run an offset MRDS anyway, why not gain the clarity and ruggedness of an ACOG?
I was actually putting a TA33G-H and an RMR in my cart through a pro-deal site when I called Larue to ask about a mount (stupid pro-deal site doesn’t have the Bobro for the TA33 or the RM33 for the RMR. I believe the gentleman that answered said his name was Sheldon (after a quick Google search, it’s probably Sheldon Carruth) and he mentioned that he was a big 3-gun guy. He told me not to waste my time with that setup and that a 1-4 was the way to go.
Now, I’m not looking to shoot 3-gun. I also don’t have $2K+ to spend on a Short Dot or the Swarovski he recommended. I want to respect the opinions of guys like him, F2S, and others that recommend the 1-4. At the same time, it seems like if you don’t pony up for S&B or Swaro, you’re missing the boat.
In that case, is the TA33+RMR a viable alternative? The best alternative? Even maybe a better alternative?
The rifle in question is a 16" LW middie. I’m trying to have just a bit of magnification for precision, but still have the opportunity to be quick up close. I just took the Nightforce 2.5-10 off the gun and sold it because it was heavy and slow up close.
Anything else I’m missing? Input please and thank you!
I don’t think you’re going to get an answer that meets your needs. We all shoot different, so the bets bet is to beg or borrow others set ups to try. On my SPR clone I have an offset RMR mounted in a LaRue ring mount. It’s pretty slick for what it is. My primary need wasn’t for being able to do both short and far well, but rather be able to excel at range yet save my ass up close if need be. I also tried a 1-4 and it worked well, just didn’t have the magnification my POS eyes needed or wanted. I’m more high drag-low speed than anything, but up close it made no noticeable difference whether shooting the Aimpoint or the 1-4.
As far as 1-4’s go, you don’t have to drop close to $2k on a short dot or Swarovsky to be functional. There a very good alternatives for under a grand. Heck SWFA plans a 1-6 under $1k (barely so, but still technically under)
Find a shooting buddy and borrow their shit to test. Or take the plunge one way, but don’t have a kanipshion should you have to sell some stuff to fund another buy.
There is a bit missing from what Sheldon said. For starters most three gunners are shooting Tac Optics class the most popular by far where 2 optics is not allowed. Open shooters like me most often do run a low power variable like the Swarovski and an off set red dot. The low power variable is great but the off set red dot does give you some advantages in certain situations. The down side to running both in real life is cost and a bit more weight. Its really going to boil down to what you want. A TA 33 with an off set RMR is going to be a very compact package that will do a lot for you. A low power variable will give you more flexability due to the greater magnification but at the cost of more weight and expense. What gun are you going to put this on again?
Pat
Meopta ZD 1-4. . . . I bought it. The reticle is fantastic. Clear glass; daylight illum. Under $1k.
After I’ve run it through its paces I will consider the ACOG/offset RD. But for a 1-4 I don’t see how you can beat the ZD, even spending 2.5 times as much.
If Meopta sold their ZD tactical LR scopes to the public, they would have another chunk of my money.
The gun is a 16" DD LW middy’. The cost is a non-issue because of the deal I’m getting. The acog/rmr combo is lighter than a 1-4 and the acog glass should be better than a comparably priced 1-4, right?
The more I deal with optics the more I believe that personal preference and experience are the real driving factors in what people want and are willing to pay for.
Personally, I like a Mil Based reticle with thick outer cross-hairs in a 1-4x or 1-6x with sufficient illumination to clearly stand out when the background is dark, with good eye-relief. I don’t like ancilliary aiming devices that require a different presentation than my primary sighting device. They are preferences based off of my experience and my application.
I am not a fan of the Acog line in general, though there are some that I prefer over others. That being said, if I had to use a TA01 or TA31, I would rather have either a piggybacked or offset MRD to compliment the COG than not to. That doesn’t mean that ACOGs, or piggybacked/offest MRDs are useless garbage, just that I have a preference that equates to better performance to me, in the circumstances that I use my guns.
So, I would recommend that you investigate why certain people have the preferences that they do, along with what else they tried, compared to how you want to use your carbine.
FWIW, I haven’t seen any 1-4s of comparable price to a TA31 that had insufficient optical quality to go head to head with it.
I am removing as much personal preference from the discussion as possible.
Its hard to give a simple answer on glass quality as things vary from manufacture to manufacture. That said ACOG glass quality is good in my opinion. If its a light weight I think the said TA 33 with RMR would make a good package if you want to keep it as light as possible. I will say I have never owned better glass than the Swarovski Z6i but it is expensive. In your shoes however for a light weight gun I would go with the TA33 with the RMR. I would have my Noveske N4 back up patrol rifle set up like that if not for the cost. I currently have a T1 on it with a magnifier in a flip to side Larue mount. I got a great deal on the set up used. But I hate the short eye relief and limited field of view on the 3x magnifier.
pat
Most 1-4s are in the 16-18oz range; add an LT104 at 7oz and you have a hefty piece of kit.
OTOH an ACOG is 9oz plus a 4oz mount. BUT then you add an offset mount and a T-1. . . . I do not know the exact weight of these, but would a total of 6oz be reasonable guess?
So an ACOG (TA31) and a T-1 gets you back up to within 3-4oz of my 1-4. . . . . . or am I figuring something wrong?
You’re not far off. The RMR weighs 1.2 oz vs the 3.0 oz T-1. The TA33 weighs 11.64oz with the mount. A DD 1-oclock mount weighs 1 ounce. That’s a total optics pkg weight of 13.84 oz. That’s pretty light for what it is. Especially compared to a 17-19oz 1-4 plus a 7 oz mount.
I’ve tried the T1+magnifier and didn’t like it. The dot distorted through the magnifier no matter how much I adjusted the stupid screws on the magnifier. The T-1 by itself is perfect, and I still plan to use it on my MK18. Just looking for a little magnification on this gun.
I guess I’ll give the ACOG/RMR thing a try. I don’t see anyone saying it’s absolutely stupid. If it doesn’t work, I’ll sell it and try something else.
FWIW, a bit ago, I experimented with a TA33 (7.62X51 version) / RMR setup on an M14 out of a perceived need at the time for a 7.62 rifle that was at home in the sub-200M arena.
I honestly didn’t like it. Found the RMR to be pretty useless, as the TA33 was just about equally fast and allowed a standard presentation of the rifle. The RMR was just baggage. Had the ACOG been a shitty eye-box 4X model, the RMR might have had a purpose.
That’s the thing that I learned…if you’re going to use an offset RDS, and put in the training time to be effective with it, you might as well mount a primary optic that is different enough (read: higher magnification), to take advantage of your ability with the offset RDS.
When we talked initially I was under the impression that you’d be alternating between the NF 2.5-10 and a T1 based on the kind of shooting you’d be doing. Now it looks like you want a do it all, single setup solution. I’m not telling you anything you don’t know by saying there’s no free lunch.
As F2S said, we all have our own purposes for using the optics we do. For me it’s 1-X variables: keep it on 1X during movement for what’s called “chance contact” at short range…once contact is established or you’re set in a static position, it gets flipped to 4X for better target ID. If your application sounds nothing like that, then what works for me may or may not work for you.
Without an intimate knowledge of how and why you shoot, it’s hard to come up with a solution. All I can tell you is that a TA33 / RMR combination probably isn’t it. I’d strongly suggest trying to put hands on a Swaro 1-6, Leupold 1-6, or an SWFA 1-6 when it comes out if the two prior options are too expensive before buying an ACOG / RMR. You may not like the 1-X optics at all; not everybody does. But from what I’ve seen in your progression / experimentation / our PM’s (just now with the knowledge that you want a single setup), I believe that 1-6 will be your best bet.
ETA: I’m a little perplexed at how glass quality has taken a central place in the discussion of low magnification optics. While a somewhat valid issue, it is far from being important or central to the discussion at the 4X magnification level. The difference in optical quality / performance between the various optics we’ve been discussing will not make one iota of a difference in any regard at these magnification levels. The issue becomes slightly more important at 10X and above, but IMO is still a pretty overrated factor…but that’s a whole new can of worms.
I don’t agree at all on optical quality. I can tell a huge difference in the quality of my Swarovski vs my TR24. I am not saying the TR24 is poor but its not as sharp. The Swarovski is much better as the light goes away and it also better at long range because the image is sharper and more defined. There is no set magical magnification level where crap glass is ok. In fact if you have good class you don’t need as much magnification. I can shoot nearly as well out to 600 with my Swarovski on 6x as I can with my Nightforce 2.5-10 on 10x. As for running the TA33 fast at close range. Some people can. Rob S does well with his from what he has posted. However not everyone can run magnified optics fast up close. This is especially true when shooting while moving. I found I could shoot the TA33 nearly as fast in static drills but when you introduced moving, scanning and shooting it fell down for me when compared to 1x optics with red dots being the best at this. I think a off set red dot is a good tool to have regardless if your running an ACOG or a low power variable.
Pat
Agreed, I honestly don’t see a dramatic difference between my S&B or my NF until I get above 12-15x. It’s once you’re talking about 1200+ that super high end optically quality REALLY starts to shine.
My point was not that no difference in quality exists, rather that at the 4X magnification level, there are a whole host of other considerations that should take precedence over optical quality, which has an extremely marginal role at 4X. We’re not talking $20 Tasco scopes here…at the level of quality and price point we’re discussing, I say again that optical quality is not a deciding factor in a low magnification optic…it will not make one iota of difference in placing rounds on target at or around 4X.
You’ve undoubtedly got enough experience and knowledge to disagree reasonably, so there’s something to be said for that and your opinions certainly have merit, but you would be in the minority of experienced shooters who I know that would say the arguably minuscule difference in clarity between two relatively high-end optics makes a substantive difference at less than 10X.
As for what you said about the TA33, it’s true that not all shooters can run it quick, making an offset RDS desirable. But if you require an offset RDS because you can’t run the TA33 fast, then why limit yourself to 3X if you’re not able to be fast with it anyway? Might as well be slow with a little more magnification than 3x on the primary if you have an offset RDS, right?
Hence:
“That’s the thing that I learned…if you’re going to use an offset RDS, and put in the training time to be effective with it, you might as well mount a primary optic that is different enough (read: higher magnification), to take advantage of your ability with the offset RDS.”
Now - the final solution that you propose is great if the money is there. A 1-4/6 with an offset RDS is one of the most versatile and capable combinations for obvious reasons. No argument from me there. But if the money is not there, the 1-4/6 by itself is still a viable solution.
The argument for a TA33 is the compact size and its one of the better ACOGs when it comes to usablity due to more generous eye relief than the TA31 models. The only ACOG I prefer for actual use is the TA 11 but its considerably heavier and the OP is trying to keep the weight low. I do understand the argument for a more powerful main optic. I run a 2.5-10x Nightforce with a Aimpoint R1 in an off set mount on my patrol rifle. But everyone has different needs. I also agree that a 1-4 1-6 by itself is viable. I just appreciate the bit of an advantage in certain situations an off set red dot can give me. With any ACOG you should run a off set red dot in my opinion from the simple fact there are plenty of lighting situations where the ACOGS fiber optics are not working and where its not quite dark enough for the tritium to be seen. The TA33 with an off set red dot is a light weight fairly versatile option that can take you from 0 to 500 yards.
While I understand what you are saying that at 10x and above you can appreciate good glass better because the differences are easier to see. You can still see the differences at lower magnification levels. I really notice it at longer ranges and in failing light at least with my Swarovski compared to my TR24.
Optics choices are highly personal and depends on ones needs or wants. I just think for a light weight carbine a TA33 with an off set micro red dot has some merit. Take care.
Pat
My suggestion would be to buy the TA33, get a used one if you can, and try it by itself for awhile. Get a lens cap you can flip up/down and default to the down position until you need to engage at distance. Indoors/close range keep the cap down.
I’ve been using the TA33 on and of since it first came out. AFAIK I bought one of the first ones Grant got in-stock. I am a big fan of this optic, but even I will tell you that there is a bit of a re-learning curve if you put it down for awhile and shoot only 1x RDS.
Either way, I think we’d need to know the total price you’re paying for the two optics and mounts in order to be able to give some idea of what comparable 1.x-Y options you may have.
Again, thanks so much for sharing your experience. I value it immensely; as I do all those who have taken the time to post here. I think that perhaps my perception changed after handling, mounting, and shooting the Nightforce.
I found the eyebox to be VERY small and unforgiving, even @ 2.5X. If I were in a static position only, it would be workable, but even shooting the rifle offhand took a second to correct head position and achieve a full sight picture.
I got caught up a little bit in trying to push the rifle into more of a precision/sniper role. It’s not. It has a 16" LW CHF barrel because I like it that way. On the surface the whole long range precision thing seems appealing, but I really have no practical use for it and I don’t have the money to play at it. I owned a nice Rem 700 rig for 4 years and it only made it out to the range twice, and once or twice for deer hunting (a heavy bastard to be carrying around the deer woods, by the way). After handling the rifle with the Nightforce, I realized I was trying to turn the nice, light carbine into the big, heavy precision rig it is not.
So then, what do I want and how do I shoot?
I’m within 20 minutes of two 25yd indoor ranges and within about 40 minutes of a State DNR-run 75yd outdoor range. The outdoor range is not conducive to movement, etc, but they’re fairly lenient regarding rate of fire, etc, so I can shoot something like a 1-5 drill and practice strong/weak side transitions. I also deer hunt and would like to explore predator (coyote) hunting. As far as HD goes, primary is a M&P 9mm/EVO9 combo. That may change when my stamp comes back for my MK18 (should be around June). The T-1 I currently have will go on that.
So that leaves the 16" LW middy as an “outside” rifle. Deer hunting, predator hunting (200yds and in), social collapse, natural disaster, etc. I live in a subdivision, but the lots are bigger, and beyond my subdivision the surrounding area is pretty rural (cows, etc). Mountains are 40min North. Some magnification would be nice for better shot placement, target ID, etc. However, not so much magnification that it becomes a “sniper” rifle. It still needs to be quick and fast closeup or on moving targets. For instance, from a hunting perspective, Rob has shared his experience with a hog that was moving through brush. he could easily see the hog with the naked eye, but through the scope, he could only see fur. This was with his TA33 that he runs so well up-close with an occluded front lens. Hence, either an offset 1x dot, or the 1.1x end of a variable would be highly beneficial.
I do agree with your point about having higher magnification on the primary optic if you’re running an offset dot, but again, not trying to turn this into a “sniper” rifle. I’d guess based on my extensive time in the outdoors hunting, etc, that my need would be around 70% non-magnified, 30% magnified. That sounds like a good application for a T-1+magnifier, and I’d agree. However, I tried it and didn’t like it. The magnifier distorted the dot no matter how I adjusted it. Also, even though you gain magnification, you still have no hold points. If I wanted to shoot something beyond about 200yds, I’d need a hold point of some kind.
In conclusion, I agree that a 1-6 sounds like the ideal solution. Some sort of a holdover reticle would round out the pkg perfectly. However, I don’t have $2400 for the Swarovski. I also don’t have $1995 for the Leupold. (If the Leupold would be $1500, that would probably be the answer.) So that leaves the Super Sniper. Folks like Alaskapopo and Belmont that have lots of experience with glass turn their noses up at the SS. Then again, A0cake and F2S, both of whom have actively served in mil war zones, run and recommend the SS. I guess it couldn’t hurt to try.
Basically, I have $1200 to play with. Again, for what I paid, I should be able to recoup my costs and get into something different if need be.
Hopefully this info can help you guys further advise. Thanks again for all the input thus far. I really feel like I’m learning something and coming toward a solution.