I currently have a borrowed Aimpoint CompM2 that I’m using on my LEO patrol rifle. I’m in the process of deciding which sight I should buy. I have it down to an Aimpoint, Aimpoint w/ magnifier, or an ACOG (probably a TA31ECOS w/ 7moa Doc).
I’m interested in hearing your recommendations between these options:
I have an Aimpoint M4 on one AR, and a ACOGTA01ECOS + Doc on another.
I prefer the ACOG + Piggyback because it’s more versatile, and I can see what i’m shooting at a lot better. Shooting at 100 or 50 yards with the Aimpoint is slightly more difficult, due to the smaller size of the target.
That being said, the Aimpoint M4 with it’s larger window is faster, and probably easier to use if I’m running and gunning.
I have not tried the Aimpoint + Magnifier, but I think that’s one of the more optimal rigs, as it allows zoom + no holdover parallax like an ACOG piggyback
For LEO use, a micro aimpoint would be perfect. I doubt you will have any need for an ACOG or a magnifier. Most of your work will be up close and personal. The micro is fine for long ranges up to 200 and more if you are good.
The last poster was right usually stuff we do in LE is up close and personal, however I run a magnifer and I got it after a call a few years ago. We had a guy who was in a nearby national park shooting rounds in the general direction of people with a handgun. He was 200 yards away from us. My department was backing up the Troopers who only had 2 guys in the area. Our dispatcher was able to talk the guy into giving up over his cell phone. But that was a long range situation and if he would have had a rifle he could have done some real damage. He was far enough away that a 3x magnifer or a good 1-4 power scope would have been worth its weight in gold. I was running an Eotech on my gun back then. One of our guys got his 7mm hunting rifle out. (which he has never qualified with at all major liability)
I used the incident to justify having the chief send me to a sniper school. But it shows you that while 99% of the time you don’t need magnificaiton sometimes you do. I feel its worth the extra weight to have a 3x magnifier on my gun. We may never have a call like that again. But then again we might.
To the OP. If you are in a job where more of your threats are likely to be close vs far I would go with an AImpoint and a magnifer. IF you are in a job where your threats are more likely to be far vs close then go with the ACOG and off set red dot.
Pat
I am not a cop.
I am a military dude and my recommendations are based off of my impression of sub 200 meter use of lethal force in daylight, twilight, and darkness, which I assume is most relevant to your needs.
I really like Aimpoints due to their durability and “always-on” caipability.
I like Aimpoints with 100 meter/yard zeroes for a 0 to 200 envelope.
I like 3X to 4X magnification for distances past 100 meters for identification, descrimination, and precision.
I do not like magnification for distances under 50 meters.
I like the T1 for it’s weight saving, but for me to get the most out of it I prefer it to be mounted just forward of the rear sight.
I like the Aimpoint C3 for it’s cost efficiency, though I do not own any. I use the M3 because I have a need to use it with NODs, which I bought before the M4 was out, and I would prefer to have an M4 over the M3 for simplicity’s sake. I like the
M4 sized Aimpoints mounted at the end of the receiver or cantilevered forward, which works better with magnifiers.
I like a 2 MOA dot in my Aimpoints, though the larger dot of the T1 is not a problem at the relevant distances/zero.
I do not like piggy-backed MRDs on top of ACOGs due to the excessive hold-over at close range and the “chin-weld” necessary to effectively employ them.
I do not like most MRDs due to their fragility, though the Trijicon RMR may be significantly more robust.
I find that most people will habitually drop into the ACOG instead of the MRD under stress until significant training time/repetition habituates chin-weld.
There are some ACOG options that are more suited to wider spectrum use than others due to reticle brightness and eye-relief requirements. I would lean toward the TA33 and TA11 optics with horse-shoe/dot or donut reticles. Still, these are inferior to a decent RDS at sub-50 ranges and in transient/inequal lighting conditions or with a white-light. More detail on these issues can be found in other threads.
Low powered variables (1-4, 1.1-4, 1-6, etc.) are a viable option, but are usually limited by battery life and cost, as well as a slower shift from 1X to 3X and vice-versa.
So, for rapid use in variable conditions, without a need to dive or use NODs, with a possible employment from 0 to 200 meters I would go with a C3 and a 3X.
M3s and M4s come up on the EE for significantly less than they cost new.
If you want to save some weight, the H1 (T1 without NVG settings) is an option, though at a bit more cost.
I think the ACOG with RDS on top is an abortion. Talk about taking a less capable optic and just putting expensive icing on the turd…
If I was going to use an ACOG (of the type that they attach the DR. to) I would put an Aimpoint T-1 on an offset mount out front instead. but even then, the ACOG + RDS solution is one for a situation where more of your rounds fired are at distance but you MIGHT have a need to use the rifle up close. I don’t think that’s very typical of an LE role.
I vote RDS with tip-over AND removable magnifier.
You are a civilian and entitled to your opinion. People have been taking out bad guys with this optic for over a decade now and it does a fine job. Most users of ARs do not have the time and money to learn proper hold overs for their weapon system and be able to repeat them under stress. The ACOG helps in this case immensely, the AIMPOINT all of the time crowd is mostly made up of people who do not need to shoot beyond 100m most of the time. The ACOG is most definitely not an abortion or a turd, it is a tool and it works fantastically at its intended role.
I called the ACOG with RDS on top an abortion, not the ACOG itself.
This isn’t about just the ACOG, it’s about the ACOG with the DR on top.
I’m not sure how the ACOG fixes holdover issues at close range. Yes, if you have a ranging reticule AND the firearm it’s designed for or have taken the time to learn the POI for each stadia line then the ACOG offers some advantage at distance, but I think I said that the ACOG was better suited to use at distance with limited use up close.
Learning to use an ACOG up close is a MUCH more intensive operation than learning to use an Aimpoint out to 200 yards (or more with a magnifier). Putting the DR on top does not resolve the problem.
BTW, the OP is a civilian too.
If I am not mistaken, once you put a magnified optic on your gun, you have to qual as a sniper?
Personally, I don’t see a real need for a magnifier on a LE Duty weapon.
To me battery life is very important (as you want to turn your optic on and leave it on). So look at the C3 or ML3. If running NV, look at the M3 then.
For ACOG’s, the TA44SG-10 is my favorite (for a 1.5X) and the TA33 series for magnified.
C4
Rob is talking about the ACOG with the RDS on top of it. This is a very poor idea as it puts the optic WAY to far over the bore line.
Rob (like me) is a fan of the ACOG.
C4
That would be highly dependent on the department. No department in my state has a regulation like that. Now pretty much all of the departments that I am aware of up here require you to qualify with your iron sights in addition to your optic. Every department can have different rules and regs. As for needing a magnifier for LEO work like I said before most of the time it would not be necessary but some times it can be very handy. It also depends on rather you are working in a rural or urban setting.
Pat
Even though I agree with rob_s, the H-1 on an LT-724 works well in close, particularly when we train to go to the Aimpoint first. I could not stand to sell the TA31F at market price. This made keeping it worthwhile. Best of both worlds. YMMV.
Based on much of the feedback here and on thoughts of how I would be deploying this weapon I’m leaning towards option #1 - an Aimpoint. I’ll need to give the specific model some more thought. One consideration that I had not included in my original list was a short dot option.
After reading the feedback in this thread:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=4209
From USMC03, “The Short Dot gives the end user almost the same capabilities as an Aimpoint and an ACOG in one optic.”
The S&B short dot would seem like an excellent option other than the $$$$
Take a look at the Trijicon TR24’s…sorta the best of both worlds…
The TR24 is a great scope. I wish they (Trijicon) would add one of their ACOG reticles to it. That is the only thing missing from an otherwise great optic. A bullet drop compensator. How hard could it be.
Pat
This gets a +1
Having an optic mounted on top of an optic makes a large offset from the bore. This reduces the offset while you have both unmagnified and magnified optics. I find that an ACOG will be better than any optic + magnifier. Might as well have both ACOG and red dot.
Agreed. I’ve fallen in love with their horseshoe reticle, particularly in green. Fingers crossed that that is a future option. I’d be all over that like stink on poo.
Yep. 3x, better eye relief, lighter, smaller… better than the standard ACOG IMHO.
I had the ACOG + T1 in the Larue mount as shown above. I didn’t like it. I sold the T1. The ACOG (TA11) remains on my gun.
Why?
I think having two possible sights on a gun slows you down. When you mount the gun in a dynamic environment (for me this is hunting), you hestitate because your brain has to decide “which sight will I use?” This adds an addition decision path into what should just be a situation where you mount the gun and shoot. I found this happen over and over again hunting jackrabbits. Usually, I am walking in the desert and they unexpectedly take off just a few feet away. You get startled and are trying to get on target as the rabbit runs in and out of your line of sight behind bushes. This has many of the same characteristics of a real SHTF scenario … surprise, dynamic movement, target obstruction. Having two sighting choices makes things much worse.
After I sold it, I was doing some research and learned my experience was not new or revolutionary. It is explained in Hicks Law.
Hick’s Law, started out as a paper written in 1952 and simply set up an equation that states the mind takes time to decide between options. For the record, the equation is TR+a+b{Log2 (N)}. Another famous police trainer mentioning Hick’s law said:
“Lag time increases significantly with the greater number of techniques.”
The bottom line is that I find the ACOG as fast as the T1 up close. In situations where I can’t see the reticle, I will point shoot.
P.S. This same effect also applies to having a 3X magnifier. Your brain goes through the same limiting decision loop … “magnifier in or out?” This slows you down.
It must be pretty damn hard, because people have been asking for it for years.