Aimpoint/Magnifier or Acog TA11 for my purposes?

Tactical Gear Optics & Mounts
1

Howdy all. My first time posting here, and I’m hoping to get optics advice for my
16" carbine length AR15 that has a DD lite rail.

I do most of my shooting with a Troy BUIS right now from 50 to 100 yards. My local range only goes out to 100 yards, but there are other ranges nearby I may go to that go out to several hundred yards. That would normally suggest to me to get an Acog TA11, but I worry about CQB situations in the future. In the future, I may want to do competitions or even have to use the AR15 for home defense, and there’s another range nearby with targets at random distances from 5 out to 300 yards. I looked through a TA11 at a gunstore and was highly impressed with the eye relief, but acquiring targets at close range was incredibly awkward for me.

My other option was getting an Aimpoint ML3 with 2moa dot and an Aimpoint 3x magnifier. I have been unable to check out an Aimpoint magnifier in person so I’m hesitant to commit to this idea. While it seems to have the best of both worlds by allowing amazing CQB speed while allowing the option of the magnifier in a flip to side mount for more precise shots at greater distances. I’m just worried about the clarity/optical quality while looking through the magnifier. Granted… it’s like a $500-$600 (more than the ML3 itself!) magnifier, I was wondering if anybody had first hand comparison opinions. Seems like the entire setup wih Larue mounts would run around $1200.

The only other solution I can think of… would be to get an Acog set up top, then something like an Aimpoint T-1 in a 1:00 offset mount. This also seems like a great idea, and it’s probably faster to just flip the rifle to 1:00 then messing with the magnifier, but this does add an extra $700 to the Acog’s $1200.

On another note… if I do go the Acog route… what’s your take on the horseshoe reticle? I haven’t been able to check one out in person, but it seems like the circular shape of the horseshoe would give the donut reticle’s quick acquisition while the dot would give the chevron’s precision. Just not sure about all the windage hash marks as that many doesn’t seem necessary and just adds to clutter.

If I go the Aimpoint route… is the M4 even worth the price increase over the ML3? I was told the lowest brightness setting on ML3 made it compatible with night vision (I don’t have any NV… yet…:smiley: ) and that the M4 just has better battery life. Some say it’s more durable than the ML3… but… I thought the ML3 was already bombproof?

2

I’m a big fan of the RDS/magnifier combo. In my opinion it offers the best of both worlds for a standard carbine and the distances and uses you described. It also offers the ability to upgrade/change optics and mounts easier.

I’m not a huge fan of an ACOG. They have a great reputation for durability and offer several reticle and magnification options but I can’t use it up close and the eye relief on most models is not ideal for me. I also think the versatility for ANY fixed power scope is limited. There are some very good variable power scopes out that would fill your needs and be within the prices you’ve mentioned.

Others will chime in with their experiences and opinions.

3

I dont have comparison opinions as this is the only setup I’ve owned. Though for me it was the answer. I have an aimpoint twist mount and keep the 3x in my chest rig in a 40mm grenade bag. The 2moa is fine for me magnified or not. I also heard (read no proof) the 3x are zeiss glass, no one will confirm nor deny. Though I own zeiss bino’s and I can say the quality is close. I have yet had a chance to stretch her legs out passed 100m but look forward to the chance. I was sold on this when I had the chance to shoot a surefire sample rifle in this config, it was amazing and I had to have one. I got to shoot this rifle at the silenced shoot, http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=36173 events like this are so cool and I cant understand why there is always room in the lot. Dont come though cuz its less likely I’ll win a door prize if you do :wink:

4

I’ve tried the ACOG/T-1 off set mount combo. Until LaRue puts out an offset mount which will fit on the upper, I found myself looking for the red dot rather than through it with DD or TNVC rail mounts.

I’ve used 2 MOA M3/ML3’s with both Aimpoint and Po’ Boy magnifiers. T-1 or, better, H-1 (since you mentioned non-NV ML3) is better solution: less parallax issues, lighter weight, still bomb-proof. Dot size is a non-issue. (See FJB below.) Otherwise, get a 2 MOA C3 (unless you are diving) and put the money saved into an LT129.

rgrgordo posted on LF:
Here’s a few things to consider:
…
* Any type of small RDS–with the exception of the T-1–has over 80% inherent parallax in the eye box (viewing field) which is severely increased when a good/consistent cheek to stock weld cannot be repetitively replicated by the shooter

In addition, I have yet to see any engagement where I have been recently; the Korengal, the Waygul, Chowkay, Helmand or any where in N2KL, or P2KL; where a shooter has effectively engaged at 400-600 meters. I have repeatedly seen shooters completely mis-judge distances in those places because they don’t know how to use their ACOG stadia’s and reconcile a proper range estimate. I have seen shooters misjudge by being up to 300 meters off. Here’s an example of a conversation I had on Restrepo this past fall

* Me--"dude; what are you shooting at"
* Shooter--"that guy at 550 meters"
* Me--"how far did you say he was"
* Shooter--"550???"
* Me--"dude...that cat daddy is maybe 200-225 meters from us right now. You're shooting right over his head. That's why he keeps flinching; because your shots are snapping way above him. Drop to your 200 stadia and shoot that fucker"
* Shooter--"Oh O.K."
* Note--Shooter shoots
* Shooter--"Holy shit your right...fuckers dead!!!"

For my money, unless you pay the bill for a S&B SD, A Trijicon 1-4x24, a Leupold 1.5-4 (Vari X III) or my favorite, a NF NXS 1-4, you can’t go wrong with a T-1 on an LT 606 and an Aimpoint T-1 on an LT 649 Pivot Mount. I’ve been using that set-up now got two solid years and it works. It gives you the variability you need to hit at distances in that environment–up to 400-500 meters–while giving you the ability to accurately, effectively, quickly conduct CQB engagements. The only other option I see for that environment is what has been added to the SOPMOD Block II kit–The ELCAN Specter DR aka, the ECOS SU230. Just my two cents…
…
Oh yea…there’s one other major planning consideration…WEIGHT. The T-1/3X combination is considerably lighter than any other sight combo–including the SU230–which as those that have patrolled at altitude in that part of the world can tell you, is a major planning consideration

  Weight comparison:
* ACOG RCO/MCO TA 31F with any mounting option 16.1 oz-17.8 oz
* NF 1-4 NXS, S&B SD, Meopta 1-4x, Trijicon 1-4x, Leupold 1.5-4x, or any of those combos with the mounting option, 16.5 oz-18.2 oz
* SU230 17.3 oz
* Aimpoint T-1 on LT 606 and 3x on LT 649 Pivot Mount 10.7 oz

Just a thought…
…
[T]he Aimpoint by itself with no variability to magnify will loose out over the ACOG in that environment at long distance engagements. However, the Aimpoint T-1 w/the 3x magnifier gives a shooter the ability to switch between 3x and unity extending his ranges to 400 meters and allowing him to engage quickly and accurately at CQB ranges with both eyes open…
…
Parallax is a natural phenomenon that indicates the apparent, artificial and inherent shift of the aiming point in reference to the target–it exists in all optics and iron sights. There are only two aiming devices that don’t exhibit parallax–a passive or active laser and a digital reticle. This means that if the “shooter” doesn’t take into account his 6 fundamentals of shooting,

* stance/position
* grip
* sight alignment/sight picture
* trigger control/trigger squeeze
* follow through
* recovery

and attempt to always center the RD in the viewing field, then he’ll induce a shooting error–parallax. Therefore, if a sight. like the RDS I talked about which already has factory induced parallax in 80% of it’s viewing field , then there is already a hard to control shooting error inherent to the sight that the shooter has to work that much harder to overcome.
…
Should I find that I can’t optimally maximize my 6 fundamentals, the T-1 is less forgiving and allows me to more easily accurately engage targets…
…
Sorry again…I mean MORE forgiving…

Freddie Blish is spot on with the dot comparison. I tried it.

FJB posted on LF:

Regarding the size of the dot on the Micro T-1 the demo to dispell it’s “large 4 MOA” is to place the Micro T-1 on the same rail as a 2 MOA CompM4 or CompM3, so that people can see dots simultaneously. I place the Micro T-1 dot on setting 8 (setting for advertised 50,000 hours - 8760 hours = 1 year) and the CompM4 on setting 12 (setting for advertised 80,000 hours with AA Alkaline - longer for AA Lithium - oh AA Alkaline batteries in CompM4 or CompM4s sights are not having corrosion issues like another company’s…I have one with 2 1/2 years and no issues) or setting 7 for CompM3 (setting for advertised 50,000 hours). The T-1 dot will appear slightly larger than the 2 MOA CompM4 or M3. Turning the T-1 to setting 7 makes the size of the dot appear the same size as a 2 MOA. Hope this helps inquiring minds.

5

Red dot optics rock for everything from close range work in the dark out to the limit of effective hold-over (usually about 300 to 350 meters depending on zero). Sticking a magnifier behind one is great, but won’t do much for hold-over. What this comes down to is that the gun/optic combination are limited to 350 meters and in, and that adding the magnifier will simply let you see more detail from which to tune your shooting out to the effective range of the zero.

The TA11 rocks in competition. I have one on my run-n-gun rifle, and with a 100 meter zero and the application of at least a few fundamentals and wind adjustment I can put a bullet into a torso out to 600 meters with relative ease. They work great in daylight, my TA11G stands out like nothing I have used before that didn’t require batteries. The illuminated donut can work close-range targets with disturbing precision and speed. It is the epitome of what I want for competition at this point in my path. Make distinct note that I use the word competition, and a specific model and reticle (TA11G).

If I could only have one rifle and optic solution that I would use for everything, it would probably be an Aimpoint T-1 with a 3X in a LaRue pivot mount. It is the optic solution I would be able to apply at knife-fighting range out to 350 meters, which is exactly where I fight the most.

If I already had at least one “serious” gun and wanted to be competitive in the 3-gun world, I would have a TA11G or HG (which is exactly what I have, BTW ;))

As far as reticles go- I really like the H (it seems to have worked out like I hoped it would), but I am very happy with the donut, even though I didn’t initially think that I would like it. The donut really is something that you need to experience to appreciate.

Now, if Trijicon would get to work and release an Accupoint in the 1-6 range with a horseshoe, donut, or crosshairs with a BDC I might be singing a different tune ;).

6

How does the optical clarity of the Aimpoint magnifier compare to that of the Acog? Is it drastically different? Because the Acog’s was actually very very clear.

So there isn’t that noticeable of a difference between a 2moa and 4moa dot. The 2 advantages to the T-1 over the ML3 would be weight savings and better at dealing with parallax. (So if I look through an ML3 with my head slightly tilted/away from cheekweld, I won’t get a clear sight picture but I would with the T-1?) I’m assuming the T-1 is just as bombproof as the ML3, but the battery life is 1/4th of the ML3’s it seems.

I’m now just trying to justify the extra cost of the T-1 over the ML3 as weight savings seem to be less than 1/2 a pound.

Some other guys are telling me to not count out the Acog since it is apparently capable of better accuracy and at close range… one could literally just point the gun over the target and it’d be easier to acquire the sight picture that way.

7

Have you looked at the Trijicon AccuPoint TR24? That may be what you’re looking for.

8

From Grant’s site an ML3 w/LT129 is $566.00. And H-1 (non-NV, cheaper version T-1) and LT660 is $595.00.

A mere $29.00 difference for half a pound saved. At $58/lb., that’s less than what Obama pays for Kobe beef for his buds.:smiley:

Really?

9

Odd… it’s $625 on larue’s website for the T-1 and $552 for the ML3.
Which height would on need for the T-1 if I were to go that route?

10

What all does the T-1 sacrifice for the 1/2 pound weight savings? Just battery life?

I’m trying to find pros/cons of the ML3 and the T-1 so I can make the best decision possible. And the optical clarity looking through either of those with a magnifier should be similar to an Acogs, right?

11

Am I reading this correctly: you have a TA11 with a green horseshoe reticle? I thought there is (currently) only a TA11H and the horseshoe is red. Inquiring mind, etc.

12

Sorry for the ambiguity- I have a TA11G (green donut) on my game gun.