trijicon ACOG TA33G-H VS. Aimpoint COMPM4s

Tactical Gear Optics & Mounts
1

Maybe this is a dumb question, and since I’m new, I may not fully understand. I have narrowed down my optics choice to the Aimpoint compm4s and the trijicon ACOG TA33G-H. One has magnification and one does not. I see many people using the trijicon, how would you use it in a CQC situation? I would use this as home defense since I am alone and not in-fear of rounds going through walls or hitting anyone that does not belong in the house.

However, I will mostly use my rifle at the range or killing coyotes on my property, which magnification would come in handy. I also plan on purchasing a gen 2 NV device, probably a ATN with magnification, nothing fancy, one that would run around $1200 down the road. How would each of these work with the NV scope? I have handled both and like both, wish I had the cash for both, but I do not.

Question is, what would sever me better?

2

A few random thoughts…

You have hit on one of the principal problems with ARs, and that is that people try to make one gun do too many things. Whether out of economic limitations, legal limitations, or just plain self-imposed limitations. A “home defense” AR, assuming you mean indoor use, IMHO would look nothing like a coyote-popping AR.

If you’re limited by budget (which, based on the price of the optics you’re considering I would say is not an issue) then it’s understandable why you’re trying to do what you’re doing. In that case I would suggest a less expensive Aimpoint like the 2 MOA C3, and add a magnifier to it when you want some magnifications for popping coyotes.

However, with training and practice the compact ACOG can be a CQB optic. The main complaint with them is low-light visibility of the reticule, which the green is supposed to address to some degree. Since the optic relies on ambient light to “power” the reticule, and you have little to none at 03:30 in your hallway, and the tritium glow is all but non-existent, it can be tough to find the dot in those circumstances. But the magnification issue can be overcome, it just takes training to learn how and practice to keep up the skill(s). Start with shooting with both eyes open.

3

The discussion of ACOGs in low light generally includes stating it’s poor low light performance.

I’m curious how bright of a recticle people would like. My amber TA 33 is presenting a clear, sharp and obviously amber chevron in total darkness at this time. My TA01 presented a bright red recticle in total darkness.

How much more brightness do folks seek? The ACOGs level of low light brightness seems to allow good target discrimination behind the recticle vs being so bright it it obscurred - which can be an issue with battery powered optics cranked up to high (ie default setting on an EOTech).

4

I guess everyone’s eyes/situation are different. I’ve owned two compact ACOGs (1.5x triangle and 3x chevron, both red), and tried a few fullsize indoors as well (can’t recall model numbers, but amber & red). If I stood still and tried to see the reticule I could make it out, but if moving quickly, searching, and “engaging” (dryfire) “targets” it disappeared on me.

To be clear this wasn’t about total darkness as I’ve never seen total darkness in any house I’ve lived in for the last 10 years. There is always SOME ambient light, even if it’s just the light generated by my Surefire, although that typically makes the problem even worse as all I see at that point is a black reticule and on dark targets or backgrounds it vanishes.

Then there’s the issue at the other end of the spectrum where a very bright and sunny day will cause the reticule to wash out. I will generally put tape over the fiber optic tube when zeroing to get a sharper tip.

I ran compact ACOGs for quite some time in my matches, and in that environment they were PERFECT. We went from evening light at around 7:00 pm to the stadium lights once it got dark, and in those lighting conditions the ACOG reticule worked fantastically.

5

Rob, I agree 100% with what you are saying, and yes, price is an issue. I cannot afford to buy 2 ar’s, and 2 different scopes. But as many say on here, buy once cry once. If a new guy like me is coming up with this situation, one has to wonder why Trijicon does not address this issue, and not with the tri-power. ( I think I would rather have a bushnell than that thing).

While searching the forums until 2am, I found where someone put a mini aimpoint off to the side, which may work for me, but does add some weight. I also looked at the trijicon RMR, but to me looks like a total abortion on-top of an Acog, and I would imagine would never set a correct zero being so high up. Not to mention $500? Are they serious? :rolleyes:

I think the Aimpoint was made for a soldier in mind to be ready at a moments notice without worrying about turning a light on, which I commend them for that.

Both have distinct advantages, but I have, after many sleepless nights thinking about this,:stuck_out_tongue: decided on the Acog. I think a offset Burris fast fire will work for me at a later time.

Thanks for the replies, they are much appriciated. :wink:

6

I know you say you’ve already decided, but did you ever consider something like this?

http://trijicon.com/user/parts/products1.cfm?PartID=673&back_row=0&categoryID=5

7

On my last AR, about 5 years ago, I had that, maybe it was the 3x9 version, but I hated the reticule on it. I seriously considered the Burris XTR 1-4. IMO that is an awesome scope if you can not afford the nightforce version.

The other issue is that I want to use NV, and I do not think that would work to well with it, I could be wrong, I have not had the time to look into it, but that reticule, a huge triangle on a skinny line, yuk.:smiley:

8

I’ve been exceedingly pleased with my Aimpoint M4s w/ Magnifier combination. I use this for my LE patrol rifle where CQB ranges would be expected.

9

Big fan of the compact ACOGs, owned 5 of them. They were okay indoors, but I found the reticles too big for outdoors, so I eventually had to let them go. Plus, the Larue mount places the optic too low if you have a fixed front sight.

Had a chance to try my TA31G in a shoothouse. If you attempt to run the ACOG as an OEG, depending on your instructor, your results will range from combat accurate (missed the desired impact area, but still somewhere on paper) to unacceptable (within the desired impact area, but still too sloppy for a static training environment).

Eyes vary, and for my eyes, outside of 3 yards, using the 4x ACOG as an OEG will result in shots outside the desired impact area. Absolutely unacceptable, and as such, I have always applied the BAC correctly, scanning with unmagnified view, shooting with the magnified view. This allows me to always get my hits.

Theoretically, you could train yourself to compensate for the OEG offset created by your eyes by changing your point of aim (aiming for the shoulder to hit COM), but you do not always get a full frontal view, and you’re adding an additional step.

For me, utilizing the ACOG properly, I was able to get the hits I wanted, shooting on the move, in a static training environment. However, I have found that indoors, if I am moving and the target is moving as well, then all bets are off. It’s too hard for me to shoot in magnified mode since my scanning eye is busy tracking the target and the result is unacceptable accuracy.

In the end, I found I had to focus too much on both shooting and learning, so I switched back to my Aimpoint so I could forget about the shooting aspect and just focus on the learning.

Good luck!

10

Double post

11

OK,
I have a little experience with what you are attempting to do with NV.

I own a pvs 14 that I use with a standard “skull crusher” head mount.

I did not want to invest in a designated NV weapon sight of the same quality so I did some experimenting on what can I use with a head mounted NV.

I have tried it with my TA 33 and it does not work well. The focus is off unless you adjust the 14’s focus to match the 33. In which case you are blind as you are now out of focus for normal viewing. Even then, you have a real problem with eye relief, especially during recoil and a very restricted field of view as well. Also, your point of aim will be off considerably. Something to do with looking through a magnified optic with an NVG. Experts please chime in.

My TR-21 works better. It has sufficient eye relief to fit if you are careful and don’t blade to the rifle. Turned down to 1.25 X and with the scope’s ocular focus adjusted to match the 14’s focus it is usable out to about 50 yds. I suppose a true 1X like the TR24 would work better. I have hunted successfully at night with this set up.

My Aimpoint T1 is the best. Works exactly the same as under non NV conditions. You just use a NV setting on the T1. Plenty of eye relief, night vision settings for the dot. No magnification so focus is not an issue. I keep my 14 focused for whatever distance I am looking at. I can scan with the 14 in the head mount and rapidly engage targets very accurately out to as far as I can ID them with the 14. Practicing on the indoor range with a rimfire converter is great fun! I get the same accuracy as I do with the T1 without NV.

A laser designator of any kind will also work but may be illegal for hunting in many states. If you go this route, use a red laser as it is less bright on the target. a green one will look like an anti aircraft search light from WW II![/QUOTE]

12

i like both! i had a ta31f acog and currently have a aimpoint c3. for a primary range/hunting rifle the acog is great, they are beautifully made and enjoyed mine very much. i wouldnt worry about it affecting your home defense needs because you most likely will be 10 yards or less from the threat (super close quarters) and would be point shooting anyway. i sold my acog because i felt it was overkill for the distances i shoot (100yards or less, my state sucks). i like the versatility of a aimpoint or eotech with a magnifier for about the same amount of money. but if i were to get another acog it would be the ta33g-h, seems to be the best all around set-up of size, weight, magnification and speed. if your gonna do the aimpoint whats your reason for wanting to spend the big bucks on the m4? this boggles my mind why so many guys spend the extra 2-300 dollars on this model when its not in reality any better than the ml3, c3 or the micro. in my opinion and plenty others on this site, its a waste of hard earned $$$ unless you are a scuba diving troop who needs the water depth capabilities of the m4 models. i myself would put the extra money toward a good mount and some ammo to try out the new sight! to each their own i guess, some guys just have to have it.

13

Pulled the trigger on the aimpoint today. I went to cabelas yesterday and took an acog to the back room with a very dim light source as some had suggested, the tritium was a joke, I could hardly see it.

I had been watching a few m4s’s on ebay, did some research on the seller who had a very low price of $599 with free shipping. I checked him out with his last 5 sales of eotechs and aimpoints and all said it was good experience and authentic stuff.

Should be her Friday, just in-time for the range on Sunday.