Trijicon TA11 ACOG, talk me out of it.

Tactical Gear Optics & Mounts
1

Some of you that have been here awhile have seen me dick around with this stupid rifle more than I care to admit. It was a 16" DDLW midlength with a RISII rail. I just sold the barrel out of it and intend to replace it with a 14.5" Socom barrel from either Colt or BCM (whichever I can find first). The latest iteration of the rifle had it wearing a T1/LT660 as the primary with the option to swap to a Zeiss 3-9x40.

After the barrel swap, I was considering getting a 1’0clock mount for the T-1 and running the 3-9 as primary with the T-1 as secondary. However, I don’t think I’d be happy with that. After trying the following optics on the rifle, I think I have my wants narrowed down:

T-1 w/3X magnifier
T-1 alone
Nightforce 2.5-10
TA33 HG ACOG
Eotech
Leupold Mark IV 1.5-5

Here’s my priority list for optics for this gun:
Some Magnification for target ID and precision (not super concerned about long range)
Holdover points (preferred) or turrets for range compensation
Daytime bright reticle
Large field of view
Low light illuminated reticle
Somewhat compact and lightweight

These priorities are based on my uses of:
Coyote and Deer hunting with max shots out to 250 yds
Banging steel out to 600
Whatever CONUS fighting scenario you can dream up that is outside. (If HD is the primary role, I have an SBR with a T-1. Furthermore, that T-1 is also on a Larue LT660 so I can swap it over to this gun if I have to and perform a rough zero with irons co-witness.)
Local carbine matches and potentially some 3-gun just for practice.

I’ve looked through a TA11 and seemed to like it at the time, but that was 3 years ago. Based on what I’ve read, the TA11 seems to be the best of the ACOGs along with the TA33. I had a TA33 and didn’t like the narrow FOV and tiny reticle. It reminded me of my T-1/magnifier setup and didn’t do much for me. I’m hoping the larger FOV of the TA11 will be better along with the 3.5x magnification. I’m planning to go with the horseshoe reticle in red as I feel it will stand out better than green and be a better crossover to the red dot in my T-1.

The shortcomings of the ACOG, as I understand it, are the fixed magnification. However, not requiring it to be in a room-clearing role should fix that. The BAC should help. Beyond that, it has great glass, is rugged, durable, no batteries. BDC is calibrated to a certain load, I understand, but it should still be torso-accurate even if it’s not dead-on.

I’m sure the first question will be, “why not a 1-4 or 1-6?” Well, besides the cost, weight, and battery life, there’s the fact that none of them really “do-it-all” yet. The ones that come closest cost twice what the TA11 does and still aren’t perfect.
Now, shoot some holes in this theory for me. Otherwise, I think I’m gonna sell my second T-1 and replace it with the TA-11.

Thanks!:smiley:

2

Shit I wont talk you out of the TA11. Its a fabulous optic. I decided on a TA33 over it simply for size/weight since I run an offset T1 with it.

The TA11 is probably the best do all ACOG made.

3

Since you already have an SBR setup to do work, there isn’t really anything preventing you from going with the TA11 for your stated purpose. They do well in daylight in 3-gun type action shooting.
The biggest hits are the size and weight, but that’s really only in comparison to the other ACOG lines. The TA33 is, in my opinion, somewhat “better” than the 11, though the 11 has a better field of view. Since you tried the 33 and the thing you didn’t like was the FOV then the 11 might be what you are looking for. I prefer the horseshoe or crosshair reticles. The red reticles are a bit more sensitive to lighting conditions, but if you tape off 1/2 to 3/4 of the fiberoptic they are pretty usable for action shooting. I personally use a piece of innertube cut to fit.

I just have to say, for the $$ I would push you toward a middle of the road 1-4 or 1-6, but if the low end of the magnification range isn’t a factor, then the COG will save you some weight.

Highly recommend replacing the OEM mount if you go down the ACOG route.

Don’t get sucked into the “BAC” BS. It’s pretty much just saying that a reticle that the eye quickly picks up will be easier to rapidly aim with, and can be accomplished with any purpose-built reticle. No mangified optic is going to be optimal for interior work in the conditions that real enclosure clearing/fighting are done in. If it’s a fun/game/whatever gun, that’s cool; embrace it for what it is and don’t feel compelled to justify it as a “fighting/serious/social” gun. They can all be used as an implement of interpersonal conflict resolution, but don’t let that drive the fun out of it.

4

+1 on the TA-11. Happy shooting.

5

Jack, I highly value your input and appreciate your taking the time to post. In fact, prior to posting this thread, I did a search for all of your posts in the optics forum. One of your posts led me to choose red as the reticule color over green because you said it was bolder, especially in low light.

So, with a Larue mount on the TA11, I’m spending about xxx. What would be your preferred and recommended 1-4 for the same budget? If I were to go variable, I would hope to have an Aimpoint-like red dot on 1x and a mil based reticule for elevation holds on 4x. The only ones I know of that work like that are the USO DFP and the Short Dot, which are both double or more the budget.

Maybe I’m missing something though. Thanksil in advance for your reply.

6

The red is more obvious in more environments, but it comes at the cost of bloom. The bloom is less of an issue with the horseshoe/dot and crosshair reticles, and reduction of light input by taping/covering the fiber-optic does a lot to make it more acceptable. I used a TA11 with green crosshair for a while, and liked it quite a bit. I did not, however, have an opportunity to compare it side by side with a red crosshair. The green seemed less sensitive to light input, as in: did not need as much of the fiberoptic to be covered to cut down on bloom. To be candid, right now I have a TA01NSN, and it is probably my favorite reticle for its purpose, however, it is aided by a piggy-backed RMR, which is really the primary sighting device. No, it is not my go-to or preferred setup, it’s a combo that is used by people that I work with and have to mirror their gear. Anyway, that’s kind of a tangent, so I’ll get back to the actual question.

For $850, given your purpose, I think that you are going to be closer to your desired performance with the TA11 than most other options. Considering that a mount is going to have to be added to anything else (and that while not optimal, the included COG mount is usable) I would have to find a $700 low powered variable to meet your budget. The SWFA 1-4 is about as low as I would go with a recommendation, and they run $800 bare, are heavier (even before a mount), a narrower field of view (though not by much), and is not as robust (COGs are damn solid, gotta give them that). If it is primarily going to be used at highest magnification, you really aren’t getting much return on your $$ and weight.
If you are willing to open your budget (and $850 is a pretty smokin’ deal on the 11) to $1500-$2k (which is not an insubstantial sum, I know), you can start to get a measurable performance advantage over the TA11 with higher end low-powered variables.

I too used to want to have a dot reticle in low-powered variables, but I have broken with that line of thought. At this point I want a bold reticle that draws the eye and does not need illumination to work, but has a precise aiming point. Right now, the best ones I have used (from a pure reticle perspective) are the SWFA 1-4s (both T and Circle of death reticles) and 1-6s, the US Optics 1-4x DFPs, and the Bushnell 1-6.5x (as seen when at highest magnification or in the SFP, otherwise, not so great).

Frankly, I think that you could do a lot worse than a TA11 for your stated use. If you changed your performance criteria I would probably change my tune.

7

chuckle :stuck_out_tongue:

8

Thank you.

9

CFII nailed it.

I’m a TA11 guy and can do nothing but reccomend them. Although, if you are going for a lighter profile/weight carbine, then I would suggest the TA33.

10

Anybody have experience with the Boboro ACOG mounts? I can add one of those to my order for like $75 vs the $130 for the Larue. Thoughts? I run a Larue on my T-1 and like it pretty well.

11

I like the Bobro over all other QD mounts.

12

Why not offset your T-1 and go with the NSN?

I like the NSN better than all the rest, but I don’t try to make it be something it’s not.

It’s a straight 4X scope. Plain and simple. Treat it like that and you’ll be happy with it and the NSN will become much better than what’s usually heard on the 'net.

To me, getting on target at 100+ with crosshairs is very intuitive, the BAC usually results in me looking at the back of an ACOG and point shooting.

13

Jack,

What are your thoughts on the SWFA 1-6? Is it worth it over the 1-4 and is the weight prohibitive of a fast pointing gun?

I like the Vortex, but the JM reticle , I’m not a fan of.

Either that or a Ta33.

14

Where did u see a bobro mount for $75?

15

I’ve gotten several messages about the Trijicon deals. Pricing is through 3point5.com. You have to work for a retailer and take training to qualify for the discounts.

16

To throw a wrench in the works if I may…
I recently bought a TA11. I had the purchase planned for a long time, and finally my project was nearing completion. When I got in the mail and put it on my rifle, it didnt take me long to decide that it was simply too big and heavy for what I wanted. Great scope, just not for me. So I sold it and bought my third TA33. I also noticed that my 12:00 light had much more scope shadow in the TA11 than my TA33 that I replaced it with.
Before:


After:

17

I went with a TA01NSN on a Colt 6920. I already have two CQB type carbines. This was what I wanted in a mid to longer range optic. Weight and cost were an issue. Also, hey I like history, military history, and this optic is in that category. For 15 years it has been part of SOPMOD. If it worked for SEALS for years, it will work for me.

18

I’ve had TA31a and TA01s and bought my first TA11, an H-G, on Friday. It should be here on Wednesday. I’m looking forward to it very much. I just wanted a change of pace from the normal 4x ACOGs and a little better eye relief. Who knows, maybe I’ll come running back to the 4x32 line but as of now and the other TA11s I’ve shot, it seems like it’ll be a winner.

ETA: Nice carbine, Masakari. I actually like the look of the TA11 better but understand why you made the change. I like the Israeli band too. I picked up some of those over there a few summers ago.

19

Sorry I missed this.
I like the SWFA 1-4, and theoretically the 1-6 by extension, as they seen to have done a decent job on the reticle. However, having never used one I cannot really comment.
I have not had a huge issue with the Leupold CQBSS on a 7.62 gun slowing me down on presentations, so unless the eye box is really small or the reticle is hard to pick up, I don’t think that the weight will be a significant factor.

I agree on the vortex, they did a bunch of stuff right, but the reticle is specialized toward a specific use that I don’t value as much as full spectrum application.

Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.