1911Forum banner

Optics...Reviews and Discussions

52K views 106 replies 49 participants last post by  LW McVay 
#1 ·
Per your request...post 'em up!
 
#81 ·
That's great Don. You've done a great job of tightening up your groups and focusing them on critical mass areas.

I would, when you can, grab some anatomically correct targets. The ones that clearly outline the thoracic cavity and the eye box. It gives you a whole new appreciation for what effect your sent rounds will have on target. Bleed out vs lights out. And so on.
 
#82 ·
I need a better benchrest too next time I think of it too. I bought a cheapo Wallyword one last fall and it sucks. I forgot all about it this spring since with no ammo I wasn't shooting but now with my stock getting back it would be a good idea...next time I'm at Bass Pro Shops :p
 
#84 ·
Im looking for a new optic that is dual purpose, within the $1000 range. Im willing to save up for it. My main uses for an optic is mainly for CQ, but also tap into long range up to 500-600 meters.

Im very familiar with mil-dot reticle pattern and would like to stick with mil-radian adjustments.

Right now Im stuck between choosing Horus Vision Talon 1-4 x 24mm, SWFA SS 1-4 x 24mm Tactical , Aimpoint T-1, Aimpoint M4S. I will be using LaRue Tactical mounts any of the optics. Those links are not adds BTW.

With the Aimpoints I know I wont be able to engage out to 500 accurately, or positively identifying the target. But engaging at 300 or possibly 400 will be feasible.

Right now I have a LMT MRP 14.5". Im kind of leaning towards the Horus Vision Talon or the T-1, but my question is, can you see the reticle in low light without the reticle being illuminated on the Talon? And how easy is it to pick up the reticle compared to the Aimpoint? I know its not going to be as fast. And how is the eye relief?
Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
 
#85 ·
I can't help you with the Horus....but why are you even considering a red dot only sight (T1/M4S) if you plan on going up to 600m? Red dots are fine medicine, but if you regularly want to smack accurately out to 600, I would push you to go the magnified route. There are several mag capable scopes that can do well in a CQB enviro when dialed down to 1x but can really reach out to 600 by dialing up to 4x or 6x. 'Specially if you aren't doing CQB for real on a constant basis....and unless you are working for a 3 letter outfit, you most likely aren't.
 
#86 ·
I was using a red dot in Afghan, and was pushing out to 800 easily, but that was with a machine gun, light and medium. That was the reason I was considering a red dot only. But Im only using a semi-auto now, but still want to have the ability to push out to a distance, while still mainly working in CQ, not necessarily in an urban environment. Im a firm believer in 2 is one, one is none.
 
#87 ·
I hear ya. But pushing out to 800 with a belt fed with the ability to get speedballs kicked out to you on call is one thing, putting acurate steel on target in a civilian setting without instant resupply is another. If you have ammo to blow, by all means....
 
#88 ·
Does anyone have any experience with the ACOG TA11MGO-M249?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...11MGO_M249_3_5x35_Scope_Dual_Illuminated.html

If I end up getting an ACOG for my M4 (16" bbl), I've narrowed it down to either a TA33 or TA11, because I can't live without a longer eye relief. I REALLY like the reticle on this "MachineGun Optic", especially being graduated to 1000 meters. Of course I'd never shoot that far with a 16" carbine in 5.56mm, but it just looks so darn cool. :biglaugh:

We shoot the fairly heavy Hornady TAP 75 grains rounds from our M4's, so I'm sure the BDC would be a fair bit off, but I could probably play around with it and figure roughly where POA/ POI would be at various distances. I'm guessing that with the heavy round we use, none of the ACOG BDC's are going to be right on anyways.
 
#92 ·
The last time I went overseas, I opted for a TA-11 with the then new horseshoe dot reticle. It served very well. I too prefered it due to tbe eye relief. While not a true 4, it did fine.

But, with the advent of the robust rings, mounts available now combined with the robust scopes and true 1 power availability, I would choose differently now.

But the ACOG is still a great piece of glass. I keep hoping Trijicon will enter the variable market with a variable ACOG.
 
#97 · (Edited)
Click on the photo for the "integrated mounting adaptor"...it shows a molded in tube under the main optic tube that has a battery drawn in and says "AA". I'm going to guess that it has battery illumination. ;)
Although truth be told, I'm not sure how I feel about that. One of the things I've always liked about Trijicon was that they did not rely so much on batteries.
 
#101 ·
The Leupold VX6 1-6 That I put on my Noveske has worked well for me.

I actually just got a Sadlak scope mount for my M1A. I am thinking of going with the same scope on the Springfield Armory.
 

Attachments

#105 ·
Sightmark 14002 Model Red Dot Flex sight

Product webpage: http://www.sightmark.com/sm14002.html

I am new to AR's and since you guys are trying your level best to force me into debtor's prison, I could not afford to spring right off the bat for a fancy Aimpoint or Eotech like I would like, after buying the Colt m4.

So I settled for something further down the totem pole and snagged the Sightmark 14002 model for around $100 bucks.

Now, I'm not going to claim this is just as good as those upper tier brands, so don't nobody get angry. Usually in the gun world you DO get what you pay for. That said, I'm pretty impressed with this thing for the money.

Looking online, across the board you will see that about 90-95% of the reviews are very positive for it. The relative few people that rated it low seemed to have gotten duds that didn't work or immediately say that the Eotech or Aimpoint blah blah is better. Well, at nearly 500 bucks more just to start with, it ought to be better.

However, for my purposes so far this seems to be really nice sight. It is parallax free with double panes (yes, nothing is completely parallax free but it helps), seems to be well made... it does not smack of cheap Chinese crap even though thats kind of what it is.

The red dot reticle is very sharp and clear, does not appear to be fuzzy at all. It has three power levels, and two night vision modes. It feels well made, keeps its zero well, and I like that you have four choices of reticle, although it will only save the zero on one. It also has an easy to use quick detach lever.

Tested it today at the range and it did great. It was sunny and there is a lot of snow on the ground. At the highest power setting I could see the reticle fine, but if it was any brighter it might have been difficult, so perhaps it loses points there. No idea how its brightness compared to other brands but the conditions were not ideal for these kinds of sights. Still, it held zero and shot very well, and was a marked improvement for me over the irons.

The downsides that I can see are: compared to the high end optics, this is water resistant but not completely waterproof. The company says a light drizzle or snow is okay, but a heavy downpour or dunking this completely in water may kill it. Also the operating temperatures on the Eotech style covers a wider range. If it was very cold or very hot I'd expect problems with this Sightmark. The sightmark seems sturdy enough and has a metal frame but it is not battletested like the the big boys and I'm sure it is more fragile, particularly the glass itself.

Another negative is that the battery on full power will only last 25 hours. At least it uses only one CR1620 battery which are fairly cheap.

Someday when I got money burning in my pocket I'll buy up into the apocalypse level quality Aimpoint or Eotech.

I'd recommend this to anyone that wants a pretty good reflex sight but does not need trust-my-life-to-it toughness and dependability. Would be great for something you just use for plinking or hunting.

I've also read that the company Sightmark is very responsive and customever service friendly, so if you buy one and its got issues they will assist you and/or fix the thing. I had a few questions and they were quick to answer me.

Some pics: (Wish I could have gotten one of the reticle but it wasn't happening with my camera)





Sight styles to choose from:


 
#107 ·
It looks like you have it mounted on the rifle backwards.
 
#106 ·
Acog ta11mgo-m249

I recently got a new ACOG, and thought I'd do a review on it here.

Model:
Trijicon ACOG TA11MGO-M249

Product description:
https://www.trijicon.com/na_en/products/product3.php?pid=TA11MGO-M249

The Trijicon ACOG TA11MGO-M249 is the standard issue optic for the M249 SAW and the M27 IAR in the Marine Corps. The full name would be Advanced Combat Optical Gunsight, TA11 Machine Gun Optic-M249. As the name implies, this particular ACOG is designed to be used with the M249 Squad Automatic Weapon, firing M855 ammunition. It is also known by the name SDO (Squad automatic weapon Day Optic). As far as I know, there are three main models of ACOG that have military designators, the original TA01 NSN, the TA31 RCO (Rifle Combat Optic), and the TA11 MGO (Machine Gun Optic).

The TA11MGO is a 3.5x35 fixed power, dual illuminated optic. It uses both tritium and fiberoptics to illuminate the center portion of the reticle. The reticle is a green horseshoe, with a center dot and a Bullet Drop Compensator. The MGO differs from the "civilian" model TA11H-G (green horseshoe), by adding a horizontal Milradian scale, with 5 and 10 Mil. hash marks, and by extending the BDC graduation from 800m to 1,000m.

The green horseshoe is designed for the Bindon Aiming Concept, where both eyes are kept open for close range engagement, and the brain superimposes the reticle over the eye that is not looking through the optic. In practice, I've found that the BAC does not work for cross-eye dominant shooters like myself. I am able to shoot a 1x optic like an Aimpoint or EOTech with both eyes open, however, the magnified TA11 and TA31 BAC reticles do not work for me with both eyes open. They are still pretty fast to pick up, but I don't think most cross-eye dominant shooters will get the full benefit of the BAC.

When choosing and ACOG, there are trade-offs of weight, size, magnification, reticle, field of view, and eye relief. In my experience after owning the TA01NSN, TA31RCO, TA11MGO, and trying out a TA33, it is easiest to choose a model once you've decided which attribute is most important to you. I prioritized it with eye relief as the primary and reticle as the secondary attributes. That made my choice easy, and the TA11MGO is by far my favorite ACOG model I've tried. Someone else may feel that weight and size are their top priority, and a TA33 would be the logical pick.

Why the ACOG... In these days of so many great 1-4, 1-6, and 1-8 power optics, the ACOG is showing it's age. In my opinion it fills a niche role, but in that role it is excellent. The construction is beefy, the glass is clear, and the dual illuminated reticles with no batteries are the big plusses. Personally, for a weapon that I don't want to baby, I like that the ACOG is not a cylindrical optic, and can only be mounted one way, similar to an Aimpoint M4 or EOTech. I like having a magnified optic that I never have to worry about whether I set it up in perfect alignment on the vertical and horizontal axis. I think sometimes simple is better, and the lack of batteries and even the lack of magnification adjustment makes for a pretty low maintenance optic.

On an SPR, I'd prefer to have an optic like a NF 2.5-10x42, or a S&B. But for a DMR style weapon, where you are in the fuzzy middle-ground between CQB and precision, I think the ACOG excels.

So back to the TA11. The eye relief and sight picture is the biggest thing this model has going for it. Many ACOGs are plagued by short eye relief. On a static range that can be fine, but firing from various positions makes a long eye relief very welcome, and the TA11 is king of the hill among ACOGs in that regard. Many people will argue that the TA33 also has a great eye relief, much better than what the stats show on paper. I would agree with this, however, the TA33 gave me a real feeling of looking through a toilet-paper roll, as opposed to the very open feel of a TA11. But this eye relief and sight picture come at a price, it is heavier and larger than the other models. The other price it comes with is actual $$$. The TA11 is more expensive than most other ACOGs.

The TA11MGO-M249 comes with goodies. The USMC seem to get theirs with a LaRue QD mount. Mine came with a GDI QD mount. Both are exceptional quality, especially when compared with the "standard" flat top mount that some ACOG's come with. It also includes a lenspen, padded MOLLE pouch, Tenebrex killflash ARD, and flip covers. It has "bosses" ready to accept the Trijicon RMR sight on a piggyback mount, and the windage and elevation caps have retaining wires.

On to the pictures. And let me start by saying that the optical clarity is incredible. These through the scope pictures were taken with the killflash ARD mounted, and the view was still nice and bright, and clear as could be. Any blurriness of reticle lines or haziness of the background is simply my poor photography, not the optic itself:







The TA11MGO mounted on my SIG516:




 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top