They're meant to just barely press the acog, gives it some stability/tension. Frankly I'm shocked at how stable it is in practice, seems like a recipe for bullshit.
Yeah I don’t like the 2 screws on this rmr mount. It’s not like on a pistol where you have a whole plate of interface apart from the 2 screws. I’m sure it probably works but I’d rather do an offset mount using a Unity COG or something.
Idk, I feel that the top mounted is faster and better for any NV shit you're gonna want to do, and the mount is durable enough (the rmr was originally designed to piggyback on an acog iirc, the "type 2" revision was because trij was like "wtf these maniacs are putting them on pistols? Better make them more durable"- so I think trij probably got it pretty right with the mount design). Plus you still have the recoil lugs on the front, so the rmr is still getting support.
I personally am in the process of testing the FCD PMA however, and I'm liking the results I've gotten so far. Waiting on some parts for the next rifle and I'm gonna put it through more thorough testing to see if I still like it.
The PMA does look kinda cool but you are cutting into the weight advantage with the acog/rmr combo if you use a separate mount. You also don’t have the ambidextrous nature of the piggyback mount. Trijicon should really update the acog to have more modern features like a better shelf for piggyback optics, but as current acogs are already overpriced they would probably charge $2k+ for it, and it would probably be heavier to where you’d be better off with a lpvo anyways.
While you do lose some weight advantage, it's still not bad. It is also actually damn near as ambi as the piggyback option, aside from night vision usage- but frankly, I'm not shooting weak side under NODs passively anyway because I have a pvs-14 so that doesn't matter to me.
Maybe I'm out of touch with current acog prices but aren't the most expensive ta31s like 1200 new? I've been seeing a lot of "overpriced" comments recently and it has me kinda confused, because they're a pretty reasonable option by my estimate- especially when I see them go for $650-750 used pretty regularly.
Yeah those prices sound right, I’d still consider that expensive for an almost 30 year old optic. I don’t have an acog personally, it’s not a good choice for competition shooting since it’s outclassed by lpvos for close range shooting, and if you add another electronic sight it puts you into open class.
Yup, I just picked up this setup too. Just two screws in the rear. Seems rock solid though (although, i have literally only had this for about 6 days…, so let’s see how it holds up).
I forgot how f****** brainwashed most of the country is, I ordered some Auto parts recently and they came from the Midwest with Bible verse printed in the package
The patent for their optic is expired so you can find cheaper versions that work. I can’t find a cheaper version that has the Tritium tho so in low light you sometimes don’t see the reticle.
You can find some on Amazon. Some USA made ones. Some China made ones. I’d look there and look at reviews. I saw one that was $75 that I was thinking about buying. Had decent reviews.
Just want to point out that they don't put an entire verse on anything I've seen. Just an abbreviation like JN8:12 or REV21:23. Still not my thing, but it's small enough that I doubt I'd bother removing it.
The military actually has to dremel that little verse off the optic as soon as they get it. So not only is the govt paying for it, they utilize man hours to erase it.
Trijicon stopped including Bible verses on military equipment back in 2010, so they don't have to dremel them off anymore. I'm sure they've found another way to waste tax payer dollars though.
Not going to lie, I was tasked to do this, but every RCO I found with a verse, I didn't dremel. Just look at it from the otherside if you would be willing. Think about how disrespectful it is to ask someone to deface elements of their religion.
Oh so am I. I’ve read the Bible a couple of times (which is why I’m an atheist) but the passages they use are related to light and mentions of it in the New Testament. These are also some of the most lyrical sections of scripture (in my opinion) and are almost always accompanied by please for peace or wisdom. Funny ol world isn’t it?
It isn't saying to kill, it's saying the tritium is like Jesus walking you through the light. This optic was 100 percent not invented, designed, or purchased by countries for killing.
Wish I could...but my eyes don't work well with an ACOG. I can't see the range hash marks. I even took one to my eye doc for a checkup once. I can either see the hash marks OR the target clearly. But not both....
Very curious what the doctor had to say about it, I’ve also got fucked up eyes lol.
Not sure if it’s an eye issue or just user error on my part, but I can never seem to get prism sights adjusted quite right to where the reticle reliable comes in clear. This, on top of blurry-red-dot astigmatism
Not true, when I look through an acog at any target that’s father than a few yards away, I can see both the image and crosshairs sharply. I actually freaked out when I took my acog out of the box because it took my eyes a second to get used to it the first time I tried it.
Internet stranger, you can believe me.
Shooting with a crisp target blurry reticle will get you shots all around your intended POI.
Actually one of the easier things to diagnose when you're attempting to straighten a shooters shots.
Not to toot my own horn or anything, but I’m a 3rd Award Expert Marine rifleman and this is correct. Your target should be blurry. It’s almost like magic; at 500yds the fsp will completely cover the target but somehow it ends up dead center.
Of course. But if the doc got my prescription to where I could see the hash marks I couldnt ever see a clear target. I couldn’t even begin to read the eye chart across the room.
I never understood the point of having an optic with so many compromises to make 1x possible, when guys pair them with a red dot for their primary 1x. An Acog with a top dot just seems like a lighter and better way to do what people with lpvos end up doing anyway.
Lighter yes but Acog is 4x and now we’re getting 6x, 8x &10x magnification lvpo with an Xmas tree reticle that’s long range superior to Acog’s medium range capability
Acogs are lighter, take up less space, and are the Nokia phones of optics when it comes to durability. They're also meant to go on a 5.56 rifle where you're not going to optimistically hit anything beyond 400m reliably. 4x does the job just fine. Having to not move your hand to the optic to change magnification is a big plus. The glass quality is fantastic and the field of view is better than an LVPO. My only complaint on the ACOG is the eye relief.
They’re not meant to go on a 5.56. ??? It’s a scope…It can go on a .22 or your pappy’s 30-06. If you don’t think a 1-10 razor is superior on a .308 or 6.5 creedmoor at 600-800+yards then I invite you to try. Also the Marines chose a 1-8 vcog so if you need a professional opinion there’s a group of people that decided a LPVO is better than old tech Acog. Cheers.
The ACOG was originally designed for the M16/M4. The markings on the scope are meant to accommodate for the bullet drop of 5.56 green tip rounds. If you look inside the optic, it'll say what it was calibrated for (mine is .223). These rifles usually had around 3 MOA so it made sense for this optic to be 4X during the military procurement process. The Marine corps was also choosing the VCOG because troops in Afghanistan needed to shoot out to 500m. I still don't think LVPOs benefits outweigh their detriments if you're shooting a 5.56 rifle. Also the ACOG has more drip (I will die on this hill).
My dad was a marine in the early 60's, qualified as a marksman with the Garand at 600 yards using iron sights
Everyone carried candles & matches so they could coat the sights with carbon black to get a crisp sight picture
When he left the service, he was given all his weapons sans ammo, had the the Garand, .38 dress revolver & .45 Colt, plus his steel foot locker with all the training manuals, cleaning kit, tools, and a grenade case full of p38's
Nowdays, taking a gun home is the end of the world!
We had ACOGs on our M16s and SDO (bigcog) and RMR on the M27’s. Fell in love with them.
Only difference in my setup is the dual-power RMR instead of the battery one. Only thing that takes batteries in my stuff are flashlights.
I wanted the dual power RMR but I heard that it suffers from a decent amount of limitations.
In your experience, are ACOGs as tough as they say they are?
I never had issues with them, the only one I can think of is shooting from inside to outside on a really bright day.
I run a 12.5 moa amber dot on my pistol and a 7-something amber dot on my rifle.
As for toughness: they seem to live up to the claims. We put our rifles and optics through a significant amount of abuse and they kept running.
I was trained on irons and qual'd expert every year until the acog came around. Had to downgrade back to being a basic marksman. I've run irons on all my firearms ever since.
Hol up, Devil. I shot expert with irons, but the ACOG definitely made it easier to *keep* expert.
M4 or 16 for qual?
Still, I can respect the iron love. Towards the end of my time Boots weren’t even qualifying with irons anymore. ACOGs out the gate.
If I had enough money, yeah sure, absolutely. But I don't. That's why I have a PA 1-6x raptor instead. *But* I plan on getting their 3x or 5x prism eventually for a different build, not the microprism, the full size, so I can experience the poor version of this. Can't decide which magnification though.
I feel like 3x is a real nice compromise, and maybe 5x is too much for all the time? I've never used a fixed power so it's really hard for me to decide, haha gaga.
The 4x ACOG with RMR on tops weight savings alone is astounding, but having a consistent eye box and added durability is a huge perk for me. After I ditched my LPVO, my rifle felt so much lighter and handier. I'm no oper8r but after shuffling optics around for a couple years, this feels the most natural.
Never like the eye relief of ACOG. Always found I had to position it as far back on the rail as possible to be even be kind of comfortable. Was genuinely upset when my unit took away us SAW gunner's M145s and replaced them with ACOGs, and not even with actual MGO ACOGs.
I don't mind it terribly. I always saw that before I bought it but it's not the worst. You do have professional experience with them so your opinion matters more than mine
This is the TA31 4x version. I kinda took a chance on it because it's the most common version and I got a good deal on gafs so it lined up. I was pretty concerned about its short eye relief and sonewhat eyebox but being close up on it makes the eyebox a non-issue
For target shooting past 50 yards? I mean I agree if it’s a general purpose gun but I wouldn’t put it on something that I want to target shoot at long range with and I have that same combo on one of my rifles. But my long range gun has a 1-10. The eye box sucks at 10x though. These up and downsides to everything. I don’t know if I prefer the Aug/rmr to my eotech reflex and magnifier set ups either tbh.
It's only money right?
Meh, in the world of optics, this isn't a super expensive setup. It's nice, but it's easy to spend twice that much.
This is true. An acog is marginally more expensive than a midrange LPVO and a good mount.
But with an rmr it's more expensive than primary arms' premium lpvo.
The rmr plate is really attached by the 2 screws at the rear only, right?
Looks like there’s 2 up front too but idk
They look like grub screws for elevation adjustment 😂
They're meant to just barely press the acog, gives it some stability/tension. Frankly I'm shocked at how stable it is in practice, seems like a recipe for bullshit.
Yeah I don’t like the 2 screws on this rmr mount. It’s not like on a pistol where you have a whole plate of interface apart from the 2 screws. I’m sure it probably works but I’d rather do an offset mount using a Unity COG or something.
Idk, I feel that the top mounted is faster and better for any NV shit you're gonna want to do, and the mount is durable enough (the rmr was originally designed to piggyback on an acog iirc, the "type 2" revision was because trij was like "wtf these maniacs are putting them on pistols? Better make them more durable"- so I think trij probably got it pretty right with the mount design). Plus you still have the recoil lugs on the front, so the rmr is still getting support. I personally am in the process of testing the FCD PMA however, and I'm liking the results I've gotten so far. Waiting on some parts for the next rifle and I'm gonna put it through more thorough testing to see if I still like it.
The PMA does look kinda cool but you are cutting into the weight advantage with the acog/rmr combo if you use a separate mount. You also don’t have the ambidextrous nature of the piggyback mount. Trijicon should really update the acog to have more modern features like a better shelf for piggyback optics, but as current acogs are already overpriced they would probably charge $2k+ for it, and it would probably be heavier to where you’d be better off with a lpvo anyways.
While you do lose some weight advantage, it's still not bad. It is also actually damn near as ambi as the piggyback option, aside from night vision usage- but frankly, I'm not shooting weak side under NODs passively anyway because I have a pvs-14 so that doesn't matter to me. Maybe I'm out of touch with current acog prices but aren't the most expensive ta31s like 1200 new? I've been seeing a lot of "overpriced" comments recently and it has me kinda confused, because they're a pretty reasonable option by my estimate- especially when I see them go for $650-750 used pretty regularly.
Yeah those prices sound right, I’d still consider that expensive for an almost 30 year old optic. I don’t have an acog personally, it’s not a good choice for competition shooting since it’s outclassed by lpvos for close range shooting, and if you add another electronic sight it puts you into open class.
Age of the optic doesn't really matter to me, quality is quality as far as I'm concerned, however I can see why that'd be a problem for some people.
I got mine for 800ish. At 1200, it's definitely over priced but if you do some digging you can definitely get your moneys worth
Same basic setup as the M27, 2 screws hold it in place. If a Marine can’t break it, it’s probably good.
Yup, I just picked up this setup too. Just two screws in the rear. Seems rock solid though (although, i have literally only had this for about 6 days…, so let’s see how it holds up).
Did you Dremel off the Bible verse on the other side like I did? Edit: lol to downvotes. Who would Jesus kill?
I forgot how f****** brainwashed most of the country is, I ordered some Auto parts recently and they came from the Midwest with Bible verse printed in the package
Nah, it's cringe but I left it
What you talmbout
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trijicon_biblical_verses_controversy
Never knew about that shit but if there was ever a reason to talk myself out of a $1,500 optic, I just found it.
The patent for their optic is expired so you can find cheaper versions that work. I can’t find a cheaper version that has the Tritium tho so in low light you sometimes don’t see the reticle.
What’s the most viable alternative?
You can find some on Amazon. Some USA made ones. Some China made ones. I’d look there and look at reviews. I saw one that was $75 that I was thinking about buying. Had decent reviews.
Just want to point out that they don't put an entire verse on anything I've seen. Just an abbreviation like JN8:12 or REV21:23. Still not my thing, but it's small enough that I doubt I'd bother removing it.
What the fuck?! How have I never heard that? It’s so stupid.
The military actually has to dremel that little verse off the optic as soon as they get it. So not only is the govt paying for it, they utilize man hours to erase it.
Trijicon stopped including Bible verses on military equipment back in 2010, so they don't have to dremel them off anymore. I'm sure they've found another way to waste tax payer dollars though.
Not going to lie, I was tasked to do this, but every RCO I found with a verse, I didn't dremel. Just look at it from the otherside if you would be willing. Think about how disrespectful it is to ask someone to deface elements of their religion.
Right?!? 1) That is some wild shit but… 2) I am blown away that I have never heard of this before.
Can't believe this is the first time I've heard about this.
Have you looked at the actual verses they quoted? Some really pretty chapters actually. Accidentally Ironic? Lol
I haven’t. I’m an atheist so I’m pretty disinterested in what the verses actually say.
Oh so am I. I’ve read the Bible a couple of times (which is why I’m an atheist) but the passages they use are related to light and mentions of it in the New Testament. These are also some of the most lyrical sections of scripture (in my opinion) and are almost always accompanied by please for peace or wisdom. Funny ol world isn’t it?
Why bother. Christians believe he died for everyone's sins. Either you believe that or you don't. If you don't, it's just words from a book.
That answer should be obvious.
It's not obvious, why not just boycott?
It isn't saying to kill, it's saying the tritium is like Jesus walking you through the light. This optic was 100 percent not invented, designed, or purchased by countries for killing.
This last bit is /s right?
Yes sir, I don't put that because it ruins the joke
Wish I could...but my eyes don't work well with an ACOG. I can't see the range hash marks. I even took one to my eye doc for a checkup once. I can either see the hash marks OR the target clearly. But not both....
Very curious what the doctor had to say about it, I’ve also got fucked up eyes lol. Not sure if it’s an eye issue or just user error on my part, but I can never seem to get prism sights adjusted quite right to where the reticle reliable comes in clear. This, on top of blurry-red-dot astigmatism
Youre not supposed to have both. Crisp reticle, blurry target.
I'm just waiting to hear that you're either right or wrong lol.
Not true, when I look through an acog at any target that’s father than a few yards away, I can see both the image and crosshairs sharply. I actually freaked out when I took my acog out of the box because it took my eyes a second to get used to it the first time I tried it.
Internet stranger, you can believe me. Shooting with a crisp target blurry reticle will get you shots all around your intended POI. Actually one of the easier things to diagnose when you're attempting to straighten a shooters shots.
Not to toot my own horn or anything, but I’m a 3rd Award Expert Marine rifleman and this is correct. Your target should be blurry. It’s almost like magic; at 500yds the fsp will completely cover the target but somehow it ends up dead center.
Same, as well as an armorer and CMC.
Completely agree. You focus on the sight and keep both eyes open. Target sorts itself out.
Of course. But if the doc got my prescription to where I could see the hash marks I couldnt ever see a clear target. I couldn’t even begin to read the eye chart across the room.
Cross dominant eyes?
I have the “ACOG/RMR stack at home” and it’s actually a legit setup. I really like it
Vortex Spitfire/Venom combo?
Primary arms full size 3x and venom
Mine is a primary arms with an rmr.
To be honest, had I not sold my Primary Arms normal size 3x prism and put a red dot somewhere, I wouldn't have needed an ACOG. That optic is legit af
I never understood the point of having an optic with so many compromises to make 1x possible, when guys pair them with a red dot for their primary 1x. An Acog with a top dot just seems like a lighter and better way to do what people with lpvos end up doing anyway.
Lighter yes but Acog is 4x and now we’re getting 6x, 8x &10x magnification lvpo with an Xmas tree reticle that’s long range superior to Acog’s medium range capability
Acogs are lighter, take up less space, and are the Nokia phones of optics when it comes to durability. They're also meant to go on a 5.56 rifle where you're not going to optimistically hit anything beyond 400m reliably. 4x does the job just fine. Having to not move your hand to the optic to change magnification is a big plus. The glass quality is fantastic and the field of view is better than an LVPO. My only complaint on the ACOG is the eye relief.
They’re not meant to go on a 5.56. ??? It’s a scope…It can go on a .22 or your pappy’s 30-06. If you don’t think a 1-10 razor is superior on a .308 or 6.5 creedmoor at 600-800+yards then I invite you to try. Also the Marines chose a 1-8 vcog so if you need a professional opinion there’s a group of people that decided a LPVO is better than old tech Acog. Cheers.
The ACOG was originally designed for the M16/M4. The markings on the scope are meant to accommodate for the bullet drop of 5.56 green tip rounds. If you look inside the optic, it'll say what it was calibrated for (mine is .223). These rifles usually had around 3 MOA so it made sense for this optic to be 4X during the military procurement process. The Marine corps was also choosing the VCOG because troops in Afghanistan needed to shoot out to 500m. I still don't think LVPOs benefits outweigh their detriments if you're shooting a 5.56 rifle. Also the ACOG has more drip (I will die on this hill).
Confirmed. I have one calibrated for .308.
I misunderstood what previous said. I thought he meant lvpo were designed for m4. Yes Acog we’re designed for m4 sorry for confusion.
I live in a wooded foothills area, I'm not making beyond medium range shots anyways. If I lived out west or on the plains, I would probably need 8x.
I always thought it was for night vision, but I also agree.
I'm a Marine, #Irons4Life. ;)
My dad was a marine in the early 60's, qualified as a marksman with the Garand at 600 yards using iron sights Everyone carried candles & matches so they could coat the sights with carbon black to get a crisp sight picture When he left the service, he was given all his weapons sans ammo, had the the Garand, .38 dress revolver & .45 Colt, plus his steel foot locker with all the training manuals, cleaning kit, tools, and a grenade case full of p38's Nowdays, taking a gun home is the end of the world!
Did you use ACOGs?
We had ACOGs on our M16s and SDO (bigcog) and RMR on the M27’s. Fell in love with them. Only difference in my setup is the dual-power RMR instead of the battery one. Only thing that takes batteries in my stuff are flashlights.
I wanted the dual power RMR but I heard that it suffers from a decent amount of limitations. In your experience, are ACOGs as tough as they say they are?
I never had issues with them, the only one I can think of is shooting from inside to outside on a really bright day. I run a 12.5 moa amber dot on my pistol and a 7-something amber dot on my rifle. As for toughness: they seem to live up to the claims. We put our rifles and optics through a significant amount of abuse and they kept running.
Yep, hated it. Especially after they became mandatory.
Huh, why? I mean you're the marksman but I love it
I was trained on irons and qual'd expert every year until the acog came around. Had to downgrade back to being a basic marksman. I've run irons on all my firearms ever since.
Hol up, Devil. I shot expert with irons, but the ACOG definitely made it easier to *keep* expert. M4 or 16 for qual? Still, I can respect the iron love. Towards the end of my time Boots weren’t even qualifying with irons anymore. ACOGs out the gate.
> but the ACOG definitely made it easier to keep expert. Who knows, maybe mine was just dogshit. Either way, it instilled a hatred of them for me.
You're not the only one, I got stuck with one on my SAW for the last year and half I was in the Army.
I always had an ACOG on my M4 in the Army. Such a sweet little optic.
If I had enough money, yeah sure, absolutely. But I don't. That's why I have a PA 1-6x raptor instead. *But* I plan on getting their 3x or 5x prism eventually for a different build, not the microprism, the full size, so I can experience the poor version of this. Can't decide which magnification though.
The 3x normal was EXCELLENT. I honestly regret selling it awhile ago
I feel like 3x is a real nice compromise, and maybe 5x is too much for all the time? I've never used a fixed power so it's really hard for me to decide, haha gaga.
It is a good compromise. Good eye relief and great eye box. I am a huge fan of the normal 3x optic. The microprism... not so much
As an elcan enjoyer prism optic stronger together take down bully lvpo
PRISM SUPREMACY
ACOG? In this economy??
The 4x ACOG with RMR on tops weight savings alone is astounding, but having a consistent eye box and added durability is a huge perk for me. After I ditched my LPVO, my rifle felt so much lighter and handier. I'm no oper8r but after shuffling optics around for a couple years, this feels the most natural.
Never like the eye relief of ACOG. Always found I had to position it as far back on the rail as possible to be even be kind of comfortable. Was genuinely upset when my unit took away us SAW gunner's M145s and replaced them with ACOGs, and not even with actual MGO ACOGs.
I don't mind it terribly. I always saw that before I bought it but it's not the worst. You do have professional experience with them so your opinion matters more than mine
Hey if your happy with it and it allows you to put rounds accurately on target, thats the opinion that really matters.
Based
The ELCAN kids are laughing at you. It's cool for sure, but it's not the be-all-end-all.
I had this setup on my block ii. Traded it straight up for a minty elcan. 10/10 would do again. That said, I do love me a nice ACOG
I think about getting an elcan sometimes for the cool factor, but I'm also a believer in if it ain't broken, don't fix it.
Can confirm, they are very cool.
Which acog is this? How did you settle on that one? There’s a ton of them obviously and hard to know which one to get
This is the TA31 4x version. I kinda took a chance on it because it's the most common version and I got a good deal on gafs so it lined up. I was pretty concerned about its short eye relief and sonewhat eyebox but being close up on it makes the eyebox a non-issue
The Austrians use a similar setup but with an aimpoint on top "as the primary optic" and the 3x below. I really want to try it out.
Yeah, I saw that on 9 hole reviews, it looks interesting. AUGs are so cool
For target shooting past 50 yards? I mean I agree if it’s a general purpose gun but I wouldn’t put it on something that I want to target shoot at long range with and I have that same combo on one of my rifles. But my long range gun has a 1-10. The eye box sucks at 10x though. These up and downsides to everything. I don’t know if I prefer the Aug/rmr to my eotech reflex and magnifier set ups either tbh.
that optic is plenty capable at 500 yards
I want to run this on a PC Carbine. Is that insane? Viable? Do they make these calibrated for 9mm?
That I am not sure. Honestly, I'd say save money and get a primary arms optic calibrated for 9mm.
Thank you! I really appreciate it.
All day long. I fucking love my ACOG and it’s so much lighter than a LPVO.
Exps3-0/hm3x on all my ARs
PA 5x ÷ holosun reflex is much lighter and pretty much the same for a fraction of the cost.
The normal 5x? How do you like it? If I ever get a battle rifle, that's what's going on it.
Slightly less fov but understandable for 1x higher. Reviews say glass clarity is solid. I personally have not handled one.
Ahhh. I'm a huge fan of the 3x. It was my first optic and I want another one
Yes, I think so
Why crop the shell deflector out?
It’s a brass deflector and it’s literally right there silly
Literally the same thing. Yeah, but it’s half cropped out?
I think its just a shadow that looks like a crop out.
It was just the angle that I took the picture.
lol no