View Full Version : ACOG

Pages : [1] 2

Rock Ape
5/16/2008 12:30pm,
Apparently we Brits are getting the ACOG to replace the SUSAT on our IW, I'd appreciate any comments/opinions on this optical as I've never used it before.


5/17/2008 4:10am,
I love my ACOG.

Through a drug deal one of my NCO's got the armorer to get my M68 replaced by an ACOG. It's slightly different than the older ones. Has horizontal lines in addition to the chevron.

I have an ACOG on my PERSONAL weapon at home and will never sell it. I got the TA33-8 with the yellow reticle. I make shots I shouldn't be able to.

People want to argue over the Eotech 1x, the M68 red dot, and the ACOG 3-4x. I think it's personal preference and trigger time on what you like. But after buying my own ACOG and having the armorer put one on my weapon at work I am a believer. If they only made ACOG flavored koolaid I would drink it.

5/17/2008 4:28am,
It kicks ass! The magnification is just high enough to make long shots but it is still quick enough for close work. Range estimation is also idiot proof: just line up the bad guy with the line that is just as wide as he is and pull the trigger. New ones even have a mil scale for artillery spotting, so you can leave the binos at home. The damn thing is also more durable than even your iron sights. Aside from one with a manufacturing defect (canted reticle) I can't even remember seeing one break in three years of using them.

Virtually every grunt in the Marine Corps is issued one now. You can't get a better endorsement than that.

Rock Ape
5/17/2008 4:51am,
Cheers guys, appreciate it, our present optical sight is x4 mag with a field of view of 177mm and uses a trilux lamp to illuminate a vertical reticule, and I understand the ACOG is a 'red dot' is that correct?

I was also told last week that the ACOG has adjustment for windage - our sight you merely have to aim off are there any other features of the ACOG worth mentioning ?


5/17/2008 5:20am,
It's not a "red dot" in the conventional sense. Virtually all of them use a tritium lamp to illuminate the reticle enough for low-light use. The ones issued to us also had a red fiber optic that made the chevron (just a red triangle) glow bright enough for daytime use. This helps it catch the eye for rapid targeting. If either one fails (which they won't) the reticle will still be there, it will just be black. No batteries.

It is also adjustable for both windage and elevation. You zero it at 100 yards and then leave it alone. The reticle does all your range finding, so you don't have to turn any dials for longer shots. One weird thing though: after turning the dials you actually need to beat on the scope a little bit to get the adjustments to set. Otherwise they will take effect as the weapon recoils and you will see the rounds "walking" towards the bull's eye. Once set, it does hold zero very well.

Since the magnification is the same, you will probably find it very similar to the SUSAT, just more user-friendly.

Rock Ape
5/17/2008 5:29am,
Cool, can you point me to any reliable images and or technical spec on the net ? I've had a quick look via google but because I don't really know yet what I'm looking for/at I can't be absolutely sure that what I'm seeing is the genuine or correct sight.


5/17/2008 2:34pm,
Look at :


They are the manufacturers of the ACOG. You will see the different reticles and how they are used.

Lord Skeletor
5/19/2008 6:20am,
I've got a 3.5x ACOG on my HK-33 and I love it. I've got one of the more rarer reticules---it was the one that the Tom Clancy Rainbow Six: Raven Shield game used with the small, black circle with red triangle in the middle of it. It totally kicks much ass. While they are good for a mid-range weapon system---I'm still a big fan of the EoTech with it's wide viewing area and its 1MOA dot. It's just damn hard to beat. Either system is good...just depends on how much cash you want to spend. ACOGs just cost a lot of damn money, man.

Rock Ape
5/19/2008 6:59am,
Well I'm lucky my government is going to be paying but I we'll not get a choice in which variant we get

5/19/2008 7:37am,
ACOG rules over the EOtech in my opinion.

Rock Ape
5/19/2008 7:57am,
ACOG rules over the EOtech in my opinion.How so mate ?

5/19/2008 9:41am,
How so mate ?

1. Durablity. My mate had an EOtech on his AR15, and I had my ACOG. While out on a hunt, he dropped it top first onto the deck. Broke it, the reticles went all haywire.

2. Better sight picture. This is purely all imho.

Rock Ape
5/19/2008 10:35am,
Cheers mate..

5/21/2008 8:05pm,
We use a site with 3.4x mag on it. I think some US forces use the same one by elcan? the M145 or something?

The magnification is always a good thing but I find at least with ours you can get a bad case of tunnel vision. I'm sure that's possible with many optics of the like but I've read the elcan is among the worst.

I just picked up an eotech 552 a65 which I'll be using on the M4/m203. I went for it because I mainly intend to use mine while on the move, at moving targets and within 200-300meter range. Big chance that some of those contacts will be within 20 feet with only a second or two exposure. All things the eotech is good with. Also the eotech cost $500 and the ACOG $1600.

How is the acog when it comes to shooting on the move and moving targets, as well as extreme close engagements like vllage ally ways and stuff?

5/21/2008 8:30pm,
Ask everyone who has used both and I bet that they would prefer an ACOG but would be happy with an Eotech.

5/21/2008 9:17pm,
I've used the ACOG quite a bit. I've also played with the EOTech a few times, but never used it professionally.

My take: The EOTech is better for CQB, hands down. But the ACOG is faster than your irons and the magnification makes it more versatile at a variety of ranges. It depends on what you do. Someone whose job description is to kick in doors will do better with the EOTech, while the average grunt who is expected to conduct a variety of missions will be better served by the ACOG.