I recently shot the 2004 International Tactical Rifleman Championship (report here with pics).  This is primarily a military and LEO match, but there is a contingent of civilian shooters who compete and place well (in fact, the #1 and #3 places were won by non-LEO civilians this year).  47 teams signed up, 38 teams finished.  My team came in 13th.

My background is 3Gun, where I think the TA11 ACOG is the ideal optic.  When the targets are no more difficult than 10" plates at 320 yards, it's king for speed from 25-300 yards.  In 3Gun, there is no penalty for missed shots besides the time you waste, so it's no big deal if you have to send a second or third round downrange once in a while.

At the ITRC, targets went out further, and they were smaller.  Wind was more of a factor in this match than typical 3Gun matches.  Misses were highly penalized, so your first round had to count.  (Scoring was -20 for a miss, but only +10 for a hit, and only two hits per target were counted.)

This is about as "precision" as you get with field-worthy carbines: the ability to arrive at a shooting location, acquire and range the targets, and engage them with two shots each as quickly as possible.  Each round has to count.  Targets difficulty is equivalent to head-shots to about 400 yards.

For the precision part, the following is suggested:

The primary reticle aim point should only minimally obscure the target.  A big problem with the TA11 is that the 200-400 meter aiming points (on the donut and the first horizontal cross-hair) obscure most of a 2.5MOA target (e.g. a 10" plate at 400 yards).

For precise hold-over, an externally-adjustable elevation knob is required.  The knob need to be robust and have hard clicks such as the Nightforce NXS has to prevent undesired movement.  The knob needs to have either a zero-stop built in, or have its full travel in 1 revolution so that it's not possible to misjudge what revolution the knob is on.

The scope needs to be able to dial at least 30 minutes "up" from a 100 yard zero to reach 800 yards.  Each "click" should be no more than about 0.5MOA or just over 1/10 mil so that the error induced by click quantization will be no more than 1" elevation at 400 yards.

Wind hold-off should be facilitated by horizontal demarcations from the primary aiming point of no more than 1/2 mil or approximately 1.5MOA.  Again, these should not obscure a target.  An externally-adjustable windage knob is welcomed for special applications such as a constant cross-wind or when lots of time is available to dial in exact wind, but the ability to lock the windage knob would be nice.  At 500 yards, a 10mph wind only causes 3.75 MOA drift for the 75gr 223 bullets.

For speed, I prefer to dial elevation and then use reticle hold-off for windage.  Alternatively, I often use rough elevation hold-over for fast shots with the TA11.  I don't like to rely on reticle-based windage AND elevation hold-off at the same time because it is imprecise.  A Horus-style reticle is the way to go if you want to do this, but it's way too busy for my taste (and too busy for the close-range high-speed requirements coming up later).

Magnification in the 8-10x range is good for these type of precision engagements.

A bullet/caliber-specific BDC is not precise enough for this application.  Environmental changes such as elevation, and gun and load-specific changes from the standard induce too much error.

Balancing the two "precision" stages, was a high-intensity "urban combat" stage that had 500-some scoring hits which had to be engaged in no more than 25 minutes (in order for the pistol shooter to have enough time for the shoothouse).  This stage had few targets beyond 200 yards-- most were 120 or less.  In addition, this stage had "high value" targets - full size poppers - to be engaged from a moving HMMV.

For this, the reticle has to be reasonable simple and quick to pick up for BAC-like firing.  It needs to have a design fast to center on silhouette targets or poppers to 100 yards.  The low magnification needs to be no more than about 3.5X with a field of view of at least 29' @ 100 yards.

Let's not forget this is intended to go on an AR15 platform, and that suggests some other attributes for the optic.

First, if possible, the eye relief should be constant throughout the power adjustment range.  This means the shooter can keep exactly the same cheek weld for any shooting.

A big drawback of almost all conventional scopes when put on an AR15 is that their eye relief is too long.  Most conventional scopes have optimum eye relief values from about 3.4" - 4.7".  This is fine for a bolt gun, but it's terrible for an AR.  If you use an aggressive stance on the AR with your nose close to the charging handle (NTCH) (which also gives you more leverage on the gun for control under recoil), then one of these conventional scopes must be mounted so its ocular (rear) lens is already 2-3" down the flat-top rail!  You can see exactly what I'm talking about in this SPR picture: www.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/ITRC-2004/?medium=135_3503_img-b.jpg

For the typical shooter with nose near the charging handle, there will be about 1.5" distance from his eye to the rear of the flat top.  Thus, a TA01 or TA31 ACOG can be mounted with its ocular lens at the rear of the flat-top and it'll be just about right.  A TA11 with 2.4" of eye relief should be mounted with its ocular lens about 1" forward of the rear of the flat top for such a shooter.  (This corresponds to the front of the TA51 mount at the forward end of the flat-top.)

The optic should have optimum eye relief in the 1.5" - 2.0" range.  With eye relief in this range, you can bypass the whole SWAN-sleeve / cantilever mount issue and use regular, solid, super-high rings.  The side-to-side flexibility of the eye relief of the TA11 is a big advantage over the TA01/31, so if that flexibility could be added, it would really help for shooting from weird field positions.

General concerns. Size- It should be compact, maybe only slightly larger than a TA11.  When the ocular lens is positioned correctly for a NTCH shooter, the objective of the scope should not extend much past the forward end of the flat-top, if at all.  The weight of the scope should be no more than 18 ounces- the lighter the better.  The scope needs to be durable, with an absolute minimum of external adjustments to break or allow moisture/sand ingress.  If the scope uses illumination, it should be either of the fiber-optic + tritium type (ACOG), or use the ultra-long-life battery technology present in the latest Aimpoint models (10,000 hours).

In summary:  

1. Eye relief 1.5 - 2.5".
2. Compact, durable construction, lightweight
3. idiot-proof elevation and windage knobs (eg, zero-stop or 1 revolution)
4. clicks no coarser than 0.5MOA
5. primary reticle aimpoint fine to not obscure target
6. reticle has useful horizontal demarcations for windage hold-off, no coarser than 2MOA or 0.5 mil
7. reticle simple enough for close-range speed

Comparison of Spec to a couple available scopes:

1. Leupold M/RT: The M/RT has eye relief of 3.0 - 3.7", which is still about 2" too long for best use on an AR15.  The elevation adjustment knobs are higher than they need to be, which adds bulk to the scope.  On the lit reticle models, the battery life is short.  There is no zero stop on the M1 models.  On the M3 models, the elevation clicks are 1MOA which is too coarse for the precision desired.  Mildot reticle cannot be used with BAC, and it's not particularly fast acquiring targets at very short range, or from a moving vehicle.  Weight is 16 oz, length is 11.3".

2. Nightforce 2.5-10X NXS.  Eye relief is way too long at 3.7".  Elevation and windage knobs are low-pro, but have no hash marks to indicate the "zero" revolution and the zero-stop is not available.  WTF are they thinking?  Some good reticles are available: mildot, FC-2, and NPR-2.  The latter two have 5 MOA windage hold points, which is about 3-4X too coarse for wind hold-off to 500 yards.  For a full 10mph value of wind, you need don't use the first 5 MOA demarcation until you're to about 625 yards.  Weight is 17oz, length is 9.9".

3. US Optics SN-3.  Eye relief 3.0 - 3.5".  Weight 21oz, length 13.8"

4. US Optics SN-4. 1.4-6.2X.  Eye relief 3.3 - 4.3".  Weight 13.75oz, length 9.5".

5. US Optics SN-12.  3.5x Fixed. Eye relief 4". Weight 26oz.  Length 7.5"

6. TA11 ACOG.  3.5x fixed. 2.4" eye relief. Weight 14oz, length 8.0".  Reticle covers too much of small targets beyond 300 yards, no windage indexes.

Let me thank Mike publically for giving me a call out of the blue, after reading something I posted here, to discuss scope options.  That conversation led in part to this long post.

-z

I don't think such a beast exists. How about a 3x9x40 Accupoint? It has BAC, semi target knobs that could be customized easily to prevent confusion during a stage while still providing 1/4 MOA adjustments, and adequate magnification. It would probably work well in a LaRue throw lever mount if you don't like the Swan Sleeve. Just a thought...

7. Trijicon Accupoint. Eye relief 3.2-3.6", weight 12.8oz, length 12.2".   Reticle (2-6MOA depending on magnification) will obscure entire target; no reticle windage demarcations.    No externally adjustable elevation knobs.  

Sorry, it's not even close.

-z

For what you're wanting- I'd have to say US Optics.... The SN-4 may be what you need but if not they can make up anything you're looking for- Give them a call and talk it over, they should be able to help you out

-Roth

Quoted: 7. Trijicon Accupoint. Eye relief 3.2-3.6", weight 12.8oz, length 12.2".   Reticle (2-6MOA depending on magnification) will obscure entire target; no reticle windage demarcations.    No externally adjustable elevation knobs.   Sorry, it's not even close.

Noted. Problem is, nothing is close to the spec you desire. You'll end up with a comprimise in the end. Hope you find something that will get you by.

Think of it as an "objective" spec.  

Zak,
You must have meant this, at least partially, as an intellectual exercise. I’m sure you know there is nothing out there that perfectly fits your needs.
I believe that I read somewhere that Trijicon will install elevation and windage knobs for you. (I might be wrong) Not a perfect solution, but maybe a step in the right direction.
Does Trijicon hold a patent on the roof and mirror prism system that they use? Why doesn’t anybody else make a scope with a short eye relief like they do? Is there anybody out there that does custom reticles for ACOGs?
Pete

PE556,

Yes, this was meant as a discussion of what one would want in a medium-range precision optic for an AR15 platform, in contrast to what is currently available.  It is by making  these distinctions that progress can be made.

-z

Zak,


       I don't know if these optics meet your exact spec, but they make come close.  You may want to check out Schmidt & Benders Short Dot Scope....It has been fielded by some SOF units over in the box and I've heard nothing but good about it....Last I heard it was only avalible to Mil / LEO, but heard that was soon to change.

       Another is the Swarovski Babicht PV-I rifle scope......Both of these scopes are in the 1.5 - 4x magnification range....Maybe not everything you are looking for, but may be worth a look.



Semper Fi
Jeff

Got a link to the S&B Short Dot?  I can't find it with Google.

Zak,


      Go to Diamond Back Tactical and down load the 2004 catalog via PDF, it's on page 243 - 244



Semper Fi
Jeff

My practical shooting experience is quite limited, as I am just now getting into the competition shooting arena.  That being said, I would have to surmise that an ideal optic would likely include a Doctor Optic or similar red-dot sight mounted in conjunction with a more conventional scope design.  The problem is this adds weight, and complicates the system by adding more parts.  ACOGs with a BAC can address both the problems a dual optic setup addresses, but can it do it as well as a dual optic setup?  Those are just my opinions on the subject.  My problem is I don't have the money to gain the practical experience needed to make as informed opinions as some.

You're mostly right.  To enable the rifle for close-range hosing as fast as possible a secondary optic such as a Doctor or JPoint mounted somewhere - preferrably closer to the bore than atop the primary scope - helps somewhat.  

I don't feel like I lose very much speed close-in with the TA11.  At extreme close range, anybody with some trigger time practicing can hose without using a sight.  If you need more precision (e.g. headshots) or the range is longer (ie, in the 10+ yard range), the BAC is still really fast.

I am not particularly concerned with solving the "hosing" sight problem here because there are already pretty good solutions if you want one.

It's not the hard to do one's own experiments.  Set up arrays of IPSC targets from 0 - 100 yards and test target transition times and "hammer" split times using a shot timer.  Set of an IPSC pistol stage: shoot it with your pistol, and then with your rifle and compare times.

-z

EDIT:  Your point about complexity and things to fail is very good.    I don't want more things with lens caps, brightness to adjust, batteries to replace, mounting screws to verify are tight.  K.I.S.S. rules.

I'm still very new to this, but I enjoy practical shooting very much and wish to continue to pursue it.  Do you know of a place where I can get some IPSC silhouette targets?  I plan to pick up some steels in the future, but those a little pricy for my budget at the moment.  

Try www.targetbarn.com/

IOR 2.5-10x42 ill MP-8 reticle

I had this battle for a while and this is what I came to.

Matt Carper

8. IOR/Valdada 2.5-10x.  Eye relief 3.5", length 13.75".  Clicks are 1/2 MOA, but it's not clear if the turret covers can be left off permanently.  Diopter adjustment is one more thing to get bumped out of adjustment.

bump for posterity and new readers

I think the ultimate do all scope, for the ultimate do almost everything rifle(ar15) has yet to be made. A scope thats say 1-10x no more than 30mm objective illuminated retical(of yer choice) 1/2 MOA adjustments on the target knobs(lower profile if possible). The only problem would be keeping said scope small and on the lighter side. But it would allow for CQB as well as reach out and touch somone. I'd also prefer a first focal plain retical(but thats just me I like them). It world work just as good on a .308(FAL, M1A ect.) as it would an AR. I doubt one would ever be made but it would be bad ass. Also it would have to be built like a tank, but still not cost over say $1k(definatly won't see that I'm sure).

Quoted: 8. IOR/Valdada 2.5-10x.  Eye relief 3.5", length 13.75".  Clicks are 1/2 MOA, but it's not clear if the turret covers can be left off permanently.  Diopter adjustment is one more thing to get bumped out of adjustment.

IOR turret covers can be left off the turrets are sealed. I leave my IOR(4-14x50) turret covers off all the time on my 308 no problems ever. And I wouldn't worry about the diopter adjustment either, I have yet to have a problem with it.

Zac,

Great write up.  Isn't it funny, with so many scopes on the market, no one makes a model which encompasses your goals.  Who would'a thunk it?

Zak,
Have you had a boo at the specs on the NF 1-4 yet?

Basicload (on LF) has the 1.1-4 S&B Short Dot on his gun
Basicload's Loadout

I found some data on the Short Dot here: www.schmidtbender.com/scopes_policemarksman.shtml  (ETA: I can't tell if that actually IS the short dot or not.  It looks like it, but it's labelled differently)
It's hard to find good info on this scope.  The eye relief is 3.3".   Clicks are 1/2MOA.  It's not clear if the elevation turret only has one revolution or not (that would be good, assuming it's got enough adjustment to get to 800 with a 100 zero).

All I know about the 1-4 NXS is what's in the NF catalog:
eye relief 3.5"
field of view @ 100 yards: 100' @ 1x, 24.9' @ 4x
1/4MOA clicks, no revolution marks, no zero stop
8.7" long, 16.5oz
same reticle choices as the 2.5-10
The 1-4 and 2.5-10 NXS's have no way to determine what elevation revolution you're on.

I really prefer a little more magnification than 4x for shooting to 800 yards.  

I think that S&B deserves more attention...

WOW !! great job. I'd be curious how you feel about the Leupold 1-5x20 scopes?? I realixe they are not in the same league as the S&B or the US Optics, but I was curious of your opinion of them in general.

Quoted: WOW !! great job. I'd be curious how you feel about the Leupold 1-5x20 scopes?? I realixe they are not in the same league as the S&B or the US Optics, but I was curious of your opinion of them in general.

To be clear, this thread is meant to address a precision optic for an AR platform (AR15 or AR10) intended to make hits on targets smaller than silhouettes to about 800 yards.   Think "SPR."  

The problems of close (0-50) and 20 - 350 yard general purpose are solved by the Aimpoint M2 and the TA11 ACOGs, respectively, IMO.

I actually have a Leupold 1.5-5x20mm scope!   The eye relief is less flexible than the TA11 with regard to optical axis alignment-- by this I mean if your head isn't centered just right, the scope will "black out" especially at 5x.  At 1.5x, it's a little bit better, but much slower to acquire than a TA11.   For long-range precision work, I want more than 5x magnification.   At 1.5x, the eye relief is something like 4.7", and at 5x, it's closer to 3.7".   So not only does the eye relief change drastically as the power changes, but you have to mount it almost like a "scout" scope.  The other killer is that it has no field-adjustable elevation and windage knobs.    

The 1.5-5x isn't really in the right class to compete here.    However, it would be right at home on a rifle for which you won't be shooting further than your point-blank-range (for whatever margin of vertical error you can accept).   I'd be one of my first choices on a lightweight conventional bolt action hunting rifle, but on an AR in that application, I'd rather have a TA11/31 -- it fits the rifle better, is more compact, and has more general purpose application (BAC and the BDC).

To shoot precisely at long range, you compute a data card which has the elevation MOA/clicks required at intervals out to the max range (say every 50 yards), along with the wind drift data, typically for 1 "full value" (10mph crosswind).  Thus once you arrive at a shooting location, you range your targets by the method of your choice, dial the elevation, dope the wind, and either dial windage or use windage hold-off.    The data-set on the card ought to be for your specific rifle, with the specific ammo, at the specific environmental conditions.   For exmaple, it's pretty common to have to change data slightly going from my "home" elevation of 5000' to the NRA Whittington Center's 6800'.

-z

Zak,

The Leupold Tacticals have long eye relief but getting an ARMS S-EX rail to mount the scope further forward is no great challenge.  A 3.5-10X40mm LRT M3 should serve nicely, no?  How about an 3-9X36mm MRT M3?

You can get mil dot reticles and BDC knobs.

I used to run a 4.5-14X50 M1.   With the large bell a good halfway down the rifle-length fore-end, the rifle's balance is all off and it weighs a ton.

Right now, my thinking is that the M/RT meets more of the criteria, with the exception of short eye relief.   However, I've looked through one and wasn't that impressed.  Everyone seems to say the 2.5-10 NXS optics are way better.  It has the additional downfall of not having a zero-stoppable elevation knob.   I may be able to make due with the 2MOA hash marks in the NPR2 reticle.


-z

Ah seen - I misunderstood you were trying to get an optic that did both (and I really thought you were stretching the carbine well past its limits...)

It all makes sense to me now (maybe I should titles and topics better before goign off halfcocked)

Quoted: I used to run a 4.5-14X50 M1.   With the large bell a good halfway down the rifle-length fore-end, the rifle's balance is all off and it weighs a ton. Right now, my thinking is that the M/RT meets more of the criteria, with the exception of short eye relief.   However, I've looked through one and wasn't that impressed.  Everyone seems to say the 2.5-10 NXS optics are way better.  It has the additional downfall of not having a zero-stoppable elevation knob.   I may be able to make due with the 2MOA hash marks in the NPR2 reticle. -z

Zak,  This is a great discussion you have here, I was thinking about the Optic stituation  for sometime and I decided to go with a NXS 2.5-10x24mm for a Grendel that I'm going to build.  I was bouncing back and forth from the MR/T and the NXS and I chose the NXS.  Since everything you have heard and read about them is top notch!  Also a side note I could have gotten the MR/T for dealer price and I still went with the NXS.  Which I have to pay retail! But it will be money well spent!  If you decide to go that way I can give you the number of this dealer who has better price's than what you have seen here or from other dealers of NXS.

Bigant

It's real easy.

All somebody has to do is take a Leupold 3.5-10X M1 and shrink it down to the size of a TA11, reduce the eye relief to 2.4", make the knobs low-profile with 1/10 mil clicks and lockable, one revolution only, keep the fiber-optic BAC lighting the dead center dot of the reticle for reflex shooting (with some capability to dial down the brightness to zero), and use a fine reticle with 1/2 mil hash marks.

Easy, right?  

Quoted: Quoted: WOW !! great job. I'd be curious how you feel about the Leupold 1-5x20 scopes?? I realixe they are not in the same league as the S&B or the US Optics, but I was curious of your opinion of them in general. To be clear, this thread is meant to address a precision optic for an AR platform (AR15 or AR10) intended to make hits on targets smaller than silhouettes to about 800 yards.   Think "SPR."   The problems of close (0-50) and 20 - 350 yard general purpose are solved by the Aimpoint M2 and the TA11 ACOGs, respectively, IMO. I actually have a Leupold 1.5-5x20mm scope!   The eye relief is less flexible than the TA11 with regard to optical axis alignment-- by this I mean if your head isn't centered just right, the scope will "black out" especially at 5x.  At 1.5x, it's a little bit better, but much slower to acquire than a TA11.   For long-range precision work, I want more than 5x magnification.   At 1.5x, the eye relief is something like 4.7", and at 5x, it's closer to 3.7".   So not only does the eye relief change drastically as the power changes, but you have to mount it almost like a "scout" scope.  The other killer is that it has no field-adjustable elevation and windage knobs.     The 1.5-5x isn't really in the right class to compete here.    However, it would be right at home on a rifle for which you won't be shooting further than your point-blank-range (for whatever margin of vertical error you can accept).   I'd be one of my first choices on a lightweight conventional bolt action hunting rifle, but on an AR in that application, I'd rather have a TA11/31 -- it fits the rifle better, is more compact, and has more general purpose application (BAC and the BDC). To shoot precisely at long range, you compute a data card which has the elevation MOA/clicks required at intervals out to the max range (say every 50 yards), along with the wind drift data, typically for 1 "full value" (10mph crosswind).  Thus once you arrive at a shooting location, you range your targets by the method of your choice, dial the elevation, dope the wind, and either dial windage or use windage hold-off.    The data-set on the card ought to be for your specific rifle, with the specific ammo, at the specific environmental conditions.   For exmaple, it's pretty common to have to change data slightly going from my "home" elevation of 5000' to the NRA Whittington Center's 6800'. -z

Nice post, I have to agree with most of it. I use a Leupold 1-4x20 on my AR. It was chosen spesificly for use between 0 and 300 yards and it works well for that. I haven't shot it at 600 yet to see how it does, I need to do that one of these days though. The IOR 2.5-10x42 I think fits the bill rather nicly for the shooting you outlined, however in some situations I think the smaller variables are still better, even to extended ranges. Besides that if yer going to have to take shots at 300+ yards yer better off with  .308 or anything bigger than .223 there is no reason to do any sniping with a .223 past 300 yards really. It just doesn't have what it takes past that, even with the heavier OTM rounds. Thats the only thing that has kept me from putting a 2.5-10 IOR on my AR. There is just no reason to be shooting the .223 at extended ranges(+300 yards) execpt for competition and of course the military may have a reason too as well.  

For 0-300 a 1-4/1.5-5 power scope should do very well. I used the 1-4 in a Defensive Edge class, I could do everything, though some things were a little troublesome but I still got rounds on target. I haven't played with an ACOG, and I've played with a couple aimpoints and didn't really like them for anything past 150ish. But than again I'm not a big dot sight fan either(but thier growing on me.)

Zak,

The Leupold 50 mm scopes are big and heavy.  The one you mentioned weighs 22 oz.  Leupolds 3.5-10X40 mm weighs in at just 13 oz - a half pound lighter and more compact, too.

Have you considered compiling a list of requirements?  Just boil your post down to a simple list.  It will make it easier for others to understand.  A list facilitates comparison to scope specs, too.  

In the past, when I've gone through that type of exercise, I've often found the products that best suit my needs are otu there, but perhaps aren't as popular as they should be (usually due to no marketing, poor marketing,...).

Besides that if yer going to have to take shots at 300+ yards yer better off with .308 or anything bigger than .223 there is no reason to do any sniping with a .223 past 300 yards really.

 I do shoot a lot of competition with 223, and this kind of optic would be appropriate for at least two matches.   But your point about 308 is well taken.  In fact, the rifle I'm trying to equip is my AR10.

For 0-300 a 1-4/1.5-5 power scope should do very well. I used the 1-4 in a Defensive Edge class, I could do everything, though some things were a little troublesome but I still got rounds on target. I haven't played with an ACOG,

For 0-300 on anything but very small targets, I think the ACOG wins.

Mike,

Good points.  The weight I'm seeing for the 3.5-10X M1 is 19.5oz.   And the straight 10X M1 is about 21oz.  Am I missing something?

I'll work on distilling it down; you're right that it's not that complicated.

-z

Quoted: Besides that if yer going to have to take shots at 300+ yards yer better off with .308 or anything bigger than .223 there is no reason to do any sniping with a .223 past 300 yards really.  I do shoot a lot of competition with 223, and this kind of optic would be appropriate for at least two matches.   But your point about 308 is well taken.  In fact, the rifle I'm trying to equip is my AR10. For 0-300 a 1-4/1.5-5 power scope should do very well. I used the 1-4 in a Defensive Edge class, I could do everything, though some things were a little troublesome but I still got rounds on target. I haven't played with an ACOG, For 0-300 on anything but very small targets, I think the ACOG wins. Mike, Good points.  The weight I'm seeing for the 3.5-10X M1 is 19.5oz.   And the straight 10X M1 is about 21oz.  Am I missing something? I'll work on distilling it down; you're right that it's not that complicated. -z

I don't know about that, the acog comment I mean. I'll have to go and play around with one next chance I get. The way my retical is(duplex)as long as the target is between where the retical goes from thick to thin, it's a garunteed hit(when the scope is properly sighted in that is) Aim COM hit com, it comes up quick and is right there and no matter what I'll put that round on target(well if I pull the trigger when I'm suposed to). I think the 1-4 is just as fast as an ACOG, but like I said I haven't played with the ACOG yet, just looked at one here and there. Actually I take that back I got to shoot an M4 at an NFA shoot that had an ACOG on it but that was two years ago, and I didn't like it all that much. But thats not enough of an experiance and or trigger time with one to make a good comparison.

Where the post gets thick on top, thats a pretty much dead on aimpoint at 100 yards. Where it gets thick at the bottom Thats about dead nuts at 300 yards(I'd know for sure if I had had the scope dialed in dead on when I was shooting it at 300 but I didn't) those are off a 50yard zero using wolf 55gr FMJ, it's about the same with the 68gr BTHP from black hills too.

If you get a chance, try a TA11 ACOG in some type of "practical" rifle shooting, and the advantages should become clear.  The brightly lit donut is fast to pick up even with a compromised/no cheek weld.

Quoted: If you get a chance, try a TA11 ACOG in some type of "practical" rifle shooting, and the advantages should become clear.  The brightly lit donut is fast to pick up even with a compromised/no cheek weld.

Will do If I can get my hands on one.

Look at the VXIII scopes, not the tactical line.  A little black poaint to cover the "golden ring" and it will look tactical.  Premiere Reticles can install a mil dot reticle and M1 or possibly even M3 knobs if the low profile knobs are not to your liking.  Low profile knobs help reduce the chance of snagging.

Quoted: Look at the VXIII scopes, not the tactical line.  A little black poaint to cover the "golden ring" and it will look tactical.  Premiere Reticles can install a mil dot reticle and M1 or possibly even M3 knobs if the low profile knobs are not to your liking.  Low profile knobs help reduce the chance of snagging.

Plus they are user windage/elevation adjustable in the field now. (finger adjustable)

Quoted: Plus they are user windage/elevation adjustable in the field now. (finger adjustable)

Useless unless sealed, large, and have highly visible markings from the rear.  Some ability to know what revolution you're on is required too.

-z

Quoted: Useless unless sealed, large, and have highly visible markings from the rear.  Some ability to know what revolution you're on is required too. -z

Key points

I dumped a round one rev out with my B&L 10X Tactical which once rested upon my bolt gun - I had just been deriding folks for being one rev out and saying never happend to me etc.
Fortunately the cardboard hostage took the round and I learned in training...

Duplex reticles are usless for quick ranging finding I would agree to contact premier reticles

Why do knobs have to be large?  The M3 knobs are not large.

Quoted: Why do knobs have to be large?  The M3 knobs are not large.

That was poor description on my part.  They have to be large enough to actuate from the shooting position.  Even if new VXIII knobs are finger-adjustable, they are not really practically field adjustable.

The S&B single-revolution knob is nice.

The problem I have with the M3 knobs is not their size, it's that the M3 elevation knob has 1 MOA clicks!

-z

Yes, minute of man and there's only one revolution on the turret (so you cannot get lost).

Quoted: Yes, minute of man and there's only one revolution on the turret (so you cannot get lost).

Note that some S&B scopes have 1/10 mil clicks (approx 1/3 moa) have only one revolution, and have enough elevation for 308 out to about 900 yards.

-z

Quoted: Look at the VXIII scopes, not the tactical line.  A little black poaint to cover the "golden ring" and it will look tactical.  Premiere Reticles can install a mil dot reticle and M1 or possibly even M3 knobs if the low profile knobs are not to your liking.  Low profile knobs help reduce the chance of snagging.

 The 'M-3 knobs' can only be had on M-3 scopes. The target turrets can be put on VX-2 and VX-3's. 45.00 per. There are two different dials available for the target turrets also. One with quite visable markings.

 Leupold will also change reticles. But cannot install M-3 stuff.

 

Quoted: Quoted: Look at the VXIII scopes, not the tactical line.  A little black poaint to cover the "golden ring" and it will look tactical.  Premiere Reticles can install a mil dot reticle and M1 or possibly even M3 knobs if the low profile knobs are not to your liking.  Low profile knobs help reduce the chance of snagging.  The 'M-3 knobs' can only be had on M-3 scopes. The target turrets can be put on VX-2 and VX-3's. 45.00 per. There are two different dials available for the target turrets also. One with quite visable markings.  Leupold will also change reticles. But cannot install M-3 stuff.

I'm sure all these Leupold limitations are ttrue, hence, the merit and interest in this thread.

+1