I bought a Fakepoint Micro years ago, but the internals rattled apart on a real AR.  Also had a Fakecog, but it had a weird illuminated cross reticle that would either be red or green.

Sort of steered clear of fake optics since then, but seems like they're getting better?

For the real deal they are exact externally, the difference is in the reticle calibration for a 20" and 14.5" barrel. So for a FAKEOG, it really don't matter. Get 2 of the same one

They are fixed focus. Other dude is confused.

I can’t get my rear focus to adjust on my TA31H either. Threw it in the garbage

I was trying to be gentle

Too bad I dont see a ta33 clone lol.

I got 2 . 1 on ebay came with focus on back like a regular scope to focus reticle. Took 3 weeks to get and ,came with cross hair BDC. The one I ordered
was supposed to have the red chevron. 75.00 shipped. Dropped it on a carpeted floor and it went to hell inside.opened it up and set screw to glass and hot glue holding
it together. Reticle was also canted. Fiberoptic cord broke off as well. I may play with it to see if I can make it work.
@nd one I got off Amazon. This one came with the red chevron but reticle was also canted. No focus for the reticle. Slightly blurry. Will return this one to the Zon. May try one more time
From a different seller. If your going to buy I would buy from Amazon. Same products, get it in 2 days, easy return. just wanted one for a S&W AR15-22 Optic.
Not to expensive and, if I can get one that is squared away I''d call it a win.

FYI/FWIW...

ALI fakecog with elevation labelled UP and windage labelled RIGHT - neither with an arrow.  Both reference CCW direction, so turn elevation CCW for Up, and windage CCW for Right.

I don't know a lot about Trijicon ACOGs, but I do know they cost a lot more than I'd like to pay, and they seem to hold their value quite well.  I've heard about the crystal clear glass, but I've also heard about the less-than-desireable eye-relief (a trait shared with another high end mil optic - Elcan).

So I happened to stumble on this thread that seemed to have some good things about these fakes, which really surprised me.  I've had fake optics, but I haven't consciously bought any since I first started getting into firearms (2010).  All of the ones I've ever had rattled apart, both internally and externally, and just couldn't handle the recoil of a real firearm.  After buying lots and crying lots, I decided that these were toys were only meant for Airsoft rifles, and had no place on real firearms.

But when I read about these fake ACOGs, many were citing they were able to hold up.  There was even a youtube video of a guy trying his fake ACOG on a shotgun.  I thought my M16A4 clone could use an alternative to the carry handle (though I really like the look of the carry handle), so I figured for $60 USD, let's give it a try.

Besides, if shit hit the fan, the M16 clone would probably not be the first rifle I'd grab and depend my life on.  I got it as a novelty because I don't see myself ever coughing up coin for a real one (my real Elcan was already a hard pill to swallow for such low magnification).  This would be used for plinking at the range until it implodes.









There are markings on the body of the scope, but even though I don't own a real ACOG, they don't look very authentic.  The QR code seen on many scopes and firearms just doesn't look right.



I've also seen a few real ACOGs to remember that the works "Trijicon ACOG" were embossed on the side, not printed in bright white, however I could be wrong and maybe there are models that look like this.







At a quick glance, the fake doesn't look too bad, and even has some heft to it, however flip it upside down and I confirmed there was no way this could be a serious substitute for the real deal.  The base consists of two screws, but one of the screws was drilled into the base incorrectly and is too recessed into the base to catch the rail.



On closer inspection, you can seen imperfections in the metal underneath the paint, which could be casting anomalies.



You can also see where the worker who assembled this thing painted the inside of the tube, maybe it was glue or weather proofing to seal the glass.



The glue/paint goes all around where the glass meets the body of the scope.



You can also see the two points where they glued down the fibre optic.



Who knows how long this will hold up.



More imperfections visible in the metal underneath the paint.



Surprisingly, the glass was pretty clear, the reticle was crisp, and the red chevron was nice and bright.  Being completely unfamiliar with ACOGs, I first thought the thing was shipped with the illuminated reticle lit, only to realize there was no battery powered illumination, it was just a really bright fibre optic.  I'm not sure I'd trust the bullet drop numbers printed in that reticle though.



Here you can see where one screw is recessed and completely useless on your rails.









Anyway, the thing looks good on my M16A4 clone...from a distance.  I don't think I'd ever use this beyond plinking at the range.  Shortly after I took these photos, I took the thing off and ended up putting the carry handle back on.  I might just set this fake ACOG aside and use it if I ever build an M4 clone with a dedicated .22lr upper.

Ok, I got the one OP pinged on flea bays. What way to turn the turrets? This thing is bright inside with hardly no ambient light.

Apparently counter clickwise is ‘up’ for the top turret and ‘right’ for the side turret.

Two things:

1. A genuine ACOG is rougher looking (externally) than the knock off. Trijicon doesn’t care about what the molding looks like on the outside. I bet if you handled the fake and gen at the same time (without looking at the glass), you’d think the real one was the knock-off.

2. I’ve got a few high end mounts (Larue comes to mind) that only engage the upper’s Picatinny slots on one cross member (or lug) of the mount.

Other than that... Good write up.

I ordered one and it arrived a couple of weeks ago.  I haven't had the opportunity to shoot with it, but I did mount it.

Overall it looks ok for the price.

My one complaint is that reticule is rotated slightly counter clock.

The optic does fit in the base correctly, so I assume the innards are cranked.

After I shoot with it, I'll see if I can make an adjustment by filing the base, or the optic

I found some on Geek app. They look like these. Anywhere from $50-$75. The reviews and pics look ok. Tempted lol.

Well today I had the chance to dial it in.  I like it.  I put it on a dedicated 22lr upper from PSA.

The rotated reticle is a problem though.

Is it possible to file the base to straighten it up?

Opinions?

How do they hold zero after a few range trips?
I'm not looking for ACOG style abuse/torture...just normal,use.

Will they hold zero? I saw a video review saying they don't.

I'm looking for a compact fixed 3x or 4x.
I was thinking about a PA prism or burris ar-332

Can you cite your reasoning/proof for the vials being illegal to own and buy?  (Honestly curious, as I have never seen or heard this one before, and in a watch making project I am doing I plan on using mini trit vials as hour markers.)

Trit vials on Amazon

Not to mention all night sights sold for pistols use trit vials (or damn near all).

There appears to be regulations over volume of Trit that can be sold and bought, but I can't find any reference to it being illegal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tritium_radioluminescence

Might be illegal to sell, but not to buy/possess.

https://www.amazon.com/ArT-Preserver-Argon-Preservation-System/dp/B01MEHJCQ2

I've seen products like this used on a PVS14 diy

I actually have a few I use on lamp pull strings.

Mine holds zero.

Mine holds zero if I keep checking the mounting screws. The  ta51 knockoff does not stay tight

Blue Loctite

I like mine so far. I put liquid electrical tape on the fiber optic to calm it down (it gathered too much light in bright sun light and blurred the red chevron and numbers )
Dennis

Are they knocking off ta33's yet? I have some 22 stuff that could use the treatment.

I'm guessing that there is no cite coming for the statement that trit is "illegal to buy and own..."

Oh, man, I'd be all over a facog ta33