Trijicon's ACOG can't be beat in terms of light transmission and overall durability, but the eye relief is quite short, so unless you like shooting with your face jammed up into the charging handle, you'll choose something else. Also, most models are passively illuminated.

For the average civilian and home defender, a red dot sight or an LPVO is the way to go (assuming you desire something more than iron sights, though for home shooting distances, irons are really all you need). If you have any astigmatism, the LPVO should be your choice over the RDS. When using an RDS such as the Aimpoint PRO, I do see the dot and can hit targets, but in addition to the dot, I also see a small cluster of tinier red dots at about the two o'clock position, which is distracting. I have no such aberration with refracting optics, and that's why the LPVO is a better choice for me.

If you get an LPVO that's a true 1x (1-4 or 1-6 or even greater), then you've lost nothing by using an LPVO instead of an RDS except compactness and lower weight of the RDS.

My choice is the Trijicon Accupower 1-4x. Now discontinued, this scope was made for Trijicon by LOW- Light Optical Works of Japan, which is a producer of high-quality OEM optics for many scope companies. The Accupower is a real gem, a best buy, and has now been replaced by the Credo (also manufactured by LOW) which is the same optically, is less than an ounce heavier than the Accupower and has twice the battery life of the Accupower, up from ~31 hours, to ~68 hours in the Credo.

One of my Accupowers, shown in a Warne XSKEL mount, combined scope and mount weight of just under two pounds.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Even if the magnification can be dialed down to almost 1×, they’re still not going to be as good for really close distance engagements as a nonmagnifying red dot.

I beg to differ. My Accupower LPVOs are true 1x. That is to say zero magnification, and there is no practical difference between the 1x setting on this scope, and the zero magnification view of my Aimpoint PRO. Both offer true 1x both-eyes-open target acquisition. I lose nothing in close-range shooting with an LPVO.

Hello. If you consider one of the 4x ACOG models (TA31, TA02, TA01), you might want to look into either the KRAM spacer, which allows you to add one of three different heights to the optic and also allows you to move the optic further back so you don't need to shoot nose to charging handle, or the new BCM ACOG mount which puts it at a 1.93" height. Hope this helps.

KRAM: https://www.weaponoutfitters.c...er-acog-pattern.html

BCM: https://bravocompanyusa.com/bc...jicon-acog-and-vcog/

Chris

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Trijicon's ACOG can't be beat in terms of light transmission and overall durability, but the eye relief is quite short, so unless you like shooting with your face jammed up into the charging handle, you'll choose something else. Also, most models are passively illuminated.

For the average civilian and home defender, a red dot sight or an LPVO is the way to go (assuming you desire something more than iron sights, though for home shooting distances, irons are really all you need). If you have any astigmatism, the LPVO should be your choice over the RDS. When using an RDS such as the Aimpoint PRO, I do see the dot and can hit targets, but in addition to the dot, I also see a small cluster of tinier red dots at about the two o'clock position, which is distracting. I have no such aberration with refracting optics, and that's why the LPVO is a better choice for me.

If you get an LPVO that's a true 1x (1-4 or 1-6 or even greater), then you've lost nothing by using an LPVO instead of an RDS except compactness and lower weight of the RDS.

My choice is the Trijicon Accupower 1-4x. Now discontinued, this scope was made for Trijicon by LOW- Light Optical Works of Japan, which is a producer of high-quality OEM optics for many scope companies. The Accupower is a real gem, a best buy, and has now been replaced by the Credo (also manufactured by LOW) which is the same optically, is less than an ounce heavier than the Accupower and has twice the battery life of the Accupower, up from ~31 hours, to ~68 hours in the Credo.

Para, thanks for that excellent info! To speed things along, I think I'll likely start with a red dot (leaning Aimpoint Micro T-2), realizing that I'll probably experiment with other options soon enough. With respect to the LPVOs currently offered, do you have a favorite that most closely tracks to your Trijicon Accupower 1-4x?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: parabellum,

The Trijicon Credo, as mentioned in my post.

Here's the reticle for the Accupower and the current Credo CR424-C-2900013.

Trijicon recommends a 100 yard zero, which is how my two Accupowers are sighted. With the ubiquitous 16" .223/5.56 55 grain- at 20 feet, the point of impact is ever so sightly above the first graduation mark below the red dot; essentially right at the graduation mark.

Not that you require that degree of accuracy in a home defense encounter, but, you could take that hypothetical bad-guy-holding-a-hostage shot with confidence.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
The Trijicon Credo, as mentioned in my post.

Thanks Para! Sorry, I'd misunderstood, thinking a good version was discontinued, but that perhaps you didn't think highly of the replacement. I read it correctly now and it seems obvious to me.

Nightforce nx8 1-8 with fc-dmx reticle in a 1.7 to 1.93 height mount is my preferred optic setup for a general purpose rifle. It’s about perfect as a do everything rifle from contact to 600 yds.

quote:

Originally posted by JoshNC:
Nightforce nx8 1-8 with fc-dmx reticle in a 1.7 to 1.93 height mount is my preferred optic setup for a general purpose rifle. It’s about perfect as a do everything rifle from contact to 600 yds.

This. The FC-DMX reticle is tits. I think 1-8 is the sweet spot for LPVOs and IMO NF does it the best.

It's old, it's uncool, but I love it. A Burris AR 332 is an excellent option.

It's 3x magnified, so my old eyes can see shit at range.

It's an etched reticle in black, so even if the batteries are dead, it works just fine in daylight.

With batteries, it has both red and green at different intensities.

Because the reticle is etched, and not projected, I don't get any flare from my astigmatism.

it has both windage and elevation compensation in the reticle, and I have found it to be spot on with reasonable ammo at reasonable distances.

The sight is occasionally offered for the regular price, but including a holographic reflex sight to put on the sight's rail for in home distance at rapid fire.

It's not a boatload of $.

Are there better options? Probably yes, but I find this unit to be the best of the available compromises for my eyes and my use.

UPDATE:

I got my optics in and mounted them up. I went with an angled offset LaRue mount for my red dot in order to move it forward some to see if that worked better for my right eye. It works, though the battery compartment of the ACOG partially occludes the lens of the red dot. But with both eyes open, my left eye (the one that is better at distance) can see the full target clearly, and the right eye is only needed to see the dot, which it does. Still, I will probably try one of the T-Rex mounts to put it up top of the ACOG and I'll see which is better for me.

It is a preference thing for sure, but I like the 12 o’clock mounting option way better.

My one rifle with an electric sight. Nothing fancy, but extremely effective.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
It is a preference thing for sure, but I like the 12 o’clock mounting option way better.

Same. On my 16" that I use for "distance", I have a red dot that sits atop my 2.5-10. Target acquisition is always easier, FOR ME, when I can PID under zero mag, then just drop down in to my LPVO. I've spent too much time searching for the target than I care to discuss. This helps me mitigate said searching.

I'll definitely try it on top. I like the T-Rex mount for putting it forward on the ACOG.

quote:

Originally posted by r0gue:
I'll definitely try it on top. I like the T-Rex mount for putting it forward on the ACOG.

I believe you're fairly new to the AR platform. A challenge with using 2 sighting systems on the same rifle is attaining a consistent cheek weld on both. IMO an offset red dot on the 1- to 2-o'clock side of the rifle (for a right-handed shooter) is the best method. This requires a buttstock that rotates counter-clockwise without changing cheek weld and having the red dot essentially the same distance from the bore as the main optic.

When the red dot is mounted above the primary optic, the proper eyebox for the optic will be a cheek weld and the proper eyebox for the red will be a chin weld. Some people adapt to this, others not so much.

There's a simple solution. It's right on this page.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
There's a simple solution. It's right on this page.

True true, an LPVO does not carry such challenges. I'll play this two-piece for a while trying to replicate the setup described on one of the earlier pages (videos), but after watching more of D34, (particularly this clip/timestamp) I can see where moAr magnification is better.

Ounces become pounds. How much does all that weigh? Two optics and mounts, with one of them sticking out over the side of the rifle. Think about running around with such a setup- getting it into and out of a vehicle, wielding the rifle while wearing a winter jacket, etc.

A lightweight, variable power optic of good quality is the way to go. If you want 1-6x, Trijicon has a Credo model that's less than two ounces heavier than the 1-4x model. Credo 1-6x.

It's the rare AR-15 owner who settles for good on the first configuration they try out. There's a reason for this.

I have to agree with Para on this. I've run some offset red dots (such as T-1s and things of that size) and they throw the balance off for my liking. Micro red dots like RMRs or Holosun EPS are my preference if I'm going to have both, but that's a very niche rifle for me.

My GPR has a 1-8 and the 1x power is plenty fucking good for me.

Good points, thanks. I've never handled a scope that I felt seemed particularly robust in durability, but I assume that these are more in line with the ACOG in terms of ruggedness?