Scope for a 5.56

[dhoobler]

I have the acog ta01. There is not a better scope. It is combat tested in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Two points about the acog. The bdc is calibrated for m193 fired from a 20 inch barrel. It practical terms, it will work with m855 and shorter barrels.

Second, it tritium is quite expensive to replace. It costs about $250 to replace it when it decays after 12 years. If you only use it in daylight, that does not matter.

[Skiprr]

Another option is to consider an offset, 45-degree Picatinny mount (like this one, from Brownells) that would ride under your glass, and then mount a lightweight, quality red-dot on that. For close-quarters snap-shots you cant the barrel slightly inward and use the red dot. When you have more time, you straighten the angle of the stock and use your glass. It adds additional weight plus an object that sticks out to the side, but just about nothing is as fast at ECQ distances as a red dot, and that frees you up to choose a for-purpose glass that doesn't have to worry about sub-75-yard shots.

The result ends up something like this (though, depending upon the type of red dot, I'd likely prefer mine to be mounted farther forward):

[The Annoyed Man]

I have the acog ta01. There is not a better scope. It is combat tested in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Two points about the acog. The bdc is calibrated for m193 fired from a 20 inch barrel. It practical terms, it will work with m855 and shorter barrels.

Second, it tritium is quite expensive to replace. It costs about $250 to replace it when it decays after 12 years. If you only use it in daylight, that does not matter.

Actually, it could matter. It's not a deal breaker, but I found originally with my TA31F that the reticle was TOO bright in bright sunlight. Then a friend of mine (multiple Afghanistan tours and a LOT of combat experience with an ACOG) taught me to put electrical tape over the fiberoptic element in full daylight—relying on either the tritium only, or on tritium with e-tape folded back a little at a time to expose just enough of the fiberoptic element to supplement the tritium according to ambient light conditions. It made the reticle much sharper and easier to see, eliminating any blurring of the reticle image from overbrightness. I absolutely love the scope, but that trick is what made it perfect. But even without either the fiberoptic or the tritium, you still have a usable black reticle for daylight use.

One other thing...... I have two optics for my latest build - the above mentioned ACOG, and an Aimpoint T2 Micro. I keep the T2 on the gun, and keep the ACOG in reserve for longer distances. Yes, I realize I could pop for a magnifier, but I already have one, and it's not enough because a plain dot is not a good choice for longer ranges—magnified or not—and the magnifier and its mount weighs at least as much, if not more, than the ACOG and its mount.

Now, the question becomes, how repeatable is your return to zero if you dismount your optic for any reason, and then remount it? If, for example, you have elected to not go with an angle mounted set of iron sights or RDS (I have my own reasons for not doing this which I will explain further down), and if your choice of scope becomes a hindrance at CQB distance for instance, you'll be able to quickly dismount it, and remount it later. OR, if you do like I do and maintain two optics for your rifle, you can switch them back and forth. However, the problem of returning to zero then becomes an issue.

I cannot emphasize enough how much it is worth it to use a BOBRO quick detach mount for your AR's optics if you are ever going to be in the position of dismounting/remounting your optic. I used to have a link to test results in which a range of QD mounts from reputable manufacturers were compared in an independent test against one another for repeatability of return to zero. The BOBRO mounts won the competition hands down. I don't remember the exact numbers, but the BOBROs returned to within about .1 MOA of zero with great repeatability. To put that in perspective, in a rifle capable of accuracy at 1,000 yards, the BOBRO mount will get you back to within 1" of zero at that distance. That is just crazy accurate.

Yes, they are expensive, but they are not as expensive as some, and they are WELL worth it. I have personally tested this on my own AR. I have zeroed the T2, removed it, zeroed the ACOG, removed it and remounted the T2, tested zero, and it was spot on. Then I removed the T2 and retested the ACOG, and it was spot on. I have done this several times, and I have never seen a measurable movement of zero at 50 yards for either optic. I have not tested it at 100 yards or further, but I plan to and will report the results when I do. However, I am confident that the results will be equally reliable. Currently, I have BOBRO mounts for both the Aimpoint and the ACOG, and for the Vortex 4-16x50 Viper PST on my SCAR 17S. The Aimpoint and ACOG mounts have single release levers and are designed to be permanently attached directly to the base of the optic, and the Vortex mount has a single release lever and two 30mm rings, and is designed for a full sized rifle scope. I'll never buy another brand of QD mount again.

I bought my T2 Micro from SWFA ($749.95), and it was a kit purchase which included the BOBRO Absolute Cowitness QD mount ($109.95 if purchased separately), and a 30-round PMAG ($11.95 from SWFA)........which means that you're getting the T2 for $628.05......or about $11 cheaper than at OpticsPlanet.com (LINKEY). The mount for the ACOG runs $119.95 from SWFA (LINKEY). The full-up riflescope mount for the Vortex runs $209.99 from SWFA (LINKEY).

If you have no plans to buy higher end optics, then none of this matters. But if you're going to pony up for really good optics, you'll want the very best in mounts, and BOBRO is it.

[Richbirdhunter]

I have the acog ta01. There is not a better scope. It is combat tested in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Two points about the acog. The bdc is calibrated for m193 fired from a 20 inch barrel. It practical terms, it will work with m855 and shorter barrels.

Second, it tritium is quite expensive to replace. It costs about $250 to replace it when it decays after 12 years. If you only use it in daylight, that does not matter.

Actually, it could matter. It's not a deal breaker, but I found originally with my TA31F that the reticle was TOO bright in bright sunlight. Then a friend of mine (multiple Afghanistan tours and a LOT of combat experience with an ACOG) taught me to put electrical tape over the fiberoptic element in full daylight—relying on either the tritium only, or on tritium with e-tape folded back a little at a time to expose just enough of the fiberoptic element to supplement the tritium according to ambient light conditions. It made the reticle much sharper and easier to see, eliminating any blurring of the reticle image from overbrightness. I absolutely love the scope, but that trick is what made it perfect. But even without either the fiberoptic or the tritium, you still have a usable black reticle for daylight use.

One other thing...... I have two optics for my latest build - the above mentioned ACOG, and an Aimpoint T2 Micro. I keep the T2 on the gun, and keep the ACOG in reserve for longer distances. Yes, I realize I could pop for a magnifier, but I already have one, and it's not enough because a plain dot is not a good choice for longer ranges—magnified or not—and the magnifier and its mount weighs at least as much, if not more, than the ACOG and its mount.

Now, the question becomes, how repeatable is your return to zero if you dismount your optic for any reason, and then remount it? If, for example, you have elected to not go with an angle mounted set of iron sights or RDS (I have my own reasons for not doing this which I will explain further down), and if your choice of scope becomes a hindrance at CQB distance for instance, you'll be able to quickly dismount it, and remount it later. OR, if you do like I do and maintain two optics for your rifle, you can switch them back and forth. However, the problem of returning to zero then becomes an issue.

I cannot emphasize enough how much it is worth it to use a BOBRO quick detach mount for your AR's optics if you are ever going to be in the position of dismounting/remounting your optic. I used to have a link to test results in which a range of QD mounts from reputable manufacturers were compared in an independent test against one another for repeatability of return to zero. The BOBRO mounts won the competition hands down. I don't remember the exact numbers, but the BOBROs returned to within about .1 MOA of zero with great repeatability. To put that in perspective, in a rifle capable of accuracy at 1,000 yards, the BOBRO mount will get you back to within 1" of zero at that distance. That is just crazy accurate.

Yes, they are expensive, but they are not as expensive as some, and they are WELL worth it. I have personally tested this on my own AR. I have zeroed the T2, removed it, zeroed the ACOG, removed it and remounted the T2, tested zero, and it was spot on. Then I removed the T2 and retested the ACOG, and it was spot on. I have done this several times, and I have never seen a measurable movement of zero at 50 yards for either optic. I have not tested it at 100 yards or further, but I plan to and will report the results when I do. However, I am confident that the results will be equally reliable. Currently, I have BOBRO mounts for both the Aimpoint and the ACOG, and for the Vortex 4-16x50 Viper PST on my SCAR 17S. The Aimpoint and ACOG mounts have single release levers and are designed to be permanently attached directly to the base of the optic, and the Vortex mount has a single release lever and two 30mm rings, and is designed for a full sized rifle scope. I'll never buy another brand of QD mount again.

I bought my T2 Micro from SWFA ($749.95), and it was a kit purchase which included the BOBRO Absolute Cowitness QD mount ($109.95 if purchased separately), and a 30-round PMAG ($11.95 from SWFA)........which means that you're getting the T2 for $628.05......or about $11 cheaper than at OpticsPlanet.com (LINKEY). The mount for the ACOG runs $119.95 from SWFA (LINKEY). The full-up riflescope mount for the Vortex runs $209.99 from SWFA (LINKEY).

If you have no plans to buy higher end optics, then none of this matters. But if you're going to pony up for really good optics, you'll want the very best in mounts, and BOBRO is it.

That's a great setup, I'll spend time looking at that.
Thank you

[The Annoyed Man]

If, for example, you have elected to not go with an angle mounted set of iron sights or RDS (I have my own reasons for not doing this which I will explain further down)

I actually forgot to explain why I don't like angle-mounted sights.....

I am left-handed. My ARs have ambidextrous controls, but they still eject out the right side of the receiver. Ditto my SCAR. When the AR/SCAR platform is held with the receiver straight upright, it throws its brass far enough away to not get underfoot. That is also true if the angled sights are mounted on the left side of the gun, and a right-handed shooter tilts the gun inward to the left to access the BUIS. The brass is still ejected outward in an arc, away from the shooter. But if the shooter is left-handed, then the angled BUIS will be on the left side of the gun. If he wants to tilt the gun inward to the right to access the BUIS, then the receiver ejects the brass almost straight down either onto his (possibly bare) arm, or directly under his feet — which means that he has to divide his attention between the sights and what's underfoot if he doesn't want to slip/trip and fall.

For my AR, my solution was to use the Aimpoint T2 with an absolute co-witness mount. I can match the irons to zero to the same POA/POI as the sight. If the sight goes down, it is easy to deploy the iron sights without losing zero. With the ACOG mounted, if I have to remove the scope to deploy the rear sight, but that is achieved by flipping a single lever to release it from the rail. On the other hand, the BAC aiming system on the 4x32 BAC ACOG scopes means that you can still use the reticle at CQB distances if you shoot with both eyes open. It's not ideal, but it works. The video below doesn't use the ACOG reticle, but the optic principle still applies to those ACOGs which have the "BAC" label, like mine does:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpGSKKgWWks

Even so, I keep the T2 mounted as the primary optic because it is better for home/self defense (this gun's primary purpose), and still OK for closer range hunting, hog hunting, etc.

For my SCAR, a single lever-throw will pop off the 4-16 scope and give me access to the excellent iron sights that come with it.

If you're right handed, a set of angled sights works fine.

[drjoker]

You'd have to be more specific. "a few hundred yards" could be 300 yards or 900 yards. Since you want close quarters, then I suggest you get an open red dot scope like an eotech, which should also work out to 300 yards or so. Cowitness it with iron sights and you should be good out to 600 yards. If your eyes are old and you need a better scope, then get a mil spec mildot scope or a good leupold and then put a laser on it like a crimson trace for close quarters because you can't cowitness it with irons if you have a tube scope on it.

You also have to specify if your targets are moving (perps and hunting game) or still (paper). If targets are moving, then irons and eotech because you have better field of view. If still, then tube scope and laser.

[Pawpaw]

I have the acog ta01. There is not a better scope. It is combat tested in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Two points about the acog. The bdc is calibrated for m193 fired from a 20 inch barrel. It practical terms, it will work with m855 and shorter barrels.

Second, it tritium is quite expensive to replace. It costs about $250 to replace it when it decays after 12 years. If you only use it in daylight, that does not matter.

Actually, it could matter. It's not a deal breaker, but I found originally with my TA31F that the reticle was TOO bright in bright sunlight. Then a friend of mine (multiple Afghanistan tours and a LOT of combat experience with an ACOG) taught me to put electrical tape over the fiberoptic element in full daylight—relying on either the tritium only, or on tritium with e-tape folded back a little at a time to expose just enough of the fiberoptic element to supplement the tritium according to ambient light conditions. It made the reticle much sharper and easier to see, eliminating any blurring of the reticle image from overbrightness. I absolutely love the scope, but that trick is what made it perfect. But even without either the fiberoptic or the tritium, you still have a usable black reticle for daylight use.

TAM, the TA01 does not have fiber optics. In daylight, it relies on a tried and true etched reticle. Like a hunting scope, it shows up black. Of course, the tritium is always lighting up the reticle, but you can't see it until it starts getting dark.

This is the TA01 reticle:

[The Annoyed Man]

TAM, the TA01 does not have fiber optics. In daylight, it relies on a tried and true etched reticle. Like a hunting scope, it shows up black. Of course, the tritium is always lighting up the reticle, but you can't see it until it starts getting dark.

This is the TA01 reticle:

I've seen that one for .308, but didn't know there was one for .223/5.56. A friend of mine has been trying to convince me that the TA01NSN-308 ACOG is the best choice for my SCAR 17, but with only 1.5" of eye relief in a scope intended for a fairly light .308, I'm not comfortable with that. But with or without fiberoptic, I think the 4X ACOG is the perfect all around scope......unless you care to invest in a two-optic system like I've put together.

That's why I'm looking real hard at the Vortex 2.5-10x42mm Viper PST FFP for that SCAR. I've looked through that scope, and it is a great scope. One of the cardinal sins people make in scope selection is "over-scoping" their rifles. I like that 2.5-10x magnification range because it gives you plenty sufficient magnification for distances out to 800 yard or so, which is really the effective range limit for a 16" barreled .308 carbine, while giving you a fairly low magnification for closer in. It's still not a CQB scope, but truthfully, a .308 isn't really a CQB weapon. But a .308 carbine with a medium range variable power scope like a 2.5-10 would be more than enough optics for any hunting situation you're likely to run into in Texas.

[Pawpaw]

The TA01 is for 5.56 and the TA01B is for 7.62.

One advantage of the TA01NSN scopes is that it makes mounting a RMR on top easier. You just remove the rear peep sight and Trijicon sells an RMR mount that just screws to those bosses. Getting mine mounted was a very frustrating trial-and-error process.

I agree about the eye relief being just a bit close for a light .308, especially when you consider how unforgiving the ACOG's eyepiece is. For those that don't know, there is no padding of any kind. It's just anodized aluminum that will be smacking you in the eyeball.