User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/19/2004 11:01:32 AM EDT
[#1]
Why is this thread not tacked anymore?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2004 9:10:57 PM EDT
[#2]
Sorry for the cruddy pictures of the TriPower.... I will try to get some closer shots that show the reticle better.
just using the fiber optic  Using the battery back-up 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2004 9:31:01 PM EDT
[#3]
What shop is this and where is it?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2004 7:16:45 AM EDT
[#4]
Its the Gun Gallery in Jacksonville.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2004 5:28:43 PM EDT
[#5]
I guess the thumb tack fell out.
Someone find it in the carpet and stick it back in please. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2004 9:53:33 PM EDT
[#6]
Nearly all the tacked threads are now consolidated in the optics FAQ thread here... www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=18&t=211481
Like almost all tacked threads, this one is now getting overlooked too 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2004 7:23:26 PM EDT
[#7]
Lets make sure its not overlooked!!!! I reference this thread when conducting all of my optics research!!! Lets not lose this thread!!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2004 7:33:52 PM EDT
[#8]
I think this thread is one of the BEST ever on this site. It convinced me to buy ever optic that I own.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2004 8:28:59 PM EDT
[#9]
Please retack.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2004 8:30:56 PM EDT
[#10]
The link to this thread is in the Optics FAQ thread. A tack is not necessary... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2004 5:42:29 AM EDT
[#11]
Why is this not tacked?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2004 7:00:59 AM EDT
[#12]
Becasue I consolidated nearly all the tacked threads into one. This way when you come in the optics forum, instead of 8 or 9 threads everyone ignores, there's only two or three tacked threads that no one looks at.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2004 9:44:44 AM EDT
[#13]
Anyone have a screenshot of a US Optics SN-12 reticle? I cant find anyone close who sells them, so I cant go out and look through one myself; its a toss up between the SN-12 and ACOG TA01 NSN model as to which will go on my M4 build.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2004 6:57:47 PM EDT
[#14]
Not a fair comparison. The range is vastly different between teh 2 photos, and the leupy isn't illuminated. What the leupy has going for it is the adjustable magnification, and that it takes AA batteries, adn that you can see the recticles with or whthout the illumination. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2004 7:17:23 PM EDT
[#15]
What you say about the ACOG simply isnt true. First of all, if the ACOG reticle isnt illuminated, you can still plainly see it. It will be black just like any other scopes reticle. The fact that you actually have to work to turn the illumination of the ACOG off says volumes compared to the amount of work you have to put into the CQT to get it illuminated (you need batteries to illuminate it and its battery life is very poor). Theres plenty of pics on this thread showing TA31's at distances even further than the CQ/T.
But I do agree with you, it really isnt fair to compare a CQ/t to a TA31... The CQ/T never had a chance. Its FOV is pittiful in comparison, the the brightness of the reticle is pittiful in comparion, the amount of time the reticle illuminates is pittiful, its size is pittiful, its weight is pittiful, its mount is pittiful, its objective lens is pittiful, etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2004 9:17:54 PM EDT
[#16]
  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2004 7:03:49 AM EDT
[#17]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2004 7:10:06 AM EDT
[#18]
Im not sure if any of us have seen that one... sorry man!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2004 7:07:28 PM EDT
[#19]
Here's another TA01-NSN shot, camera backed up enough to see the difference the magnification makes. Use the fence as a reference point.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/25/2004 7:38:16 PM EDT
[#20]
Nobody has a US Optics SN-12 or a model similar with a screenshot through the tube?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2004 11:11:21 AM EDT
[#21]
OK then,
It looks like I am in the same boat as many others. I have Long Range tactical scopes for various bolt rifles (all of which fell overboard) I intended to get an Aimpoint M2 or M2 2x with an ARMS 22M68 mount at the suggestion of my buddy...now I am looking at the pics on this thread and the ACOGs look a world better. If I intend to mount on a 16" barrel flat top, would a TA01NSN or the TA31 (A or F) be better ??? like I said, I would be mounting it on a flat top - and I can't afford both. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2004 11:38:04 AM EDT
[#22]
tagged for latter
Great work guys. Thanks |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/27/2004 1:16:18 PM EDT
[#23]
I was going over this same question and settled on the TA31F for its ability to use with both eyes open over the TA01NSN. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2004 12:10:18 PM EDT
[#24]
IOR 4x24 M2 CQB Reticle
This is the exact same reticle that is in the IOR 1.1-4 CQB Scope that was posted by NUCdt04 and chopperjoe. I just thought I`d add yet another scope to this great thread. My photography skills leave a lot to be desired so the photos through the scope are a little over exposed.   Inspired by Vinh 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2004 3:17:57 PM EDT
[#25]
 Aside from resizing, my photo was not modified in any way. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2004 4:11:49 PM EDT
[#26]
Do you have one (A CQT)? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2004 4:13:56 PM EDT
[#27]
Not sure how to interpret your wink there..... That's pretty amazing if you actually took the photo like that. I can`t fathom how you might`ve done that. As you can probably tell though...I cheated. I took a photo through the scope then without. A little PS to merge em....... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/29/2004 7:06:54 PM EDT
[#28]
It's completely legit. I will attempt to show how I did it. I believe it has to do with the extended eye relief of my low-power scope. 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 11/30/2004 4:46:27 AM EDT
[#29]
No, but I have had the opportunity to use one at length and whenever I wanted to. I have built three rifles for other people using them. I am quite familiar with the optic, which is exactly why I dont have one. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/30/2004 5:45:55 AM EDT
[#30]
Do enlighten us........ |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/30/2004 4:04:34 PM EDT
[#31]
Ok, nice to know you have experience with the scope that you malign so viciously : "But I do agree with you, it really isnt fair to compare a CQ/t to a TA31... The CQ/T never had a chance. Its FOV is pittiful [sic] in comparison, the the brightness of the reticle is pittiful [sic] in comparion, the amount of time the reticle illuminates is pittiful [sic], its size is pittiful [sic], its weight is pittiful [sic], its mount is pittiful[sic], its objective lens is pittiful [sic], etc." While you might not like it, and think the ACOG is superior, to say that this optic is "pitiful, pitiful, pitiful" is nothign but nonsensical hyperbole. It would be like my saying that Bushmaster is "pitiful, pitiful, pitiful" because I prefer Colt. Leupy makes fine products. Just because you don't like the CQ/T doesn't make it pitiful. The best thing for everyone to do is to try the options out for themselves as you apparently have, to find the one that suits you the best. I doubt any of the scopes mentinoed in these threads (ACOG, Aimpoint, Eotech, Leupy or others) are "pitiful". It's simply a matter of opinion and preference and necessity. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 11/30/2004 6:07:51 PM EDT
[#32]
Im not one to enter into very many debates, but I think the features I mentioned on the CQ/T are somehwt pitiful when you compare them to the same features on an ACOG. And you dont have to sell me on Leupold. I own a LR M3 and just got a MR/T M3, owned a Vari XII tactical for about 3 years before I sold the gun it was on and have used another Mark 4 at length on a SPR and an AR10 I own. Those are superb scopes and I would not change them on the guns they are on. I know Leupold is a phenominal company and I am quite sure I will continue to use, enjoy and recomend their products for many years to some. But because I like the company and its products does not mean I will overlook something I feel is, in so many ways, an inferior product when compared to its competition.
I posted the last thread on here right before leaving this morning to the SWAT Round up in Orlando. Leupold had a booth. I mentioned to the guy I was with that I was recently discussing the CQ/T and wanted to pick it up again since it had been a while since the last time I had used or handled one. It was the same as I remember. It was huge and the mount is seriously substandard. FOV was poor (not as poor as the 2x Aimpoint though, but that isnt saying much). The reticle, even when lit at the highest setting was difficult to see, especially in the lighting conditions I was in, under a tent, looking out in the open on a brightly lit day (welcome to FL!). It might well have been that the battery was dying, but its pitiful battery life is another issue unto itself. This was only the second day of the event and Im sure it wasnt left on all the time. The knob was off both times I went to pick it up. you could have left an Aimpoint on its highest setting for the entire week of the event and not have to worry about changing it. ACOGs, as you know dont even need batteries. If a company makes a great product, you should say so. If they make a lot of great products, you should say so. If they make something which is substandard when compared to its competition, you should say so despite what you may think of the rest of their product line. No one here doesnt know that I love Trijicon ACOGs and feel that when all is said and done they are probably the best overall general purpose optic you can put on an AR15. But I will also be the first to tell you the Trijicon Reflex is the last of the dot sights I would put on my rifle (despite the fact that I still own one and to my surprise, saw many teams using them today). I have not even been able to recomend Trijicons new TriPower because I find it lacking when compared to an Aimpoint. Poeple know ho much I like aimpoints too, but I have never once recommended a 2X Aimpoint to anyone for any reason and usually say folks should stay clear of them. I had the opportunity to refresh my memory as to why today. I did however see a prototype of the EoTech's magnifier with their new reticle today. And it was VERY cool. A couple pics should follow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/30/2004 7:18:52 PM EDT
[#33]
BMM4A3,
Turns out eye relief was not much of a factor. Notice that the scope body is still visible even when the magnified view is brought to the front. The unmagnified view bleeds into the magnified view, creating my mini ACOG effect. Is the photo legitimate? Yes. Is it poor technique? Perhaps. Does it effectively convey what it's like? I'd like to think so.     I made the images small since this is rather off-topic. Contact me if you want to inspect high-resolution images and I can email them to you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/2/2004 4:26:10 PM EDT
[#34]
CMore Colt Tactical with 2MOA diode on 20" A3.
ETA:On lowest visible setting. http://www.frontiernet.net/~ibowhunt/cowit_1.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/6/2004 9:10:09 AM EDT
[#35]
here is a pic through my ta31 and aimpoint
 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2004 10:24:09 PM EDT
[#36]
Damn, cowitness pics are TOUGH to get, especially with a point and shoot. This is YHM flip front and rear sights...and an Aimpoint M2
 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/13/2004 11:11:41 PM EDT
[#37]
whats the new reticle look like? but as a response to what you wrote... i totally agree... every company makes awesome products and every company makes sucky products... you have to search and find a combo that works for you... i'll add another example... kac... they make awesome products... but i'm sorry... there 300m buis is the dumbest thing ever  now if only the army/military would know this... and would buy everything that a company spits out... but they'd pick and choose... i guess the fbi did it... but they did pick eotech jk
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2004 5:28:13 AM EDT
[#38]
TA50R-4 on a flattop Larue mount (Too short IMHO) beside the original TA44R-4 from the first picture in this thread.
    
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2004 5:55:53 AM EDT
[#39]
I am in LOVE with amber crosshairs, by the way. I go tthe red triangle, and something about my colorblindness doesn't work with it, But Amber crosshairs are AMAZING. No washout for me (amber sticks out ALOT to me) and in the ULTRA rare event of a washout, you have the black crosshairs still framing your target. Genius. (BTW, I have donut, chevron and triangle full acogs, and those red reticles work FINE for me... go figure!)
and yeah, the CQ/t SUCKS as a CQB optic, but if they called it the MQ/t - that would be worth 700 bucks. I've used it and played with it and for short to medium range work, the variable power and dim reticle are fine. But it's jsut too small an objective and too weak a reticle for shouldering quickly, scanning, acquiring, etc.... And battery life is /sticking finger in mouth gesturing to throw up/ As the proud owner of two compact acogs, three acogs, a tripower and a reflex II - I have to admit trijicon has some DAMN fine products. (the only other scopes I have are a holosight and an IOR - both VERY acceptable sights as well. Just switched from IOR variable to an IOR M1 4x 308 WITH CQB reticle - pretty rare for an M1 model. But I wanted the diopter adjustment. That CQB reticle is GREAT.) |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2004 7:35:22 AM EDT
[#40]
ARin,
That bottom one is an excellent shot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2004 7:49:05 AM EDT
[#41]
I for one prefer amber reticules. In Maine, everything is either green, white, brown, or gray. The amber contrasts very well and compared to the red dots in my collection...I acquire my target that much faster....just me maybe....but amber rets are a-okay in my book. If I lived in bright sunny AZ I might have a different opinion.
All I know is that I wouldn't trade my 3X9 Amber Accupoint for any scope in the world. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2004 8:14:02 AM EDT
[#42]
Another amber fan. I've used both amber and red and prefer the amber. YMMV.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2004 8:35:46 AM EDT
[#43]
a) how do you like the accupoint? It's the only trijicon I don't own (current production)... could be my next scope if for no other reason than i want a big happy trijicon family.
b) anyone who likes red might /hint/ like to check out the EE /hint/ where some people /hint/ have DRASTICALLY reduced /hint/ the price for a TA50R-2 3x red triangle compact acog /hint/. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/14/2004 8:36:17 AM EDT
[#44]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2004 5:27:47 PM EDT
[#45]
After 3 Icehouse beers,
I just realized why I like the TA31F best. It looks like the mouse pointer on my desktop. And at 1600 x 1200 res I am used to the size. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2005 10:06:04 AM EDT
[#46]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2005 6:45:58 PM EDT
[#47]
And why isn't this thread tacked to the top any longer???
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2005 8:29:14 PM EDT
[#48]
I was going to ask the same thing. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/17/2005 5:49:44 AM EDT
[#49]
This thread is hot-linked in the thread that IS tacked to the top in order to conserve space and prevent the first page of the Optics forum from being nothing but tacked threads.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/23/2005 3:27:46 PM EDT
[#50]
Anybody have pics through a TA01NSN? I don't think I saw any in this thread yet.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
