During my last deployment in Iraq I used a CCO- Close Combat Optic; a red dot sight used for quick sight alignments. It was my first time training and then using one. Personally, I loved it. There were many people, even after our training, that weren't using it right and had problems. Others didn't feel as if it were reliable enough because it might loose its zero if bumped around. I'd like to hear others' opinions about such optics either pro or con.
permalink
I wouldn't want to use anything else for CQB. The only drawback for longer range is the 4" MOA at 100 hundred yards but I shot 5 round palm sized groups with my 53 at 125 yards.
I think I've replaced the battery on it one time.
I really like the red dot. Put it on target and fire. The dot can be anywhere in the optic and it will deliver the round to where the dot is aimed.
permalink
I'd love to have one on a .223 carbine for close work but I'd also like a .308 battle rifle with a 4x ACOG for anything other than urban and building type work.
permalink
How can you not use them right? It's the most simple aiming system ever invented.
You had some seriously gifted troops in your unit.
permalink
Some people thought that the red dot had to go on the front sight post. Some thought the dot took the place of the front sight post. Both these errors still believed that you needed to use the iron sights and that was after the classes we took. Yes, we had some real bright people in my unit. Some people also never managed to zero theirs properly. After a lot of knocking around some of them did loose their zero, but mine was alright. Only about one person per squad got an acog, but I liked the CCO better.
permalink
How did they determine who got an ACOG and did the ACOG user have an M4 or M16?
permalink
Literally, they chose at random. Everyone had M4s. No regard to qualification or necessity, just random.
permalink
Choice wasn't a factor? I prefer the ACOG, but I know plenty of guys that prefer the CCOs, and still others that like the Eotech. I personally get thrown off by the latter two, but I'm one of those old fuckers that learned iron for close, optics for distance. Do love the ACOG though....Like anything else with weapons, we know what opinions are like. I know if I badmouth the M9 there are a bunch of joes who can tell me how kickass it is. Part of the game. I won't open the M4 can of worms, or rip on some of Ogre's "tactical rifle" cockamamy. Well, at least he got a Mod. 700:-)
permalink
We got in 1 of them.
Not mine... one for the store stock.
Ah... I think they will sell just fine, but I am not sure I'm going to be putting one on any of my guns. The optical double is useless. Really shrinks the field of view drastically. The buttons are tiny. Very Tiny. And they are stiff. The power button on the unit... to turn it on and off - you have to pull out your pocket knife and use your knife's frame to push it because you can't push it hard enough with your fingers.
I called Vortex about it, and they said that they would get back to me... never did. Waited for that call all day.
This is the first time Vortex dropped the ball, but I think this might have been a case of the message didn't get to the party in question.
For the price... ( only $129.99! ) overall it's pretty dang good. It's the best option out there for a decent red dot sight. I'm not sure if it's quite a Poor Man's CompM3... but it has a lot of good things going for it.
permalink
I always left the front lid on my Aimpoint and left both eyes open. the eliminated any double vision and made is so all I saw was a red dot in my normal vision (without obscuring my regular vision) and led to very quick target acquisition. I loved it but understand if people don't trust 'em. As for magnification and all that, the Army never...and I repeat never has taught us about shooting anything past 300 yards. Hell, the instructors often tell us not to shoot at the 300 and save your ammo in case you miss a closer one. Kinda of cancels out any arguments about long range weaponry when we're not trained to fight at long range.
permalink
A Rifleman, any rifleman should be able to engage to 500 yards no matter what. With a magnifying optical gunsight, he should be able to go out to 800. Snipers, further yet. I believe marksmanship should become the primary focus of military training during boot camp. And it should continue. Shooting should always be a priority.
permalink
That just isn't how the Army is. Not at all. 300 meters max unless they send you to some special course or something, but that would be a one time thing anyway.
permalink
I think the argument is really rather moot so long as we're using the .223.
permalink
Still. Seeing your buddy shot through the eye socket from 600 yards away by an average American GI... you will want to keep your head down.
The US Army sucks at marksmanship.... it just does. I know this. We all know this. Past 300, we call for ordinance. Instead of that expensive use of resources, we should be able to take a rifle, aim it well, and hit the target - putting it down.
If I was Emporer of America, we'ld lose the .223 guns ASAP and go with .308 rifles. If a soldier complains about the weight - they get to do more pushups.
This Topic Is Locked To Guest Posts
It's been a while since this topic was active, if you'd like to get it going again, please post as a registered member