ACOG alternatives?

>>30501466
First, iron sights should be a priority. Got to be competent with the basics.

Do you want magnification or just a red dot?

>>30501497
This.
Get some irons first.
Then come back and ask about an optic.

Vortex makes good optics . Decently priced. Also dat Warranty.

Not sure if they have a Chevron but they have quite a few reticule options available.
What you should do first is get good with irons THEN move to optics least in my opinion. I'm sure /k/ will shit on me for saying that but hey it's not a bad idea to be proficient with irons to get your basics down

Additional info:
I live in California in case that makes a difference.
Having the chevron or up arrow reticle is a big plus for me, just personal preference.

Some optics I've already considered.

Eotech Holos with or without magnifications
Vortex optics
Bushnells

>>30501534
Irons are the hardest thing to use, but when you're good on them, you know you have the fundamentals down. Optics are more effective, but often because they let some bad technique slide.

It is always a good idea to train and do refreshers with just irons. If you can use them well, you never struggle with using optics.

>>30501558
Go vortex. Literally god-tier for beginning optics before you move on to higher tier and gucci tier optics.

>>30501558
Do you want magnification or not? You seem wishy washy on this. Please specify.

Eotechs are for 'tards.

ok I will also add iron sights on my shopping list.

any suggestions for those?

do they have to be matching sets? if i get an A2 type front do i need a specific rear?

>>30501466
I agree that irons are a must, you can get Magpul buis for cheap and they have done fine for me. Not the best irons out there, but they work. Also it means your rifle is at least usable while you research optics.

>>30501497
>>30501510

Why irons? Fair enough its good to get to know, but its not necessery to learn using iron sights. Most militaries consider it an optional back up sight.

>>30501635
it's /arg/ fags being fags

I don't have irons on my rifle either
I plan on having them, but they were never a priority to me

>>30501591
>>30501497

magnification is nice yes. 4x max. I imagine it would be difficult to use acogs on normal ranges of 50yds or 100yds? maybe?
which is why i thought about no magnification.

keep in mind i have ZERO experience looking through optics. almost practically drawn from what i like to use in vidyas (BF4)

>>30501635
Because glass can break and batteries can die. Always good to be able to aim regardless of what happens to your optic.

>>30501635
They all learn using irons first. Only backups after they graduate to optics.

File: 71fY0cmKhgL._SL1500_.jpg (112KB, 1500x1013px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 1500x1013px

you can put some inexpensive off set irons on for close in.

My vote is for vortex. You can even go the cheap route and get a crossfire and an OK mount for 250. That way you'll be able to see if you like 1x or 4x more and you won't be breaking the bank since it'a just going to be replaced anyhow.

Primary arms also has a decent dedicated 4x optic I believe. Check em out OP

>>30501691
Acog has like 10000 hours battery life, and other optics like aimpoint has like 80000 hours or whatever. Congratz on being in the situation of battery running out and you dont have spares. Acog and aimpoint is also robust as fuck.
I also doubt you'll ever be in that situation where the glass breaks.

>>30501635
Then get a red dot like a Strikefire 2

>>30501739
They? Who are they? Lots of militaries like British, Norwegian, etc. just teach to use optics

>>30501778
Im not OP

>>30501775
Yeah, the batteries "probably" wont die, and the glass "probably" wont break. At the same time, I "probably" will not get in a car accident on my way to work tomorrow morning, but I think I'll wear a seat belt anyway.

If you don't think your rifle will ever be anything but a range toy, then yeah don't worry about it. If you think you may someday have to actually use it to fight, why wouldn't you want every opportunity to win that fight?

>>30501466
Vortex Spitfire 3x is pretty choice.

Learning in irons isn't a bad idea, but you should really practice what you want to use.

>>30501775
Literally just ignorance an over-reliance on technology you posted. Shit goes wrong. You can't rely on your sight to be 100% unbreakable, and the same goes for the rest of your gear.

>>30501831
That's why I carry a katana sword forged of pure Japanese steel. A gun can malfunction and fail, but a good blade always works. :^)

>>30501831
>>30501823
But then how can you be so sure the iron sight will hold? Maybe you need a secondary iron sight, maybe OP should buy a laser sight as well. Weapons like 416 have front sights integrated, which is nice, but rarely used, and spending time learning to shoot iron sight which you may use once or twice compared to the times you use an optic is stupid. No need to learn to use iron sights before optics, two different things, one wont hinder learning the other.

>>30501884
Wow anon how could you think my cheap polymer flip up sights could ever fail? You must be an idiot to think a highly regarded and thoroughly tested optic like an Aimpoint could out last it.

>>30501466

Your M&P comes with I think Magpul pop-up sights, you should become proficient with those and KEEP THEM even after you get your optics installed. You don't want to be stuck in a situation where your batteries die or it breaks and not have anything to fall back on

>>30501466
Dont listen to the /arg/ mall ninjas who will literally put on everyting possible "in case". These are the type of guys to put snicker bars in the mag pouch. Get an optic, when you're comfortable and may feel like trying something else, try iron sights. You'll get much more use out of an optic than an iron sight, so prioritize it.

File: 146766582766060850173.jpg (2MB, 4160x3120px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4160x3120px

Accupoint or accupower. Made by Trijicon, 1-4X power, $700-$1000 so not retardedly expensive, fast 1X close range ability, quality glass, more rugged than the cheap Chinese scopes, good all around optic

>>30501831

Irons aren't exactly indestructible, and ACOGs are durable enough that they'll handle just about any trauma that iron sights can--especially since only either the front or rear sight has to break to make the system useless.

That being said, your best bet is to install back-up sights on your rifle. This measure makes the event of having an not-aim-able rifle very, very unlikely.

>>30501635
>>30501969
Indeed. If anything, as a new shooter, it will be easier for you to learn good fundamentals (sight picture, trigger manipulation) with an optic mostly independent of also needing to wrestle with sight alignment. After you have the basics down, you can go back and shoot with irons confident in your ability to make hits and being able to determine what you're doing right or wrong when learning to use the irons.

File: NorwegiansolderHK416.jpg (709KB, 3888x2592px) Image search: [Google]

709KB, 3888x2592px

>>30502038
An advantage with guns like mr223/hk416/mr556, flip up front that doesn't take up rail space, isnt in the way, and then you can have a flip up back under/behind the optic

>>30501935
I double checked, relative confirms that I do not have flip up irons. He says I can buy whatever I want, be it irons or optics.

Lets be real here though. I am using this purely for sport. Even if the Red Dawn comes down upon us, LAST THING I want to do with my zero combat chubby butt is to engage them in any way, hell I would instantly donate it to the nearest US soldier who needs it.

Am I just being a puss?

>>30502104
Better to be realistic than naive. Optic is def for you

>>30501831
>Shit goes wrong
Unless you are in the military, you will never use your rifle outside of a very close quarters defense scenario. Iron sights are completely unnecessary.

File: 1465742976493.gif (3MB, 173x267px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 173x267px

>>30502104
We aren't talking about "muh Red Dawn", merely that irons are the best way to get you practiced at a good shooter. The better you are with irons, the better you'll be when you move to optics.

Plus the skills for effectively using irons are transferable to pretty much any firearm or optic.

Irons are extremely cheap compared to optics, so get some now, practice, and give yourself time to research optics.

You wanna be good at this stuff, right?

>>30502130
No shit you'll be better, but the real reason is that you've got far more experience in everything else by that point. Practice 1000 rounds with irons or 1000 rounds with the scope you intend to use, you'll end up in the same spot.

>>30502214
Irons require more skill to use. There is less correction for bad technique.

If you are using, say, a red dot, you can get away with having some poor form. The red dot will compensate for some degree of sloppiness. That is an excellent thing to have for a combat or competition, but a terrible thing for a new shooter. It instills bad habits.

If somebody shoots only with irons, and somebody else shoots only with an optics, and you have them trade rifles, the guy who only used optics is going to struggle.

Starting shooting with irons is a better learning experience.

>>30502130
>We aren't talking about "muh Red Dawn"
oh, my bad. I thought one of the main points for irons was shit hits the fan scenario.

>You wanna be good at this stuff, right?
HELL YEAH I DO!

>skills for effectively using irons are transferable to pretty much any firearm or optic.

I can understand optics, but I thought we're supposed to treat every gun differently. I think im misunderstanding something vital here.

>>30502130
>>30502214
Debatable. For new shooters, see >>30502049
For experienced shooters, you will be more effective with whichever sighting system you are more practiced with, period. If you intend to spend the majority of your time shooting with optics for whatever reason, then there's no reason not to start with or spend the majority of your time practicing with said optics.

This is not to say that you shouldn't learn to be proficient with irons, but there isn't any objective reason to focus on them over optics if you are going to use optics for everything anyways.

>>30502265

>I can understand optics, but I thought we're supposed to treat every gun differently. I think im misunderstanding something vital here.

If you start with irons you learn about lining them up and how to focus on the front sight post. Now, if you move to a different gun with different iron sights, the particulars might change, but those concepts are still applicable.


To be clear, as I'm sure anons will take this shit the wrong way: Optics will produce better results in the heat of the moment. My point is that they stunt the learning experience for a brand new shooter.

>>30502315
Not on AR's, I practice on a T-1 micro only, as that's all you will need for defending your life with your rifle. Handguns are a different story, and require constant training, and skill proficiency.

Never use iron sights on an AR.

File: 1448336627312.jpg (94KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 640x640px

>>30502130

>>30502384
>Never use iron sights on an AR.

You don't want to expand your skills?

I don't know why people intentionally pidgeonhole themselves to use only a small slice of equipment.

If you can use AR irons, you can now be very effective with any peep sights and good with any rifle irons. Why not practice more?

>>30502264
>If you are using, say, a red dot, you can get away with having some poor form. The red dot will compensate for some degree of sloppiness.
This is not really accurate. Poor form or fundamentals with either irons or red dot will result in similarly poor results. The difference is that irons give you more opportunity to shoot poorly by failing to execute good sight alignment in addition to sight picture and trigger manipulation.

If anything, a red dot is easier to learn with because it always tells the truth without needing to already be proficient at sight alignment. Every jitter and tremor of the dot tells the shooter that they are doing something wrong with building a good stable shooting position, anticipating, flinching, crushing the trigger, and whatever else, without it being obscured by the additional layer of sight alignment.

> Now, if you move to a different gun with different iron sights, the particulars might change, but those concepts are still applicable.
The same could be said moving to a different gun with different optics.

>>30502446
Your iron sights will never be used in anything other than competition, or for shits and giggles. We know this from various actual SHTF conditions around the world. The only time you can use a rifle, or any gun for defense is when your life is danger. You will not only not be able to use iron sights because of adrenaline, you will miss, and give away you position, or you will be convicted of murder if you shoot someone outside of an immediate threat distance.

Something like an ACOG is not going to be damaged hunting animals.

Are people in here seriously jewing out on fundamentals that are under $100? Get your fucking priorities straight, people.

>>30501585
This. Vortex shills will only increase in number.

>>30502613
I've been using a vortex razor hd II for 6 months now, I don't imagine ever needing another optic other than this one.

>>30501827
This I really like my spitfire.

This thread is fucking ridiculous.

>m-muh fundamentals
Practicing with iron sights when you don't intend to shoot with iron sights is retarded and will give you no benefit over practicing with the scope you plan on shooting with, it may even put you at a disadvantage if you intend to use a BDC reticle as then you have to practice further to get used to that. Face it, aligning iron sights is about as relevant to shooting with a scope now days as cycling the bolt on a bolt action is to shooting a semi auto rifle.

>b-but your quality scope could go down when the SHTF, you need irons
First of all, the most use your scope will ever see is at the range or hunting. You aren't going to be using a scope for home defense unless you're retarded and you will never be in some post apocalyptic Fallout scenario with your rifle. Second of all, you would need a QD mount for the scope to even be able to use your iron sights. Hell, the US Marines don't even have rear sights on their M16s.

Firs off, acogs are mid range in price. Eclans are near $3000, as are smchit and bender, us optics, and vortex are $2000

Regardless, look at primary arms, burris, and vortex. All $200-$400, fixed power low magnification optics. Reticules are worse, and they arent as tough. Also all battery powered

>>30503153
/thread

>>30501855
I carry a rock for when my blade becomes nothing from constant use and sharpening

>>30503729
All battery powered for illumination, that is. You'll still have a reticle. It's not as convenient but by the way people talk in this thread you'd think the glass went totally clear when the battery dies.

>>30501855
A condom might fail but that katana will always protect your virginity

File: Screenshot_2016-07-04-23-27-40.jpg (1MB, 1150x1060px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1150x1060px

Seemed like the most relevant thread to post this as this is the gun I plan on buying.

I also want to do some hunting, specifically hog hunting. Any good suggestions for optics $300 or less that would be good for hogs?

>>30505691
Do not spend only $300 on an optic, save money for something better.

These would be the bare minimum.
http://swfa.com/Classic-C12502.aspx

>>30503153

>Not maintaining a full manual of arms on everything your rifle is capable of, optics or no

I would give you credit on the "pratice will go to waste" shit if everyone had 5+ goddamn optics, but I'm pretty fucking sure most people do not rotate between that many in a short amount of time due to the hassle of zeroing the fucking things every time you move them.

/tl;dr, you're erroneous in the more practical thought patterns.

>>30501621
Troy

>>30502613
>>30502682
>>30503071

I've been considering the Vortex 3x magnifier to pair with my Aimpoint PRO. It's sub 200 bucks for the magnifier, whereas Aimpoint wants like 600 bucks for theirs.

The fucking Aimpoint magnifier is literally more expensive than many of their optics. Never understood that.

>>30505899
>Don't spend just $300
>Link to multiple $300 optics
Good recommendation tho. Either their 1-4x or 6x should work well.

>>30506021
>if everyone had 5+ goddamn optics, but I'm pretty fucking sure most people do not rotate between that many in a short amount of time due to the hassle of zeroing the fucking things every time you move them.
What does that have to do with anything? Even if you just have one scope you would still be taking time away from practicing with equipment that you do use to practice with equipment that you don't use.

>>30501775
>Acog has like 10000 hours battery life

>acog
>battery life

>>30501466
Buy an airsoft replica my boy.

>>30506783
Trijicon did make a battery powered ACOG.

>>30506829
And 90% of ACOGs dont use batteries

>>30506755
Nigger that same retarded logic can be applied to owning multiple guns, just how hard is it for you to get out and shoot?

>>30506856
Doesn't affect my statement.

>>30506895
Some people do practice with a single gun, though. Especially if it's for a more dedicated purpose.

And it doesn't really matter how often you shoot. Spending part of your range time practicing with a different gun or optic is lost time, be it an hour a week or ten hours.

The alternative is that you're shooting to have fun, in which case it's pointless to sperg out about muh irons for marksmanship when you can buy whatever optic you want to enjoy.

File: Gun12-MRD_1024x1024.jpg (47KB, 1000x666px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 1000x666px

Why does no one talk about ATIBAL on /k/

>>30501775
Basically this sure shit can break (just as likely to be the gun) and batteries can die (and you forgot a spare) but basic bitch flip up sights are easy to transition to

>>30506895
In addition to what >>30506999 said, people generally own multiple guns because they have other roles they need filled or because they want them for fun. No one wastes time shooting guns they don't like and don't otherwise use just because muh fundamentals, that would be retarded.

>just how hard is it for you to get out and shoot?
Ammo costs money. Spending that ammo doing things that aren't necessary and that you don't enjoy is stupid.

This is the most autistic thread on /k/

>Does anyone know of a 3x or 4x that is in the 300$ price range for a carry handle mount that still provides iron sight use?

>>30501775
>fighting this fucking hard on at best, an $80 backup component that is essential to use of rifle.
>wants acog or acog alternative, that's at least $1000

Either you have your budgeting confused as fuck, or you have a principle that is based purely on spite.

File: IMG_3131.jpg (2MB, 2174x1887px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2174x1887px

Not even in the same vein as an ACOG, but it is a sight that requires no power.

I have one on my Marlin XS7C and I really like it.

File: See-All-Nite-Rail00018.jpg (276KB, 1000x665px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 1000x665px

Turns out they've just released another sight which is tritium, rather than edge glow.