Elcan C79A2 vs. ACOG TA31 for SA20 *update. Got a scope

R

Roddy

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
109   0   0
Location
Leduc, AB
I figured this should go in this sub forum instead of the optics one as it is about a black and green rifle.

I'm picking up an SA20 and got a good deal on an Elcan C79A2-1 (I think that's the latest model). I have very limited experience with these scopes but they are popular in Canada for C7A2 clone builds obviously.

I really like the glass in the Acog scopes and I wouldn't mind a 4x so I am thinking I might like the TA31 better. There are very few head to head comparisons on AR15.Com as that model of Elcan just isn't that popular south of the border.

Almost every summary by Canadian Forces member says they don't like the Elcan but I'm not sure if that just the old mount or the glass quality itself.

So what I want to know is one much better than the other? Is the reticle or glass quality that much better on the Acog? Is the eye relief better on the Elcan?

Thanks in advance for any advice.
 
Last edited:
The glass quality of the Elcan is great. The big thing for me is that the Elcan is not as solid as the ACOG. Even with the updated mount, it is still not as solid as the ACOG.
I like the red chevron reticle better than the reticle on the Elcan. For the glass, they are pretty much on par IMHO.
Unless you want to make a clone of the C7A2, I would say grab an ACOG.
 
Good to know CZ85Combat. I wasn't trying to make a C7A2 clone originally but now all that's missing is the Elcan. All I wanted was 20" AR.

I was leaning towards a green crosshair over the red chevron as it seems to have less flare/blossom and I notice that a lot with my eyes. I know you can cover the fibre optic tube and reduce the brightness though.

The crosshair also seemed more precise but slower for close in shooting so if I use it for 3 Gun maybe the chevron us the way to go. Definitely one of those two though, not the doughnut.
 
Be aware that the TA31 has really short eye relief. While I like the idea of ACOG's, they haven't really changed in 15+ years, meanwhile in the world of variable low power optics, we've seen huge advances in durability and decreases in cost.
 
The eye relief on the TA31 model is indeed very short but on a low recoiling caliber like .223 it shouldn't make much of a difference. It may affect where you mount it on the top rail depending on where you place your cheek on the stock. You may want to consider the TA11 series which is only 0.5x less magnification but significantly better eye relief.
 
May we ask what you will be using the sa20 for?
If you are using it for casual plinking at the range the issues with the mount should not be an issue. I have a first gen c79 and it's really fabulous glass. Great eye relief and super bright. Now I can't comment on the trijicon other that what I've handled in shops.

If you are going to be using this rig for 3 gun or in courses etc maybe the acog would stand up better. Though out to 100ydinner I doubt center mass shots would be off that much


If you have the c79 already use it. If you find it doesn't work for you, look to sell and go to a acog.

On a side note would you consider a 1-4 or 1-6 optic? I have a strike eagle and love it for the money
 
Ar180shooter said:
Be aware that the TA31 has really short eye relief. While I like the idea of ACOG's, they haven't really changed in 15+ years, meanwhile in the world of variable low power optics, we've seen huge advances in durability and decreases in cost.
Click to expand...

Have you seen the eye relief on the c79?
 
Gryphon I like the size, weight, and magnification of the TA31. Also from what I hear you can have more eye relief you just lose a bit of the generous field of view. That's just what I have heard.

TheM4chef, it will mostly be for range plinking but I may take it to a 3 Gun match for fun. That is my plan to try it. With regards to the 1-4x optics I have one on my Tavor and since this is a full size service rifle I would like a service rifle type optic in it, even if it's not the right one.

r34skyline, is the eye relief bad on the C79?


Thanks for all the input everyone.
 
I have both and prefer the ta31 over the c79 maybe it's just me and what I like but find it nicer for follow up shots. Keep in mind I'm no professional operator. I agree it fits the clone bill (why I have 2) but my regular users have the acog, NF 1-4 and vortex razor 1-4's. I've posted this pic before but for reference

 
Gryphon Energetics said:
The eye relief on the TA31 model is indeed very short but on a low recoiling caliber like .223 it shouldn't make much of a difference. It may affect where you mount it on the top rail depending on where you place your cheek on the stock. You may want to consider the TA11 series which is only 0.5x less magnification but significantly better eye relief.
Click to expand...

This^

I will take the TA11 over the other two any day of the week.
 
Elcan < ACOG

I'ved privately owned both and still use the Elcan on service rifles. I went through that silly ''build a C7'' clone phase back when I was 18 when I got my first AR. Needless to say I got a C79 for it too. Later I swapped it for an ACOG and then swapped the latter for a TR24 1-4.
 
Elcan makes great optics.... now...

The C79 scope was like the "proving grounds" for them. their is a lot of issues, particularly with zero retention.

If you wanted to buy a os3 or a specter DR, i would say they are worth the money...
but the only reason i would put forth for owning a C79 is a C7/C8 clone. Other short optics in the C79 price range are a much better value and general better.
 
i have a ta31 ch, a ta11 chevron, a browe and a specter dr
the glass quality out of the 4, its very close, i would say acogs at the bottom, then browe then the elcan at the top.

the ta31 eye relief is not great, but its compact, crosshairs are thick
ta11 very long and a little heavier but eye relief is a lot better
browe eye relief is sbout the same as the ta31 but the etching for the crosshairs is very small, makes it a much more precise reticle
the elcan, crosshairs and dot are thick, dot being 1.5 moa i think, pretty heavy
 
Roddy said:
...it will mostly be for range plinking but I may take it to a 3 Gun match for fun... With regards to the 1-4x optics I have one on my Tavor and since this is a full size service rifle I would like a service rifle type optic in it, even if it's not the right one.
Click to expand...

I have several ACOGs and have had C79s in the past, both as issue and privately owned.

There are several attributes that might make one or the other better options given the specific scenario.
As a general combat optic with greater overall simplicity & robustness, the ACOG is the better choice.
For competitive use, the ability to open gate the elevation drum on the Elcan gives it an edge in Service Rifle competitions.

As a good range going optic they are both surpassed by quality variables like a Nightforce NXS 1-4 or a US optics variable.
The variables are in use by special forces, so as far as wanting a 'service' optic for a 'service rifle' - they are in good company.
 
I don't have any Elcans to compare against but I was always impressed by the glass quality of any Trijicon I've looked through. This is the first time I've heard anyone suggest they're the bottom of any pile.

I have a TA31CH (4x32 BAC with .223 red illuminated crosshair), TA33C (3x30 with .223 amber chevron), and TA55A (5.5x50 with .308 red chevron). I definitely prefer the chevron reticles to the crosshair which I find gets a bit muddied up by the 200 meter stadia as it's so close. I've found myself second guessing my POA because my eyes shift around on the reticle too much.

The TA31CH has a few advantages, definitely wider FOV although I frequently find I need to get closer to the scope than I'd prefer. Since I don't shoot nose-to-charging handle (I really don't understand that) it means I need to mount the optic as far back on the rail as possible. The TA33 is a really nice optic which sits on my Tavor, although it's like looking through a drinking straw compared to the TA31. It really forces you to use the BAC. The price was right when I bought it, and the compactness is nice.

The TA55 is just a monster. Awesome glass but there are likely more advanced options available these days with variable mag in a more compact size. This one sits on the XCR-M and despite its shortcomings as a scope, the image quality means I'm always pleased to look through it.

There is something to be said for the fiber optic illumination of the Trijicon reticles. Maybe the novelty hasn't worn off for me yet but I truly enjoy peering through them and the system works brilliantly, no pun intended.
 
LordEvilPepper said:
Elcan makes great optics.... now...

The C79 scope was like the "proving grounds" for them. their is a lot of issues, particularly with zero retention.

If you wanted to buy a os3 or a specter DR, i would say they are worth the money...
but the only reason i would put forth for owning a C79 is a C7/C8 clone. Other short optics in the C79 price range are a much better value and general better.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

If getting an Elcan, a nwer one is way better than the C79, although the newer Elcans are mighty pricey.
As others have said, ACOGs are very nice (I've owned 2) but the eye relief on the 4x ones are stupidly short. Not a deal breaker for .223, but I still find it awkward. Some of the 3.5x ones have longer eye relief.
For similar money there are many other quality options to consider as well.
 
I had a C79, and sold it. I now have a TA01 on a Larue mount, and like it much better. I didn't like the bulk of the Elcan for what it was, and it seemed heavier to me as well.
 
What is everyone's favorite reticle for the Acog's? The crosshair seems precise but the chevron seems easier to pick up. Does the chevron allow for pretty precise aiming?

The doughnut I really didn't like. Blocked too much of the view and flared a lot.
 
Gryphon Energetics said:
I don't have any Elcans to compare against but I was always impressed by the glass quality of any Trijicon I've looked through. This is the first time I've heard anyone suggest they're the bottom of any pile.

I have a TA31CH (4x32 BAC with .223 red illuminated crosshair), TA33C (3x30 with .223 amber chevron), and TA55A (5.5x50 with .308 red chevron). I definitely prefer the chevron reticles to the crosshair which I find gets a bit muddied up by the 200 meter stadia as it's so close. I've found myself second guessing my POA because my eyes shift around on the reticle too much.

The TA31CH has a few advantages, definitely wider FOV although I frequently find I need to get closer to the scope than I'd prefer. Since I don't shoot nose-to-charging handle (I really don't understand that) it means I need to mount the optic as far back on the rail as possible. The TA33 is a really nice optic which sits on my Tavor, although it's like looking through a drinking straw compared to the TA31. It really forces you to use the BAC. The price was right when I bought it, and the compactness is nice.

The TA55 is just a monster. Awesome glass but there are likely more advanced options available these days with variable mag in a more compact size. This one sits on the XCR-M and despite its shortcomings as a scope, the image quality means I'm always pleased to look through it.

There is something to be said for the fiber optic illumination of the Trijicon reticles. Maybe the novelty hasn't worn off for me yet but I truly enjoy peering through them and the system works brilliantly, no pun intended.
Click to expand...

Nose to charge handle is how the iron sights on an AR are designed to be used. Keeping your head deep on the stock and thus the rifle deep on your torso provides greater stability as well. The field of view issue isn't an issue at all. ACOG's are to be used with BOTH EYES OPEN. They are not designed for surveillance or recon work, they are an aiming device. Spot your target with your eyes, mount the rifle see the target magnified in the optic(both eyes open) and shoot. the Bindon Aiming Concept works, as long as you stop closing an eye and focus on the target and not the reticle.


As for the original question. ACOG is a far better choice with more options than any Elcan. And lighter and smaller as well.
Local
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom