ACOG for a DG Rifle

L

Loosehead

Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Location
Toronto
Just when I thought I was out....

So I've settled on either Trijicon or Leupold for my DG rifle (Win M70 in .375) - at least I thought I had. Spoke with one of the RO's last Saturday and he suggested I think of using an ACOG. He knows his stuff and was based in RSA with Canadian Forces back in the day (i.e. before Mandiba was released...) so deffo worth thinking about if he suggested it.

Trijicon's 3.5x has a much better field of view at 100yards than anything else and gives me the ability to shoot well past my limits. It's newfangled but from a reliable manufacturer. Are there any reasons why I should not use one instead of a "traditional" 1-5/6x? I've seen stuff about the boys using them for hogs, yodel dogs and deer but not much about using them on a DG rifle. Also asked my mate (a PH based out of Pretoria and with whom I will be hunting this September...). While he hasn't had anyone use one yet he knows of and likes them. He said if I can shoot it accurately at 50m go for it - but I can shoot my iron sights accurately at that distance already.

Right now I'm 50/50. I would need to get the simplest reticle of course (no cluttered reticles on a DG scope!). I've got feelers out for 2nd hand, higher end scopes too (S&B, Steiner, Kahles, Zeiss, the usual suspects) but will spring for a new one if I don't have anything by March as I want some time to set it up and get used to it. Not sure if there's something I've missed and I'm very conscious of not letting my analysis lead to paralysis.

Thanks!
 
I’ve had acogs on semis, they’re tough and well sorted, but designed to reach out not in. They were developed to increase the accurate range of M16s and M4s over the iron aperture sights in combat, but also allow close shooting. They’re a compromise especially on the close side.

Not against them, but not what I’d put on a DG rifle or .375 in general. I took both the big five I hunted over irons, and grizzly as well. I’d heavily recommend a 1.5-5 or 1-4, as having the near zero setting is key in my opinion. Or, just shoot your iron sights, they’re my preference, the original 1x with an incomparable field of view 0-100.
 
Some acogs have pretty tight eye relief (some models are worse than others), and the height may be an issue. I really like mine though, I could see it being a good fit on the right rifle.
 
Uisge said:
Some acogs have pretty tight eye relief (some models are worse than others), and the height may be an issue. I really like mine though, I could see it being a good fit on the right rifle.
Click to expand...

Ardent said:
Worth keeping in mind ACOGs are being replaced by LPVOs (low power variable optics), which are quite simply 1-4 to 1-8 range scopes due to the advantages they hold. Even Trijicon is moving that way in their new products.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback. The impression I’m getting is that it can work, but a 1-4x/1-6x is the better route. FWIW, I’m leaning to the 1-6x - another member reminded me that the rifle can reach out to 300 yards. Struth, I doubt I’ll be taking even 200 yard shots anytime soon but buy once, cry once.
 
Ardent said:
200 yards in Africa is a chip shot on plains game, pretty easy to end up shooting 350 there on some species, which a .375 will happily do with either a 4x or 8x scope.
Click to expand...

You're right it is. But for the plains game, I have my .270 with a 3-9x. My mate/PH said the majority of our shots will be under 100m and almost half will be around 50. Anything too big for the .270, we'll be getting up close and personal like :)

The .270 might be too small for eland (if we see any) but should do me for the others. I'd use it with irons on a buff - I'm comfortable hitting the proverbial dinner plate (including follow up) shot at 50m now and those things are so big I'd take the shot if Pieter let me. But, I want to be comfortable showing it out to 150m ideally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom