rifleguy

Kurt, I rarely keep my variable power scope at 1 or 4 power except for CQB hoser type stages when it is 1 power. I usually have it set midway, everyones eyes are different, I guess. I do think your idea about a lever to bring the TA-11 down to 1 power has merit though. It is the only drawback to the scope that it is a fixed 3.5 power.

I think what I would like as far as reticle is a horseshoe similiar to the IOR CQB reticle, but about half the overall thickness of the existing horseshoe. The horseshow would be used for close in targets. Inside of that we would have a 2.5 minute dot for targets a bit further out. The reticlw would also have a calibrated crosshair similiar to the Ta-11 touching the dot for distance targets requiring holdover. Basically, it would be the TA-11 with a dot (not the circle) with the CQB style horseshoe around it for close in taget acquisition.

I also own both the AccuPoint, the IOR 1.1 - 4 and an Acog TA-11 with the chevron. I like the eye relief on the AccuPoint, but little else. The reticle is useless on targets that require holdover. 2 vertical lines come up from the bottom of the reticle (containing the fiber optics) and obscure your vision. It is fairly light, 9 - 10 ounces, but it is a 1 inch tube. The glass is slightly blurry around the edges, which probably means it was not fully polished. This is typical of most scopes which come from Hakko of Japan which manufactures this for Trijicon. I would give this a much better rating if they did something with the fiber optics lines and went to a 30 mm tube. The IOR has worked very well for me to date. It is a medium size scope weighing 15 ounces. The glass is extremely clear and bright. The horseshoe is very quick on close in target acquisition. I am not thrilled with the mil line hash marks that are used for holdover. I would prefer BDC style holdover lines calibrated to a particular bullet weight similiar to the Acogs. The TA-11 is also a medium size scope weighing 14 ounces. It works great for me with intermediate to distant targets. I have trouble with close in stuff transitioning from target to target becaused of the fixed power. I face this issue with any fixed power scope. I would prefer a variable power setup in this scope package, but I know that is not going to happen. The glass is clear and bright with the ability to tone down the brightness of the reticle by covering the fiber optics. I still am searching for the perfect general purpose short to intermediate variable power scope. Night Force is coming out with a 1-4 very soon, with around a $1000-1100 price tag, but they missed the boat on reticles. It will have the option of a mil style reticle and something similiar to the Leupold CQT dot / circle combination with a few more lines thrown in. They could have learned from the mistakes of the products on the market and taken the market over, but their reticles choices are not as good as the current available products. I used a Leupold CQ/T previously and discarded it. The reticle is a dot / circle combination which has no lines for holdover giving it limited utility. The objective is 14 mm, giving it a miniscule field of view. It is big, close to the same size as the acog and ior, you would have thought it would have been made with a decent objective size. All in all, my personal favorites in the short to medium range scopes currently available are the Acog Ta-11 and the Valdada 1.1-4.

stingerjg, Looks like Midway is out of stock on them until 8/2. Status: Out of Stock, Backorder OK Date Expected In-Stock: 8/2/2004

What Mark said. This was the first major effort by the Drats club in IDPA. Some things went well, some will lead to learning experiences, hopefully. All in all, it was a positive experience.

Summary results are listed on their web site: www.zianet.com/drats It was a decent match for their first effort.

Shooting off a rucksack is pretty much standard procedure for current military. It is taught at division level and army sniper schools as a field expedient tool. Many have also mounted a 4 inch strip of foam on the lower edge of the ruck to rest the rifle on. You don't get "bipod bounce" when using this method .

Michael, you might want to take a look at this thread: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=14073.

Trijicon has a 40,000 sq ft facility in Wixon, MI where their product lines are assembled. In looking at product boxes and statements on them, Acog's and Reflexes definitely do not come out of Japan. It is possible that Accupoints were farmed out for manufacture since they are so different that the rest of the Trij line. It is also possible that Hakko, at one time, was making knock offs to sell to less than astute buyers looking for a bargain on Trij stuff. But, Hakko definitely does not make the better Trijicon lines. If that was the case, we would not be facing the current situation of demand so much greater than supply.

Chriss, would you have any feedback on whether Hakko has ever produced a decent quality scope? And what would be the trade name on it? Interesting that CDNN is already clearing out the S&W scopes (Hakko made) for under $200.

the owner of 3Gungear was at the monthly 2 gun match yesterday with a large quantity of items for sale as alway. He is in town working as normal until the MGM match next month in Idaho, from what he says. I heard he is backed up making a large quantity of things for a Remington order, but he is around.

If it is a high round count stage, I use the 3 gun gear thigh rig, otherwise a Blade Tech belt single mag holder. Best option, of course, as Kurt said earlier is not to reload. gotta love those Sterling 40 round mags, although they don't work real well when you go prone.

It is my understanding that Springfield Armory scopes were at one time made by Hakko of Japan, the same company now making them for Smith and Wesson. that would account for the low prize and questionable quality. If they are being "redesigned", I imagine that Springfield has farmed them out to a different vendor for manufacture.

Kellyn, hmm, you are pretty passionate about this, aren't you? Your argument about opening scopes up to anything and everything has merit. Would it lead to an equipment race such as IPSC faced in the past with handguns, I don't know. Would it matter if it did? I also do not know the answer to that question. I brought up what worked at RM3G because it was a refreshing change from the mandated list such as WC3Gun and SMM3G imposed on the participants. And it seemed to work well and allowed freedom of expression in scope choice. Actual rational behind the 4 power limit would have to be offered up by one of the match directors. It does look like that rule has been changed for this years match: 6.4.5 TACTICAL CLASS SCOPED RIFLES MAY BE EQUIPPED WITH NO MORE THAN ONE (1) ELECTRONIC OR OPTICAL SIGHT. I see nothing in this years rules about limiting a scope to any power, so perhaps the passion of your arguments is winning converts. :-)

The RM3G match had a rule that was beautiful in its simplicity. Use any scope that you want, but go over 4 power and go home. Takes a lot of the political and arbitrary bs of Furbee's list out of the equation. I understand that itt is very difficult to get a scope added to Furbees list. A person needs to approach him and provide specifics, samples, data, etc way in advance so that he (Furbee) can make an "informed" choice. The list is also closed a long period in advance of the match because it has been been available publicly. I can only guess that no one jumped through the hoops to get the Accupoint approved. I am interested in the Accupoint for cqb type stuff given its long eye relief, but am not sold on its distance applicability. The triangle is 4 moa at 4 power at 100 yds, so it will tend to be bigger than a large number of the targets at 250 and greater yardages. Even using the point of the triangle, I am not sure if you will be able to see some of the targets at distance. The supporting black vertical lines are thick and do not look like they will allow efficient "kentucky" holdover. I would like it a lot better if it had some type of vertical mil hash mark system for holdover. But, I still plan on getting one and trying it out to see how my theories hold up.