tTito Posted December 18, 2003 Share Posted December 18, 2003 I'm considering the 1.25x - 4.0x version for my new rifle. How does 4x stack up beyond 100 yards? I looked at the scope the other day and it appears to be very bright. My other option is a more powerful scope and a dot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErikW Posted December 18, 2003 Share Posted December 18, 2003 This is probably my favorite scope in my limited experience with them. I shot everybody else's rifles* at a Bennie Cooley class, and the Accupoint was my favorite. Bright, wide field of view, no reticle business in the way of the other targets, just the right amount of magnification at 200 yards. * Aimpoint, numerous ACOG variations, Leupold CQB, US Optics, Reflex, variables, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Posted December 18, 2003 Share Posted December 18, 2003 Hi Tito, 4x is fine out to 400-500 yards on the targets used in practical rifle shooting (12-24" plates and IPSC paper). Tack sharp optics, a reticle that you like, and a wide field of view are more important in IPSC rifle than a large magnification factor. If you are in Open, a dot on the handguard is needed anyway. If in Limited, or Tactical take a look at the JP Rifles handguard mounted iron sights. It is hard to hose at close range with magnification at 3x or more and a secondary sight system mounted on the handguard allows you to transition near to far without wasting time adjusting magnification. It also has the additional benefit of having the Point Of Aim much closer to the Point Of Impact at close ranges compared to the main scope/barrel POA/POI offset of 2.5 inches (or more) on close stuff. Regards, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kellyn Posted December 18, 2003 Share Posted December 18, 2003 "If you are in open class, a dot on the handguard is needed anyway" - Don't tell Voigt, Holmes, or Miculek that! Nothing wrong with a 4X scope for distance shooting. Remember a scope only helps you see, it does not make you hold the rifle steadier or give you a good trigger squeeze. When I was shooting open, it was rare for me to put my 3-9X above 5 or 6X and it usually stayed on 3X. The higher the magnification, the more narrow the field of view which makes transitions harder. There is a reason why ACOGs are 3.5 and 4X. That 1.25-4X is a pretty good optic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Posted December 18, 2003 Share Posted December 18, 2003 If you are in open, a dot on the handguard is needed anyway" - Don't tell Voigt, Holmes, or Miculek that! Good point. I will amend that to "a red dot on the handguard is typical". Yeah, there are definitely a few folks out there who would do well with nothing but a popsickle stick on top of their blasters :-) Regards, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tTito Posted December 19, 2003 Author Share Posted December 19, 2003 Thanks guys. I have a JP rifle on order and I think I'll go with the Trijicon Accupoint and then decide later whether to add a J-Point or Doctre on the handgaurd. My biggest concern was whether 4x was good beyond 100 yards and I appreciate your help in answering that question. I'm just getting into 3 gun and I'm really stoked!!!!!!!!!!!!! I put a Bushnell Holosight (old model Eotech) on a new Benelli Practical a couple months ago for my scattergun. Man, this if fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 Another problem with higher magnifications (at least for me) is that it accentuates your natural "wobble." I realize you can learn to overcome it, but it freaks me out when I look through the scope and stuff moves like that! Unless I'm shooting from a bench or other solid rest, I prefer lower power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeamGE Posted December 20, 2003 Share Posted December 20, 2003 tTito, I would have to agree will Eric Warren, the Accupoint TR21R is the scope for me. Been using it for the last 3 years. Long eye relieve, small bell, easy to look over to find targets, no need to have a second red dot on the gun. The red retical is way better then the orange retical. Very rarely do I turn the power up past 3x and 4x is plenty for 300 yards in our game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino Posted February 10, 2004 Share Posted February 10, 2004 There is an article in the curren Guns magazine about the 3-9X Trijicon Accupoint, but it also mentioned the 1.25-4X24mm version. Looking at the reticle, it looks pretty cool and the fiber optic illumination is obviously a good idea. So which color of reticle would be better ... amber or red? And 1.25 power is definitely low enough for hosing close targets! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny hill Posted February 10, 2004 Share Posted February 10, 2004 On low power, your scope needs to see at least 70 ft. field of view @ 100 yds. Also clear from 3 ft. to infinity. This will enable you to see at least 2 or more targets at a time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grim death Posted February 11, 2004 Share Posted February 11, 2004 The red stands out better than the amber. With the close targets look over the top of the scope, it can work pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DblTap Posted February 14, 2004 Share Posted February 14, 2004 I just boughta 1.25x4 Accupoint from SWFA for $399! Awesome scope! It's like a cross between a BAC ACOG and a standard low power variable scope. So far it's the best setup I've seen. The reticle is great in low light. A word of caution though, with it's long eye relief the Accupoint needs to be installed on an extended SWAN sleeve or other rail system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PacMan Posted February 14, 2004 Share Posted February 14, 2004 Yeah, that's SWFA's clearance deal, but only in amber! I would of jump on it was the red triangle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warpspeed Posted February 14, 2004 Share Posted February 14, 2004 Mine just showed up and it is the red one and was $ 411 delivered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DblTap Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 Thought ya'll might like some pics... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DblTap Posted February 15, 2004 Share Posted February 15, 2004 BTW, to each his own, but the amber is awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtr Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 I'm buying one of these for a 20in Colt Flattop. How do I mount it on a flattop so I get proper eye relief, all the ARMS things just confuse me, what numbers do I need, and where can I do it the cheapest? I understand that the ARMS #22 rings are the ones to use, but which heighth between the medium and high ones are best? And which extended rail to get? I don't need an integrated BUIS, and I want it long enough for the scope to fit on but not too much longer than necessary, thanks guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Religious Shooter Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 The cheapest extended rail is probably the one from Yankee Hill and Bushmaster. I don't think they are optimal (short base) but they work. http://www.bushmaster.com/shopping/bmas/yhm-9474.asp There is a similar thread to this for the IOR: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=11435 As for the ARMS, they are 30MM so you would need reducers for a 1" that IIRC the Accupoint is. Check out the Leupold QRW 1" as mentioned by KellyN on the above thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtr Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 Thanks religious shooter, the base you mention, I don't understand how it installs on the rifle, can you explain? If I go with ARMs products I need the #22M with a reducer for 1", which extended rail should I use? thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Religious Shooter Posted March 6, 2004 Share Posted March 6, 2004 Your gonna have to determine how you are going to shoot with the optic on. Some guys will continue to use a nose to the charging handle (CH) cheek weld/position with an optic inorder to have continuity or use the same muscle memory between an iron and an optic equipped gun. If you are going to use a CH or near CH hold you will need a longer one from the looks of it. If you are quite a bit back from the CH, you can get away with a shorter one. Of the long rails without the BUIS I'd get the GGG GS1 rail. http://www.gggaz.com/products/standardscout_gs1.php If you go to that link, it shows you how short a base the YHM/BM rail is when compaired to the GGG and ARMS rails. That's what I mean the YHM/BM is a short base. It attaches like all rails by clamping on to the flat top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul G. Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 I've recently ordered the same Accupoint and am searching for the rings and a mount. Why the #22 rings? What is the advantage to the QD feature over standard rings? I would think the lowest rings possible would be best. Are the mediums the lowest we can use with the Accupoints? Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Religious Shooter Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 I didn't go with the ARMS 22's ($100+). But they have a good reputation for keeping zero and used widely by the "Special" guys. I went with the medium QD rings from Valdada for my IOR ($59). The only reason to get QD for 3-gun is... maybe for cleaning? Maybe you want to experiment with different optics? Having QD rings help make it easier. Personally got QD's because I am a tactical poser and like to have the ability to take out the optic fast if it goes down. Lower rings might not be better for you ergonomics wise. You should check out other shooter's guns to determine what ring height would be comfortable for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtr Posted March 29, 2004 Share Posted March 29, 2004 Well I've put 200-300 rounds thru my AR with the Accupoint on it now, so far it's great. I used the ARMS extended rail (don't remember if it's the 36 or 38 S-EX, whichever one doesn't have the integrated BUIS), with some Leupold rings. Anyways after getting a good zero the thing just shoots awesome, I can hit stuff I couldn't even see with iron sights (like a 22in plate at 400 yards). I'm just not sure why anyone would go with an ACOG when I paid $450 total for this scope, rail and rings. But that's just my opinion. I'd post a picture but I don't have anywhere to host it, anyone want to help me out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErikW Posted March 30, 2004 Share Posted March 30, 2004 People go with ACOGs because they are legal at SMM3G and other matches that limit scopes in certain divisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtr Posted March 30, 2004 Share Posted March 30, 2004 People go with ACOGs because they are legal at SMM3G and other matches that limit scopes in certain divisions. The accupoint isn't legal for SMMG? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now