36 yard zero on an ACOG?

[Nico9283]

Anyone here prefer their TA31 to use the combat effective zero of 36yds instead of the intended zero of 100 meters?

I know the 36 yard zero would make the intended bdc values useless.. but I feel like here in the northeast, an unobstructed sight line longer than 300 yards is almost non existent (at least not unless it’s a deliberate clearing at a shooting range) and therefore I don’t see the practical need for a hunting or defense BDC beyond that distance.

 

[cams]

 

[Nico9283]

View attachment 772999

I get it that some people may think the question is redundant. Could you provide a reason NOT to zero an acog at 36 yards? Im not saying I’ve done it, I’m simply wondering about it’s benefits.

Because technically it has zero benefits unless it’s mounted on a rifle that exactly matches the specs of the rifle layout it was designed for.

 

[paul73]

I’m asking if anyone has theirs zeroed at anything other than 100m.

i did not get most of the rest - but on this topic - sure.

for guns i shoot at long distances - all are set to 100yds zero, as it represents the top of the curve and they have long scopes with proper reticles.

for operational tactical guns and hunting guns - the 50/200 zero is best as it gives you the flattest 0-300 section where you would use that weapon in a real life scenario - and that is what is best for the acog or prism or red dot.

a 36/300 zero is not too practical due to too much deviation from flat trajectory at a 100. the rational here is to be able to make an impact aiming at the center of mass on any of the 0-300 distances.

i would also add - if you set all your guns the same and know dope for all of them - it does not matter what the zero is, as long as you know how to use it and make the impact happen.

 

[Nico9283]

View attachment 772999

I deleted all the hypotheticals to keep it simple. But watch, now people will start bringing up all the hypotheticals I deleted

 

[cams]

Well luckily for you I think this thread will deliver.

 

[Nico9283]

for operational tactical guns and hunting guns - the 50/200 zero is best as it gives you the flattest 0-300 section

a 36/300 zero is not too practical due to too much deviation from flat trajectory at a 100.

I thought the 36 yard zero proved to be the flattest possible trajectory up to 300 yards?
Are you familiar with the video of Shawn Ryan Explaining this?

 

[GaryO]

Well luckily for you I think this thread will deliver.

It's been awhile, we're due for a good thread.

 

[Nico9283]

It's been awhile, we're due for a good thread.

You should read the threads about bill 4420. They’re a cluster f***

 

[cams]

It's been awhile, we're due for a good thread.

You should’ve seen it before he deleted the other 4 paragraphs in the OP. lol

 

[paul73]

I thought the 36 yard zero proved to be the flattest possible trajectory up to 300 yards?
Are you familiar with the video of Shawn Ryan Explaining this?

i am a practician, not a theoretesist.
i already said it - whatever you prefer is the right thing for you. choose one and get used to it.

50/200 is what i prefer, as it has less deviation from point of aim at distances where it matters, for me.
and i know that i will highly unlikely shoot a lot at 300yds far marks using a red dot or 3x prism.

 

[Broc]

I get it that some people may think the question is redundant. Could you provide a reason NOT to zero an acog at 36 yards? Im not saying I’ve done it, I’m simply wondering about it’s benefits.

Because technically it has zero benefits unless it’s mounted on a rifle that exactly matches the specs of the rifle layout it was designed for.

BROC verdict --- BDC reticles are SH*T .

 

[Dennis in MA]

I'm pretty sure even the most generous Tueller Drill wouldn't allow for a 300yd shot.

 

[paul73]

BROC verdict --- BDC reticles are SH*T

the whole idea there is to ignore BDC to simplify it, as if you are to follow the acog bdc - you need to use 100yds like it says you to do.
too bad they did not put an image of the target at 300yds, as it would illustrate why it does not matter that much - but even the 500yds image makes enough point of why.

but, shooting my tavor at 300yds, i can say aiming at 17" bigger iron i was not too happy with how many impacts it makes there, with its 3-4moa spread and bdc deviations.
any theory is one thing, but practical reality is something else.

 

[Nico9283]

BROC verdict --- BDC reticles are SH*T .

the whole idea there is to ignore BDC to simplify it

So correct me if I’m wrong here.. if I have an acog but have zero plan to use it on targets beyond 300 yards… you support the idea of zeroing it at either 36 or 50, and ignoring the bdc for anything other than ranging. Yes?

 

[Mesatchornug]

I thought the 36 yard zero proved to be the flattest possible trajectory up to 300 yards?

The idea you've been introduced to is Maximum Point Blank Range. It sounds like you still have some learning to do, to understand it.

here's a search for relevant posts:

Search results for query: max point blank

www.northeastshooters.com

Here's a thread where this was discussed earlier this year:

25/300 Yard Zero - 200 Yard POI

So I zeroed my 16" AR at 25 yards using 77gr mk262 that is supposed to be dead on at 300 yards. I usually just zero rifles at 100, but figured I would try something different this time. Well, took it to 200 yards and the POI at 200 yards is around 10-12" high. I get that it won't be right on at...

www.northeastshooters.com

I would personally not invest in an expensive optic with features I don't intend to learn to use. It seems like one would be better off running a red dot or a duplex reticle in that case.

 

[Nico9283]

You should’ve seen it before he deleted the other 4 paragraphs in the OP. lol

I would personally not invest in an expensive optic with features I don't intend to learn to use. It seems like one would be better off running a red dot or a duplex reticle in that case.

Cam.. do you understand now why I had originally typed up those hypothetical responses I expect? It’s been 10 minutes and someone is already recommending a red dot. Did I not address this specific response in my hypotheticals lol…

Red dots need batteries. I don’t want that.
Duplex reticle scopes are not very durable. I don’t want that…

 

[Soundwave]

What caliber? I found lots of good info with graphics(silhouette target) for 5.56 but still struggling with .308.

 

[DarthRevan]

Learn your optic, zero it appropriately, and improve hold overs.

Or

Just f***ing wing it, bro.

I know where I fall between those two options.

 

[Nico9283]

What caliber? I found lots of good info with graphics(silhouette target) for 5.56 but still struggling with .308.

.223/.556
Barrel length can affect the values slightly because of bullet speed differences.. but it’s fairly close within 250 yards for any barrel length between 11.5” and 18”. Shorter/longer barrels, or distances beyond 250 yards start to have very large deviations.

I can’t speak to whether or not this kind of zeroing would apply to the trajectory of .308

 

[Nico9283]

zero it appropriately

That’s what I’m trying to find out. I’m trying to weigh the pros and cons of zeroing an optic at a distance it wasn’t designed to be zeroed at. There are pros and cons to using the bdc, and there are pros and cons to ignoring the bdc and only using the chevron/donut/horseshoe/whatever reticle you have.

I’m not smart enough to think of every pro and con to either, that’s why I’m asking for others to chime in so I can make the most educated decision I’m capable of… which may still be wrong but screw it, why not learn if I can?

 

[DarthRevan]

That’s what I’m trying to find out. I’m trying to weigh the pros and cons of zeroing an optic at a distance it wasn’t designed to be zeroed at. There are pros and cons to using the bdc, and there are pros and cons to ignoring the bdc and only using the chevron/donut/horseshoe/whatever reticle you have.

I’m not smart enough to think of every pro and con to either, that’s why I’m asking for others to chime in so I can make the most educated decision I’m capable of… which may still be wrong but screw it, why not learn if I can?

You’re asking about an ACOG, just zero it to the manufacturer specs. It’s not rocket science.

If you want to mess around with different zero distances, get a scope with mrad dots and a ballistic calculator on your phone.

 

[Soundwave]

I still haven't gotten into using a ballistic calculator but these graphics helped me decide.

 

[Nico9283]

You’re asking about an ACOG, just zero it to the manufacturer specs. It’s not rocket science.

If you want to mess around with different zero distances, get a scope with mrad dots and a ballistic calculator on your phone.

to avoid the op being too long, i deleted my reasons for wanting an acog specifically.

Those reasons are: best durability, doesn’t require batteries, has a fiber optic, has tritium for low light use of the fiber optic, has an etched reticle in case both tritium and fiber optic fail.

I don’t care at all about the bdc… but to my knowledge, an acog is the only optic that can meet the criteria I want in an optic for a utility rifle. But the acog doesn’t have a model that DOESNT have a bdc.
Do you know of another optic anywhere in the world that uses an etched donut/chevron that’s illuminated by a fiber optic instead of batteries, and is even halfway as durable as an acog? If so, please mention it here.

 

[Compooky]

I would zero it as intended unless you basically just chose an acog to only use it like a red dot + magnifier. 36 yard zero is more to point and shoot and be close up to a certain distance. The bdc is an extra tool to aid you. If you have it, might as well use it and spend that little effort to remember close range offsets.

 

[Mesatchornug]

Cam.. do you understand now why I had originally typed up those hypothetical responses I expect? It’s been 10 minutes and someone is already recommending a red dot. Did I not address this specific response in my hypotheticals lol…

If you want efficient answers to your questions, form them better. You asked about using a battle zero on an optic that's designed for a 100 yd zero. It doesn't require "4 paragraphs" to explain that you're (for some unknown reason in 2023) scared of batteries.

Red dots need batteries. I don’t want that.

Duplex reticle scopes are not very durable. I don’t want that…

there is little in the world more durable than an etched duplex reticle in a fixed magnification optic.
in fact, that's all an ACOG is
except they put a bunch of time/effort into sorting out an estimated bullet drop trajectory based on an assumed cartridge and barrel pairing. (for a client with controlled ammo and barrel lengths)

You're new. You're building a LARP carbine. You don't know what you don't know. That's awesome. Learning where we are is the first start on any journey.

If you want simple, use a simple reticle. if you're going to spend the money on something fancy, you're wating money if you don't use it how it's intended.

.223/.556
Barrel length can affect the values slightly because of bullet speed differences.. but it’s fairly close within 250 yards for any barrel length between 11.5” and 18”. Shorter/longer barrels, or distances beyond 250 yards start to have very large deviations.

I can’t speak to whether or not this kind of zeroing would apply to the trajectory of .308

Every cartridge/barrel pairing will be different. For any given combo, there is a MPBR BZO that you could develop for your use.

to avoid the op being too long, i deleted my reasons for wanting an acog specifically.

Those reasons are: best durability, doesn’t require batteries, has a fiber optic, has tritium for low light use of the fiber optic, has an etched reticle in case both tritium and fiber optic fail.

See? one sentence. Boom.

Now...why do you think you need something "as durable as an ACOG"?

More accurately, is your lifestyle really so High Speed Low Drag that you expect to be in such austere conditions that you'll be forced to use your optic as a hammer for years on end without the option to hit a resupply and replace the battery? If you are planning to zero the rifle and bury it for so long the battery may have died, I've got two pieces of bad news: 1) Tritium dies, too; 2) that means you haven't trained with that rifle.

If not, even a Holosun will go a year without a battery change, and a spare battery can be stored in the pistol grip of your rifle. If you change the battery every time you change the clock, you'll never have a dead battery. And if you train with it regularly, you won't find yourself worrying if your battery is still good.

Better still, if you train with it regularly, you can test countless configurations and zeroes, to find the one that actually works for you, without drawing the laughing attention of guys like @cams who have actually been there and done that, with irons.

[edit]
cribbed from that other thread, here's another visual to help you understand what's going on:
(NB: your 36 yd zero really is the 300 yd zero)

 

[Nico9283]

If you want efficient answers to your questions, form them better. You asked about using a battle zero on an optic that's designed for a 100 yd zero. It doesn't require "4 paragraphs" to explain that you're (for some unknown reason in 2023) scared of batteries.


there is little in the world more durable than an etched duplex reticle in a fixed magnification optic.
in fact, that's all an ACOG is
except they put a bunch of time/effort into sorting out an estimated bullet drop trajectory based on an assumed cartridge and barrel pairing. (for a client with controlled ammo and barrel lengths)

You're new. You're building a LARP carbine. You don't know what you don't know. That's awesome. Learning where we are is the first start on any journey.

If you want simple, use a simple reticle. if you're going to spend the money on something fancy, you're wating money if you don't use it how it's intended.


Every cartridge/barrel pairing will be different. For any given combo, there is a MPBR BZO that you could develop for your use.


See? one sentence. Boom.

Now...why do you think you need something "as durable as an ACOG"?

More accurately, is your lifestyle really so High Speed Low Drag that you expect to be in such austere conditions that you'll be forced to use your optic as a hammer for years on end without the option to hit a resupply and replace the battery? If you are planning to zero the rifle and bury it for so long the battery may have died, I've got two pieces of bad news: 1) Tritium dies, too; 2) that means you haven't trained with that rifle.

If not, even a Holosun will go a year without a battery change, and a spare battery can be stored in the pistol grip of your rifle. If you change the battery every time you change the clock, you'll never have a dead battery. And if you train with it regularly, you won't find yourself worrying if your battery is still good.

Better still, if you train with it regularly, you can test countless configurations and zeroes, to find the one that actually works for you, without drawing the laughing attention of guys like @cams who have actually been there and done that, with irons.

[edit]
cribbed from that other thread, here's another visual to help you understand what's going on:
(NB: your 36 yd zero really is the 300 yd zero)

That’s all very helpful… thank you. The only part you’re incorrect about is: me being new, or being a LARPer. I just question things, a lot of people in the firearms community live in a bubble, I try to venture outside of it from time to time. Most times it’s not fruitful, but sometimes it is.
I have my reasons for not wanting batteries, you don’t need to like or agree with the reasons.
You say I can ask a question without having to over-explain why I don’t want batteries… so I’ll say you can offer an answer to my question without having to insert your opinion about why you think I shouldn’t be worried about batteries.

People’s side-opinions getting thrown in instead of just answering directly is why every thread on this forum ends up going off the rails, and it’s the reason why I had originally felt the need to answer all the questions/opinions I predicted (accurately btw) were coming.

 

[Mesatchornug]

That’s all very helpful… thank you. The only part you’re incorrect about is: me being new, or being a LARPer.

I hate to offend unintentionally.

When building a "fighting rifle," we are all LARPing, unless we're actually going out to fight. In which case we should already know the answers to these questions (or rely on the gear and recommendations of those above us).

So far as new - I mean specifically to the topic, to which you're asking the questions of a person who is new.

Especially notable is conflation of

hunting or defense

These are very different uses. "Acceptable" accuracy on a human sized combatant at realistic engagement distances is not the same as one should seek on a game animal.

I just question things, a lot of people in the firearms community live in a bubble, I try to venture outside of it from time to time. Most times it’s not fruitful, but sometimes it is.
I have my reasons for not wanting batteries, you don’t need to like or agree with the reasons.

This is true.

You say I can ask a question without having to over-explain why I don’t want batteries… so I’ll say you can offer an answer to my question without having to insert your opinion about why you think I shouldn’t be worried about batteries.

To be clear, I'm not saying aren't a failure mode. (I'm a mechanical engineer, after all, the angry pixies cannot be trusted.) I'm saying that unless you're looking to do a full decision matrix where you carefully weight each of your variables, you're not actually being as rigorous in your logic as you believe.

People’s side-opinions getting thrown in instead of just answering directly is why every thread on this forum ends up going off the rails, and it’s the reason why I had originally felt the need to answer all the questions/opinions I predicted (accurately btw) were coming.

Welcome to society. That's literally what happens when you ask other people for advice. If you just want tummy rubs, try posting your setups to the 'gram.

 

[Nico9283]

All very fair points, I see no reason for us to argue over it. To make myself more clear, I’m not opposed to people thinking not wanting batteries is stupid (or disagreeing with any opinion of mine for that matter) I would just prefer they state why they disagree.
Ie: saying you don’t know what I’m worried about with batteries in 2023 teaches me nothing. But explaining your reasons for not thinking batteries are a liability anymore might actually teach me something. That’s all I’m asking for, the juice behind the opinions. I’m open to opposing opinions if the logic behind the opinion is offered so I can see it from another point of view

 

[Mesatchornug]

All very fair points, I see no reason for us to argue over it. To make myself more clear, I’m not opposed to people thinking not wanting batteries is stupid (or disagreeing with any opinion of mine for that matter) I would just prefer they state why they disagree.
Ie: saying you don’t know what I’m worried about with batteries in 2023 teaches me nothing. But explaining your reasons for not thinking batteries are a liability anymore might actually teach me something. That’s all I’m asking for, the juice behind the opinions. I’m open to opposing opinions if the logic behind the opinion is offered so I can see it from another point of view

Modern red dots have shake awake technology, etc. that allow them to last more than a year on a single battery. Modern battery chemistry is (despite my protestations) incredibly reliable.

If you put a good battery in a sufficiently reliable optic, and practice proper PMCS your risk of failure approaches zero.

You're right - there are likely no horseshoes (and probably few chevrons) that don't include a BDC. That's because that feature came about to accommodate the BDC.

If you don't like red dots - for whatever reason - there are other options, including various etched reticles. You could test your idea on the Primary Arms SLX for 1/4 the price. Yes, it uses batteries instead of solar and tritium. But you can buy a spare optic and a case of ammo with the savings. Better still, you could probably get admission to and ammo for a carbine class with that $700 - which will tell you infinitely more about your needs than a YouTube video. (To be clear, none of this is meant to speak ill of Mr Ryan. He did good and important work, and makes interesting content.)

Buy once cry once is a great way to work. It relies on a rather complete understanding of the actual needs of the user, though. It sounds like you're trying to talk yourself into the ACOG, because you've been told all these other things are somehow untrustworthy.

At the same time, it sounds like you're trying to invent a do-all solution in a problem space with literally thousands of variables. But there's no free lunch. Don't you think that if a singular solution existed we'd all be using it? Instead, we all continue to build, explore, and refine our systems to our needs. Many of us develop a quiver, because different tools are better suited for different tasks - like hunting, and defense. Others choose a single tool, and learn how it's correctly used to serve those different roles.