What red dot sight is most commonly used by the US Army?
- Thread starter Balrog
- Start date
- Status
Cougfan2
Member
Interesting question. I have seen all three on M4's in pics of military units. I would also be interested in the selection criteria. Do you just get whatever the armory issues? Do they have a choice? Do particular services or units use specific red dots mission dependent?
gun addict
Member
in the USMC i've never even seen a reflex sight such as Aimpoint/EOtech. The unit im with only has ACOG (RCO) for our M16a4s and M4s.
course good thing about being in the military is that you get to play with cool optics like Thermal sight and whatever they call those night vision + reddot thing.
course good thing about being in the military is that you get to play with cool optics like Thermal sight and whatever they call those night vision + reddot thing.
SpeedAKL
Member
If I recall correctly the standard-issue ACOG for M16/M4 is the TA31, which is 4x.
Ragnar Danneskjold
Member
The M68 Close Combat Optic is the Aimpoint Comp M2 optic. I have never seen an EOTech sight issued, only bought and used personally. ACOGs are used by some units, or a few members of a unit for longer range shooting. But the red dot sight that is put on nearly every single M4 in OIF and OEF is the M68/Aimpoint. That sight accounts from probably over 90% of the red dots used by the US Army.
possum
Member
red dots in the army are in this order from my 7 plus years of experience and 3 deployments. this is what is issued not what people have bought out of their pocket.
M68 (aimpoint)
aimpoint m4's and m4s sights
eotechs.
doctor optics on top of acogs.
M68 (aimpoint)
aimpoint m4's and m4s sights
eotechs.
doctor optics on top of acogs.
highorder
Member
The M68 and CCO (Close Combat Optic) terms apply to the current issue optic.
It used to the be the Comp M2, now it applies to the Comp M4.
It used to the be the Comp M2, now it applies to the Comp M4.
Ragnar Danneskjold
Member
Ah, I knew Comp M4's were out there, but I didn't know they retained the M68 designation. Good to know. Unfortunately my unit still has M2s. But the point stands, Aimpoint optics are issued to soldiers far more than any other brand.
MTMilitiaman
Member
The Army primarily issues Aimpoint red dots, either the M2 Comp or newer M4 Comp, as the M68 CCO. This is an unmagnified (1x) tubular red dot sight with a 2 MOA center dot, favored for its speed in close quarters, it's durability, and its long battery life:
The Marine Corp primarily issues the Trijicon ACOG, specifically the TA21 model, known as the "Rifleman Combat Optic," or "RCO." It is a fixed 4x magnification optic with an illuminated chevron reticule, and a BDC/rangefinder for the M855 projectile out to, IIRC, 800 yards. The reticule is illuminated via tritium, and the characteristic red (or green on some Trijicon models) fiber optics located on the optic. They are extremely durable, and while not as fast as the Aimpoint or similar optics up close and personal, really help with target identification and shot placement at moderate ranges:
Other optics, like the Doctor and EOTech may be bought by individual units or soldiers, depending on approval by the right higher-ups, but to my knowledge, aren't actually general issue for any branch of the military.
The Marine Corp primarily issues the Trijicon ACOG, specifically the TA21 model, known as the "Rifleman Combat Optic," or "RCO." It is a fixed 4x magnification optic with an illuminated chevron reticule, and a BDC/rangefinder for the M855 projectile out to, IIRC, 800 yards. The reticule is illuminated via tritium, and the characteristic red (or green on some Trijicon models) fiber optics located on the optic. They are extremely durable, and while not as fast as the Aimpoint or similar optics up close and personal, really help with target identification and shot placement at moderate ranges:
Other optics, like the Doctor and EOTech may be bought by individual units or soldiers, depending on approval by the right higher-ups, but to my knowledge, aren't actually general issue for any branch of the military.
Eotechs are Military issue, have a national stock identifier number and a supplier code.
The Dot optics aren't Dr. Optics, they are Trijicons and come factory installed on the ACOGs
At least the very latest issue are.
This comes from a friend of mine who is in Special Operations.
I agree that far and away the M68 CCO Aimpoint remains the most common issue optic on Army M4 rifles.
The Dot optics aren't Dr. Optics, they are Trijicons and come factory installed on the ACOGs
At least the very latest issue are.
This comes from a friend of mine who is in Special Operations.
I agree that far and away the M68 CCO Aimpoint remains the most common issue optic on Army M4 rifles.
Madcap_Magician
Member
The M68 CCO designation is currently the Aimpoint Comp M4, but you can still find older models as well. It is the Army's general issue optic. Some units do purchase EoTech optics, I think the Ranger Battalion is fond of them. Some units in the Army use ACOG optics for SDM purposes. Mine, for example, uses ACOGs for SDMs on an M16A4, and also spreads some out among squad and platoon leadership for improved observation and recon ability.
Those optics are chosen because of certain qualities that the DOD needs.
1) Extreme reliability in harsh conditions. Nonetheless, ask any armorer or light repairman, they have optics thrown in a evac bin to higher up the chain because they can and do break. Glass lenses and electronic circuit boards cannot be made indestructible.
2) The red dots and chevrons cannot be seen in the optic forward of the user - no dancing dots in the glass to be seen by the enemy. Whether this is something you need to pay for in a range, hunting, or home defense optic is arguable (not here.) If the budget for a good optic doesn't meet the contract price (!) that military grade optics demand (!!,) then there are alternatives (which many argue, not here.)
It's even more revealing to learn the same plant makes components for the mid range and high priced optics - and it's located overseas in China. I suspect that unless you can wrangle up US Made Berry Compliant parts as a guarantee, you won't get them.
The price point for red dots is interesting, considering that most have half to no magnifying lenses, have a simple cast housing, a battery voltage circuit to light an led, and a mount. Really a lot less there than a good pair of Steiners - for the same prices, $650 to $1100. Think about it. There are red dots on the market made to milspec specifically to compete for contracts, they sell for less than $400. I smell a boondoggle, at least it's not as bad as $1100 toilet seats.
1) Extreme reliability in harsh conditions. Nonetheless, ask any armorer or light repairman, they have optics thrown in a evac bin to higher up the chain because they can and do break. Glass lenses and electronic circuit boards cannot be made indestructible.
2) The red dots and chevrons cannot be seen in the optic forward of the user - no dancing dots in the glass to be seen by the enemy. Whether this is something you need to pay for in a range, hunting, or home defense optic is arguable (not here.) If the budget for a good optic doesn't meet the contract price (!) that military grade optics demand (!!,) then there are alternatives (which many argue, not here.)
It's even more revealing to learn the same plant makes components for the mid range and high priced optics - and it's located overseas in China. I suspect that unless you can wrangle up US Made Berry Compliant parts as a guarantee, you won't get them.
The price point for red dots is interesting, considering that most have half to no magnifying lenses, have a simple cast housing, a battery voltage circuit to light an led, and a mount. Really a lot less there than a good pair of Steiners - for the same prices, $650 to $1100. Think about it. There are red dots on the market made to milspec specifically to compete for contracts, they sell for less than $400. I smell a boondoggle, at least it's not as bad as $1100 toilet seats.
briansmithwins
Member
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2005
- Messages
- 4,631
Correct me if I'm mistaken but Aimpoint's factory is in Sweden while Trijicon and Eotech are made in the US. I've never heard of any of those 3 companies subcontracting 'lower grade' optics from China.
With the Aimpoint you're paying for:
1) A bandgap filter that blocks the LED wavelength and only that wavelength. Wide bandgap filters are easy to do, which is why the $80 red dots look blue when you look thru them.
2) Battery lifetime. Any goober can use components in a red dot that will drain a CR2032 battery in 2 weeks. Components that squeeze 5 years of constant on lifetime out of that same battery don't come cheap.
3) Durability. Ruggedness ain't cheap.
BSW
Tim the student
Member
I've had both an Eotech, and an Aimpoint. Had others in my platoons that had ACOGs.
The Aimpoints seem to be most prevalent in my memory.
The Aimpoints seem to be most prevalent in my memory.
SSN Vet
Member
I'd like to chime in with a question....
I was under the impression that the Trijicon ACOG did not require a battery, but rather used Tritium (H3), which is a radioactive isotope that glows without electrical power or light. I was once told that this is why the USMC selected them.
And that the civilian ACOGs use a battery, and no tritium.
Am I mistaken?
Certainly, any manufacturing process that involves radioactive materials comes with piles of OSHA, HAZMAT and NRC paperwork and compliance.
I was under the impression that the Trijicon ACOG did not require a battery, but rather used Tritium (H3), which is a radioactive isotope that glows without electrical power or light. I was once told that this is why the USMC selected them.
And that the civilian ACOGs use a battery, and no tritium.
Am I mistaken?
Certainly, any manufacturing process that involves radioactive materials comes with piles of OSHA, HAZMAT and NRC paperwork and compliance.
Bullnettles
Member
Never knew that Brian, I'll have to take a look at my Vortex tonight.
The only versions of these three that I've known to be produced in the PFC are the illegal clones
Ragnar Danneskjold
Member
Not only that, but Tritium is very, very expensive.
killchain
Member
Tl;dr guys. 
The US Army mostly issues Aimpoint CompM2 or CompM4's.
The Marine Corps uses the ACOG TA31 on most Rifleman M16's.
The US Army mostly issues Aimpoint CompM2 or CompM4's.
The Marine Corps uses the ACOG TA31 on most Rifleman M16's.
gun addict
Member
mhh, the radioactive componant in the RCO (acog) are minimum and hardly anything to be of concern. Our Combat Instructor at SOI joked that if our Humvee ever blows up and the M16 blows up in our hand with the RCO attached it would be wise to not inhale that gas, i think that's the least of our concerns though in that situation
I've seen posters of Army guys with ACOG and doctor sight on top, talk about Envy, dont know how many years it would be before the USMC gets those army handsdowns
I've seen posters of Army guys with ACOG and doctor sight on top, talk about Envy, dont know how many years it would be before the USMC gets those army handsdowns
The only time there is a choice is when the soldier in question spends money out of pocket to buy their own optic and use it on their military rifle.
As far as selection criteria, when I deployed, the better the optic (visibility, magnification, etc), the higher up in the rank structure it was. Gunners were issued simple CCOs (M68's). Team leaders and squad leaders usually were issued ACOGs.
Mission dependency was also a slight factor with our issued equipment. I deployed with MP's, so those who weren't in a slot that was likely to be mission essential ("outside the wire") were not issued much in terms of combat equipment (optics, etc).
I was an 11B(infantry) in the 82nd airborne. M68s are the most prevalent in the 82nd. Majority of squad leaders usually snag the TA31f acogs. Eotechs are somewhat more sporaddic but also a popular choice for squad leaders. We tend to give ACOGs to soldiers that attended the squad designated marksman school priority. I was an instructor at the SDM school and cannot say enough good things about it. We get students very consistent out to 600 yards with it on m4's.
With that said, I use an eotech on my AR due to the price difference.
The m68s are not bad sites, but we had not aquired very many comp 4s. The COMP M2s just can't hold their own on accuracy vs the comp 4s and eotechs.
While deployed I used an acog with a dr sight on top.
With that said, I use an eotech on my AR due to the price difference.
The m68s are not bad sites, but we had not aquired very many comp 4s. The COMP M2s just can't hold their own on accuracy vs the comp 4s and eotechs.
While deployed I used an acog with a dr sight on top.
Last edited:
Tim the student
Member
Sax, welcome to THR. What unit?
I was in 3-505, left, and came back again to 3-505 (and the transition to 5/73).
I was in 3-505, left, and came back again to 3-505 (and the transition to 5/73).
- Status