Field report/comparison of ACOG & Shepherd scopes

[Michael Brown]

Speaking of 14.5" barrels, do you suppose our troops are ever able to engage targets out to 300 meters or beyond, successfully?

A friend of mine got a CK in Afganistan at over 600 using an SBR (12.5 inch, 1/7 twist) equipped with an ACOG.

The round was a 77 grain Black Hills.

This appears to be an aberration. I tend to regard the 5.56 as a 150 meter and in round with those outside being exceptions to the rule.

However the heavier rounds seem to be producing results that we've never seen with the 5.56 and barrel length becomes less of an issue.

Michael Brown

 

[trbii]

My impression of the lethality of the .223 rem/5.56mm bullet, going by how badly crosswinds push it off course is, out to 300 yds. on a coyote is good enough to end their career, but on tougher, harder targets, perhaps poorly hit critters would get away. I notice firing AK variants beyond that same distance is pretty sad. Something like 50% hits. Pretty absurd when you consider the AK rear sight graduations go up to 800 meters. LOL.

 

[OrangeOkie]

What is the max distance for an AR?

5.56 Nato hard ball out of an AR has max eff range of 460m

 

[henschman]

I ended up going with the 5.5x ACOG over the 3.5x for the reason you mentioned... I didn't feel like the small stadia lines would be too terribly useful at the longer distances. I can effectively range man-sized targets out to 7 or 800 with mine. It has stadia lines out to 1200m, but they are so close to the same size out past 800 that they are pretty hard to use. Those smaller lines are better used just as an aiming point for a target that you have estimated range on using other methods (known distance, map, laser rangefinder, or just eyes trained well enough to make an estimate within 10% or so accuracy).

I have the 5.5x on my M1A, and the BDC is extremely accurate. With 147 grain surplus ball, it scores me consistent hits out to 700, which is as far as I have had the occasion to try it at. I was on a range with steel silhouettes out to 1000, but it was muddy, misty, and rainy, and it was too hard to spot hits or misses any farther out than that.

It is definitely a battle rifle optic rather than a precision rifle optic... it is designed simply to get quick first-shot hits on man-sized targets, with battle rifles firing standard ball ammo. It would not be a good choice for a precision rifle firing match grade or hand loaded ammo and trying for sub-MOA groups, but that's not what it is designed to do. As for compensating for wind, it is easy enough to figure out a hold-off in MOA based on the stadia lines, since you know a man-sized target is approx. 20" wide. A simpler method is to remember the ranges and wind conditions that will give you a hit with an edge favor on a 20" target.

I know how to use a mil dot or MOA reticle, but I like the ACOG for a battle rifle because I tend to think all of that math needed for ranging would go out the window in a stressful situation like a 2-way range, when it is important to get quick hits. With the ACOG, it's as simple as picking the line that is closest to your target's width, putting it on him, and squeezing. Just that gives you pretty good odds. If it is a miss, the glass is such good quality that you can usually see where the round went and hold off that amount for your next shot. I tend to think that is the method most guys with mil dots end up going with when under stress anyway... just taking a quick shot, seeing where it goes, and applying kentucky windage for the next shot. For close range, i.e. 300m and under, it's really easy... if the target is as fat or fatter than the big illuminated chevron, just put it on him and squeeze. You will get a hit somewhere. If you need a little more precise shot at those ranges, you know that the tip of the chevron is for 100m, the underside of the tip is 200m, and the base is 300m. For REALLY close range, i.e. CQB distances, you can just look through the scope with both eyes open, and your eyes will superimpose the illuminated chevron on your un-magnified vision from your non-scope eye, and it will function like an unmagnified red dot optic. Pretty cool stuff.

For a sniper-type rifle, where you are counting on having a little bit of time to range and engage your targets, a Mil or MOA scope is the way to go. For a battle rifle, an ACOG can't be beat (except maybe for an ELCAN). For the 5.56 platform I'm building, I will probably go with a 3.5 or 4x ACOG, since that rifle will have a little shorter max effective range than my good ol 762.

 

[ez bake]

5.56 Nato hard ball out of an AR has max eff range of 460m

You realize that you responded to a 4 year old post right?

 

[Dr_Mitch]

You realize that you responded to a 4 year old post right?

Never give up the dream!

 

[dennishoddy]

I read disturbing stories in the book "Blackhawk Down" of Rangers and Delta Force troops dumping half a mag into Somali militia men only to see them jump back up, AK-47 in hand, charging forward, until M-60 gunner let them have some 7.62 FMJ. Maybe a veteran will comment about the true effective range.

Yes I know its a 4 year old post.

Just a little current info from ARFCOM:

Q. Isn't 7.62 NATO much better for long range penetration than 5.56 anyhow? Why would I want to use 5.56 when I could send 7.62 downrange instead?
Well, yes and no. For some penetration mediums like mild steel, M855 is actually superior. Consider a recent research report:

The SS-109 can penetrate the 3.45mm standard NATO steel plate to 640 meters, while the 7.62mm ball can only penetrate it to 620 meters. The U. S. steel helmet penetration results are even more impressive as the SS-109 can penetrate it up to 1,300 meters, while the 7.62mm ball cannot penetrate it beyond 800 meters.

The current production 7.62×51mm NATO ball cartridge has remained unchanged since its adoption by NATO in 1953. As typified by the U. S. M80 ball and the Belgian M77 ball, this cartridge propels a 147-grain cupronickel-jacketed lead bullet at a muzzle velocity of 2,800 fps (848 mps). Total cartridge length and weight are 2.80 inches and 386 grains, respectively. Utilizing a standard 22-inch barrel with a rifling twist of one turn in twelve inches (M14 rifle), the maximum effective range of the 7.62×51mm ball cartridge is listed as 620 meters (682 yards). The U. S. M80 and the Belgian M77 ball projectiles can penetrate the standard NATO 3.45 mm (.14 inch) thick steel plate up to a range of 620 meters and can penetrate one side of the U. S. steel helmet up to a range of 800 meters (880 yards). In barrier and fortification penetration tests, the 147 grain ball projectile can consistently penetrate two test building blocks.

The new SS-109 cartridge propels a heavier 62-grain semi-armor piercing projectile at an initial velocity of 3,050 fps (924 mps). The improved projectile contains a 10-grain .182 caliber hardened steel penetrator that ensures penetration at longer ranges.

The new projectile can penetrate the standard NATO 3.45mm steel plate up to a range of 640 meters (704 yards) and one side of the U. S. steel helmet up to a range of 1,300 meters (1430 yards). In tests of barrier and fortification penetration however, the steel penetrator of the SS-109 could not pierce any of the test building blocks.

The primary advantages of the intermediate power 5.56×45mm NATO cartridge are summarized as follows: (1) the penetration and power of the SS-109 version are superior to the 7.62mm NATO and more than adequate for the 300-meter average combat range documented in actual battle (ORO studies): (2) the lower recoil generated by the 5.56mm cartridge allows more control during full automatic fire and therefore provides greater firepower to the individual soldier; (3) the lesser weight of the 5.56mm ammunition allows the individual soldier to carry more ammunition and other equipment; (4) the smaller size of the 5.56mm ammunition allows the use of smaller, lighter and more compact rifles and squad automatic weapons and; (5) the lethality of the 5.56mm projectile is greater than the 7.62mm projectile at normal combat ranges, due to the tendency of the lighter projectile to tumble or shatter on impact. In summary, the 5.56mm NATO provides greater firepower and effectiveness than the larger and heavier 7.62mm NATO. 5.56-mm NATO ammunition weight only 47% as much as 7.62 mm NATO ammunition.

However:

These comparisons however, do not consider the fact that the SS-109 uses a semi-armor piercing, steel-cored projectile, while the 7.62mm ball uses a relatively soft antipersonnel, lead-cored projectile. A semi-armor piercing 7.62mm caliber projectile, using second generation technology as the SS-109, would easily outperform the smaller SS-109 projectile in penetration tests at all ranges. With respect to barrier and fortification penetration tests, the 7.62mm ball projectile can consistently penetrate two test building blocks, while the SS-109 semi-armor piercing projectile cannot penetrate a single block.