Browe BTO 4×32 gun sight – SHOT Show Optic Preview

browe_1

Released shortly before SHOT 2015 is the BTO (Browe Tactical Optic) by Browe Inc. It’s the forged 7075-T6 aluminum housing version of the BCO (Browe Combat Optic), which has a titanium housing. The new aluminum version has a lower price point while keeping the internals the same.

I have reviewed the titanium version previously for another publication. The Browe optic is a competitor to the popular Trijicon ACOG. The similarity is not a coincidence since the company’s founder, Brian Browe, was formerly the Director of Operations at Trijicon.

 

brow_2

Besides the change of housing material to aluminum, the Browe BTO on the right has a integral mount base with the American Defense Manufacturing QD lever. Like the titanium BCO, the new aluminum BTO is also powered by a CR123 lithium battery. The average battery life is 2000 hours. From my previous review, the Browe sight has the best automatic illumination control I have even seen.

 

browe_3

The MSRP is $1250, which is $300 lower than the titanium version. The online price is around $1000-$1100, which makes it about $100~$200 cheaper than the Trijicon 4×32 ACOG model with QD mount. The Browe sight also has few advantages over the ACOG in that it’s battery powered with a very effective self-adjusting reticle brightness control. The Browe’s sight housing is machined to take common size lens caps. The Browe BTO is both lighter and slimmer than the ACOG LED, the battery powered version of the ACOG 4×32.

 

BCO_05

A better picture of the original Browe BCO sight, the one with titanium housing, from my previous article. The Browe BCO and BTO are available in factory custom duracoat colors such as the FDE shown in the images.

 

BCO_03



Writer and gear editor with articles published in major gun publications. A five year combat veteran of the US Marine Corps, Tim is also part of Point & Shoot Media Works, a producer of photography, video and web media for the firearms and shooting sport industry. Tim’s direct contact: Tyan.TFB -at- gmail.com


Advertisement

  • Vitsaus

    If its only 200 or so less than a regular ACOG, why not just get the ACOG? If you got 1k to throw around, you’ve got 1200 for name brand.

    • santi

      I agree with you. If a brand with less of a presence within its industry has something stellar to offer the market – a product that matches or almost matches the quality of say, Trijicon. You want to hit a price point that appeals to some of us who can’t afford to dish out a grand plus on an optic but need something dependable. That makes headway in the game to me. In my opinion so much of it is overinflated already. If I have the money for a battle proven optic and its only 200 more than a Browe, I’ll buy trijicon.

    • JumpIf NotZero

      Every ACOG ever made has cloudy glass on the far right edge, this isn’t a knock on them, it’s a fact, most people will never notice it.

      ACOG eye relief on certain models is terrible. A couple are OK, but some are so bad that I question why anyone would select them.

      I have yet to see the BDC for any ammo let alone 62gr from a 14.5 or 20″ barrel line up on their BDC anywhere past 300m. Not exactly their issue as BDC is sort of dumb, but imo you have an optic that will let you see to torso sized targets to 600y clearly you should have a reference to hit them. Last one I saw was 100m “off” between 4 and 5.

      You can easily flare out / bloom an ACOG with the right lighting conditions and model. No legit options for brightness control other than masking tape.

      So…

      I agree with you that if you are spending that much, ACOG is still in the game. But, there are persistent issues with the ACOG series that would make me hesitant to purchase one for my personal uses. I have no idea if Browe is any better with these issues. Once I knew my holds, the first time I shot to 600y years and years ago was with an ACOG, fast and accurate enough, fun times.

      • Timothy G. Yan

        Most of the fanboys like ACOG because that’s what the military is using, however, they have never actually used one themselves in real shooting. Trijicon ACOG was selling for $800 before the military picked that up, then it suddenly doubled the price.

        Yeah, the fiber optic blooming is terrible. Maybe Trijcon could ask Meprolight in how to fix that.

        • KestrelBike

          Curious tangent: In your service, did you or anyone you knew ever have issues with an ACOG losing zero due to being knocked around?

      • Kelly Jackson

        Everytime I read your posts I can’t help to think that they only triggers you’ve had any time behind are on your Gamestation.

    • 360AD

      Why not? because you’re not a fanboy who would follow what everyone else is doing like a lemming when there is a better product available that is worth every dollar and not just for the name’s sake.

      ACOG generally have poor eye relief. Clarity of glass, while better than cheap scopes, is not the best. Their fiber optic and tritium only illumination is not ideal (bright enough) under certain conditions.

      Just because the military uses them, doesn’t mean it’s the best product. Politics, kickbacks play a major role in acquisition of military equipment; has little to do with quality or merit.

      You are not a politician or Pentagon official who is spending someone else’s hard earned dollars (taxes) and can benefit from the revolving door of government employment and employment by defense contractor/manufacturer. It behooves you to spend your money more wisely.

  • BryanS

    The real question… Can you even, Browe?

  • stephen

    I think to appeal to more people the price point must come down. If your in the market for such an optic, I don’t know anyone who would go cheap (save 200) and get this versus spending 200 more and getting an acog.

    Just sayin’

  • Axel

    Yeah, I’d just shell out the extra $200 for the trijicon. This product looks great, but trijicon has been used for decades with great success, and I don’t know how durable these are in comparison. To be fair, most of us wont need the durability of trijicon, and would be well suited with most brands. But having been battle proven is worth something (definitely 200 dollars to most customers). I’d buy it if it were perhaps 4-500$ less than trijicon without sacrificing much.

  • Jon Hammett

    Now, if only somebody could make something for us budget-minded college students.

    • KestrelBike

      They’re called iron-sights!

      • Jon Hammett

        Hahaha!

        I can save up for a while, but it would be nice to see something more economically priced (read: sub-$450) as a magnified optic like the Browe or ACOG. If I had $1200 to spend on an optic, it would be spent on another rifle, not a scope.

        I don’t know, maybe I’m too cheap. 🙂

        • GettoPhilosopher

          It’s called a Vortex Spitfire 3x. ($350)
          Or Primary Arms makes a few models, as does Burris or Bushnell (I forget which).