User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/11/2011 8:10:07 PM EDT
[#1]
I really am liking this sight. The fact that it functions without a battery is cool. I know there are others that do too, Reflex, Tri-Power, RX-30, Z-Point, but they all seem to have shortcomings. The SRS might too, but we'll have to wait and see. Tritium wears out eventually and fiber optics dont do well in dark/light transitions. I'm curious how durable the photo cell is but if it's built like other Trijicon products I wouldn't be too worried about it. And as for longevity, think how many of us have had a solar powered calculator in their junk drawer for the past 20 years.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2011 8:40:33 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted:
Using both eyes open, I still find the tube of the Aimpoint to be distracting. Maybe just the way my brain's wired personally, but I can't not see the housing and be distracted by it. It's the old "looking through a drinking straw" thing. To me, it's the elevation and windage dials. Because they protrude from the body of the tube, it draws attention to the fact that you are looking through glass in a tube. The EOTech window in my opinion is less distracting as it's shorter and thinner since there are no electronics built up around the EOTech window unlike the Aimpoint's tube. Since the adjustment knobs are on the base for the EOTech, you are presented a nice clear window and hence less of a tube effect. And I completely agree with you here. Well, just my opinion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2011 8:43:33 PM EDT
[#3]
I only ever seem to notice that tube effect in the Aimpoint on really bright days. Sometimes the inside lights up from the sun seems like, but other than that I don't have much trouble with it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2011 9:38:54 PM EDT
[#4]
i think the biggest factor here is the price, if its not in the $600 range and ends up in the $1000 range i see no reason to get it
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2011 10:51:48 PM EDT
[#5]
Call me crazy or whatever but I kinda like the looks.
Like others people here have said. Price will be the key... But its Trijicon, I expect this to be at least $799.00 or higher. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2011 5:45:23 AM EDT
[#6]
Quoted:
Call me crazy or whatever but I kinda like the looks.
Like others people here have said. Price will be the key... But its Trijicon, I expect this to be at least $799.00 or higher. Trijicon, IMHO charges for the technology in a small package, and I think they're priced relatively accordingly when the R&D costs associated are taken into account. Tritium isn't cheap stuff, nor is the development of a sealed, short optic to house the tritium that illuminates a reticule. For some people the technology is worth the price - I see ~$1,000 range for what an ACOG offers me. A lot of people see the cost of an ACOG as excessive however, because they don't or won't ever understand the utility of the optic, and would be just as well served with a $200 PA fixed mag scope. For the SRS, it will probably be priced reasonably considering the technology associated with integrating the panels into the optic and wiring it all together. A pretty nifty piece of technology - Postal0311 had an interesting and similar setup with a SOPMOD stock and there is or was a company that will convert EOTechs to solar panels as well. Neither have been terribly compelling to me so far and hence, understanding that the price of the SRS is likely commensurate with the technology, I'm going to make the decision that it's most likely not worth it for me. But, I'm also not the kind of person that worries incessantly about whether or not my batteries are going to die in two years or twenty, because I'll have replaced them several several times over by then - whether they needed it or not. Even with Aimpoints, and when I was overseas, I made my soldiers do the same. CCO batteries were changed on the regular - a little wasteful? Perhaps - but downrange I've learned that manufactuer's guarentees about battery life go about as far as just out the gate before falling flat on their faces. As for the total breakdown of civilization when I can never ever ever get batteries ever again? Well... I've got etched reticule optics for that. 
~Augee |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2011 5:53:07 AM EDT
[#7]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
My first thought.... Trijicon must be worried about the market shares their giving up to Aimpoint and L-3... Obviously, they feel their optics in a CQB arena are less then ideal, and putting a Mini red dot on top of a Magnified sucks for offset and check weld. And for all these "Wide field of view" comments...How many times must it be said... their is no Field of view when your shoot with both eyes open.... 
You see a dot....and a target....nothing else. Wide FOV for a RDS reflects the sensitivity to head position for dot acquisition. Think RMR sight vs T-1 vs Comp M4. Oh, I get that.... but have always discounted that because you don't get the luxury of that with Irons, so you should not expect to have it with RDS. It's great to have the extra luxury of poor head position, but it should not be the yardstick for them either... That's one of several reasons to use a red dot. In less than perfect conditions you can use your sights in positions you can't use irons. So being able to allow more room for error is better in my mind. It's not for promoting poor shooting technique. Yea..I get that too...but I don't rely on the ability to be able to have poor head placement nor is it the primary reason for a RDS. and if folks are concentrating on the target and there trigger control... the shape of the housing there red dot is in will not be a factor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2011 6:24:15 AM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
My first thought.... Trijicon must be worried about the market shares their giving up to Aimpoint and L-3... Obviously, they feel their optics in a CQB arena are less then ideal, and putting a Mini red dot on top of a Magnified sucks for offset and check weld. And for all these "Wide field of view" comments...How many times must it be said... their is no Field of view when your shoot with both eyes open....
You see a dot....and a target....nothing else. Wide FOV for a RDS reflects the sensitivity to head position for dot acquisition. Think RMR sight vs T-1 vs Comp M4. Oh, I get that.... but have always discounted that because you don't get the luxury of that with Irons, so you should not expect to have it with RDS. It's great to have the extra luxury of poor head position, but it should not be the yardstick for them either... That's one of several reasons to use a red dot. In less than perfect conditions you can use your sights in positions you can't use irons. So being able to allow more room for error is better in my mind. It's not for promoting poor shooting technique. Yea..I get that too...but I don't rely on the ability to be able to have poor head placement nor is it the primary reason for a RDS. and if folks are concentrating on the target and there trigger control... the shape of the housing there red dot is in will not be a factor. Harv, I've thought highly of your posts in the past even if we don't agree on many things - but do you really mean to imply that because I don't like the "tube presentation" of Aimpoint style optics that it must be because I have shitty technique? Is it not possible that some people simply perceive things in their field of view (not just the optic's FOV) differently as a matter of how their visual acuity is wired? Everyone that doesn't like the same optics you like must have shitty technique and no idea of how to shoot properly? ~Augee |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2011 7:02:44 AM EDT
[#9]
Quoted:
To me, it's the elevation and windage dials. Because they protrude from the body of the tube, it draws attention to the fact that you are looking through glass in a tube. The reduced tube effect relative to aimpoints was one of the reasons I went with a Z-Point. Very short housing that wraps tightly around the glass and no knobs sticking out; when you throw it up you don't see the housing or tube at all. It's also lighter than the Aimpoint T-1/H1. I'm curious if this Trijicon sight will offer different height bases, one big problem with the Z-Point is that it's too low for most AR's, though it works ok for rifles with HK-height rails and lower, as well as shotguns and pistols. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2011 7:33:42 AM EDT
[#10]
They've got me interested...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2011 11:13:29 AM EDT
[#11]
As a Tri-Power owner the new SRS sounds promising but not at anywhere near 1K,
To survive in the market they need to keep it priced comparably to its competition plus a quality mount (AimPoint / EOTech with a LaRue, ADM, Accucam, etc). Or, as others have said around the $600 +/- range. As I haven’t seen any mention of tritium in the SRS I would think they should be able to come in around that price point but, I guess we’ll have to wait and see. From what I’ve read so far I like the following; 1/3 co-witness, 3 year AA battery life, integral Bobro mount. The daytime solar power sounds promising, hopefully it will prove viable. Things I have questions about; hopefully the objective will accommodate the option of an ARD and/or some form of objective cover that will not interfere with the battery cap. Though it doesn’t look like it would be too hard to mount a conventional cap on the eyepiece. What I’m really not liking; 1.75 MOA dot, WTFO? I know many out there like small 2 MOA dots in conjunction with a magnifier but, a few of us out here feel a 4 MOA dot is better for a RDS intended environment, CQB – 200 meters. Quite frankly, Trijicon has better reticle options in its stable that would be more useful. Utilizing either the Chevron, Horseshoe or the Ring & Dot would have been better choices. All are quick to acquire at CQB ranges while maintaining the ability for precision work at extended ranges. One last thing, please etch the reticle into it so it will still work when the battery and solar power fail. Wpns Man |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2011 11:24:00 AM EDT
[#12]
Quoted:
i think the biggest factor here is the price, if its not in the $600 range and ends up in the $1000 range i see no reason to get it This is true.. If it's $600-$700 it is in the steep side of worth it.. Towards a thousand or over and I'm over it |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2011 12:03:13 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted:
As a Tri-Power owner the new SRS sounds promising but not at anywhere near 1K, To survive in the market they need to keep it priced comparably to its competition plus a quality mount (AimPoint / EOTech with a LaRue, ADM, Accucam, etc). Or, as others have said around the $600 +/- range. As I haven’t seen any mention of tritium in the SRS I would think they should be able to come in around that price point but, I guess we’ll have to wait and see. From what I’ve read so far I like the following; 1/3 co-witness, 3 year AA battery life, integral Bobro mount. The daytime solar power sounds promising, hopefully it will prove viable. Things I have questions about; hopefully the objective will accommodate the option of an ARD and/or some form of objective cover that will not interfere with the battery cap. Though it doesn’t look like it would be too hard to mount a conventional cap on the eyepiece. What I’m really not liking; 1.75 MOA dot, WTFO? I know many out there like small 2 MOA dots in conjunction with a magnifier but, a few of us out here feel a 4 MOA dot is better for a RDS intended environment, CQB – 200 meters. Quite frankly, Trijicon has better reticle options in its stable that would be more useful. Utilizing either the Chevron, Horseshoe or the Ring & Dot would have been better choices. All are quick to acquire at CQB ranges while maintaining the ability for precision work at extended ranges. One last thing, please etch the reticle into it so it will still work when the battery and solar power fail. Wpns Man I pretty much agree with everything you have to say here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2011 12:04:07 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted:
What I’m really not liking; 1.75 MOA dot, WTFO? I know many out there like small 2 MOA dots in conjunction with a magnifier but, a few of us out here feel a 4 MOA dot is better for a RDS intended environment, CQB – 200 meters. Quite frankly, Trijicon has better reticle options in its stable that would be more useful. Utilizing either the Chevron, Horseshoe or the Ring & Dot would have been better choices. All are quick to acquire at CQB ranges while maintaining the ability for precision work at extended ranges. One last thing, please etch the reticle into it so it will still work when the battery and solar power fail. Wpns Man I'm not sure you can put an etched reticle into a true 1x reflex type optic. The Leupold Prismatic has an etched reticle and is not parallax free or able to accommodate nonstandard shooting positions (no cheekweld). I'd be very surprised if the 1.75MOA dot can't be made to appear bigger by making it brighter, just like you can bloom out an Aimpoint dot. For precise shooting using the dot, dial down the intensity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2011 1:59:01 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted:
Call me crazy or whatever but I kinda like the looks.
Like others people here have said. Price will be the key... But its Trijicon, I expect this to be at least $799.00 or higher. I actually like it too. I'll have to hold out for a price before getting too attached. You also have got to remember that no mount purchase is needed with this setup. I think a target of $700 would be great and very competitive. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2011 3:28:31 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Call me crazy or whatever but I kinda like the looks.
Like others people here have said. Price will be the key... But its Trijicon, I expect this to be at least $799.00 or higher. I actually like it too. I'll have to hold out for a price before getting too attached. You also have got to remember that no mount purchase is needed with this setup. I think a target of $700 would be great and very competitive. $700 still seems steap considering you can get a PRO for $400 or a XPS2-0 for $450 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2011 5:02:24 PM EDT
[#17]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Call me crazy or whatever but I kinda like the looks.
Like others people here have said. Price will be the key... But its Trijicon, I expect this to be at least $799.00 or higher. I actually like it too. I'll have to hold out for a price before getting too attached. You also have got to remember that no mount purchase is needed with this setup. I think a target of $700 would be great and very competitive. $700 still seems steap considering you can get a PRO for $400 or a XPS2-0 for $450 $700 is steep but it's in the CompM4's range which I think is the main competitor. Cheaper would be better of course but $700 should be the max IMO. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2011 5:22:51 PM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
My first thought.... Trijicon must be worried about the market shares their giving up to Aimpoint and L-3... Obviously, they feel their optics in a CQB arena are less then ideal, and putting a Mini red dot on top of a Magnified sucks for offset and check weld. And for all these "Wide field of view" comments...How many times must it be said... their is no Field of view when your shoot with both eyes open....
You see a dot....and a target....nothing else. Wide FOV for a RDS reflects the sensitivity to head position for dot acquisition. Think RMR sight vs T-1 vs Comp M4. Oh, I get that.... but have always discounted that because you don't get the luxury of that with Irons, so you should not expect to have it with RDS. It's great to have the extra luxury of poor head position, but it should not be the yardstick for them either... That's one of several reasons to use a red dot. In less than perfect conditions you can use your sights in positions you can't use irons. So being able to allow more room for error is better in my mind. It's not for promoting poor shooting technique. Yea..I get that too...but I don't rely on the ability to be able to have poor head placement nor is it the primary reason for a RDS. and if folks are concentrating on the target and there trigger control... the shape of the housing there red dot is in will not be a factor. Harv, I've thought highly of your posts in the past even if we don't agree on many things - but do you really mean to imply that because I don't like the "tube presentation" of Aimpoint style optics that it must be because I have shitty technique? Is it not possible that some people simply perceive things in their field of view (not just the optic's FOV) differently as a matter of how their visual acuity is wired? Everyone that doesn't like the same optics you like must have shitty technique and no idea of how to shoot properly? ~Augee Not at all... What I'm trying to say is that if one truly focuses on the dot and the target....I mean really focus while concentrating on the trigger.. that the housing of your RDS could look like Spongebob square pants... and you would never notice it... and add some speed and multiple targets.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2011 6:07:24 PM EDT
[#19]
i think this rds will be better then those two choices, in my opinion
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2011 6:23:52 PM EDT
[#20]
The best part on it is the Bobro mount.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2011 11:15:34 PM EDT
[#21]
[/quote] $700 still seems steap considering you can get a PRO for $400 or a XPS2-0 for $450[/quote] $700 is steep but it's in the CompM4's range which I think is the main competitor. Cheaper would be better of course but $700 should be the max IMO. [/quote] I don't see a lot of CompM4's outside of the military - I think price has a whole lot to do with this. At a price point of $500 I think Trijicon would have trouble keeping this in stock.... not gonna happen though, based on past practice I'm thinking this thing will be $800-$900 and like the CompM4 it'll be a relative rarity in the civy world. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2011 2:01:57 AM EDT
[#22]
Looks great, from a great company.
Competition is great for the consumer! Bill |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2011 2:24:54 AM EDT
[#23]
I think I will just stick to my Aimpoint
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2011 5:04:31 AM EDT
[#24]
Quoted:
The best part on it is the Bobro mount. Agreed. The Bobro mounts are tha poopy. I want to put them on all of my optics. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2011 7:46:54 AM EDT
[#25]
Agreed. The Bobro mounts are tha poopy. I want to put them on all of my optics.
Agreed and I have them on all my optics. 
2 x Aimpoint Comp M3's 1 x Eotech XPS 2.0 1 x IOR Valdada 2.5-10X42 1 x Trijicon ACOG TA01 Just waiting on the T1 mounts to become available next. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2011 8:01:35 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
My first thought.... Trijicon must be worried about the market shares their giving up to Aimpoint and L-3... Obviously, they feel their optics in a CQB arena are less then ideal, and putting a Mini red dot on top of a Magnified sucks for offset and check weld. And for all these "Wide field of view" comments...How many times must it be said... their is no Field of view when your shoot with both eyes open....
You see a dot....and a target....nothing else. Wide FOV for a RDS reflects the sensitivity to head position for dot acquisition. Think RMR sight vs T-1 vs Comp M4. Oh, I get that.... but have always discounted that because you don't get the luxury of that with Irons, so you should not expect to have it with RDS. It's great to have the extra luxury of poor head position, but it should not be the yardstick for them either... That's one of several reasons to use a red dot. In less than perfect conditions you can use your sights in positions you can't use irons. So being able to allow more room for error is better in my mind. It's not for promoting poor shooting technique. The ability of the RDS to function in a less than perfect head position is because it requires two points to be lined up (dot and target) not three (target, front, rear) like iron sights. It doesn't matter if its a T1 or an Eotech, neither require 3 points of alignment. With any RDS the difference between not seeing the dot/reticule and and having it centered could be measured in less than 2" unless you're a bobble-head. If you're in a position where you can't obtain cheek weld and line up with your RDS, so many factors, including POI deviations, target movement etc, come into play that you're HIGHLY likely to end up NOT putting a bullet where you want. You're in a perfect storm of shit if that shot HAS to be taken now and you can't make positional adjustments measured in inches. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2011 11:53:11 AM EDT
[#27]
Quoted:
The ability of the RDS to function in a less than perfect head position is because it requires two points to be lined up (dot and target) not three (target, front, rear) like iron sights. It doesn't matter if its a T1 or an Eotech, neither require 3 points of alignment. This is a misconception - peep sights are also parallax-free, and only require two points to be lined up (post, target). As long as you can see the front post through the rear aperture, the bullet will hit where the post is, even if the post is it not centered in the rear aperture. The advantages of RDSs are their faster acquisition in low-contrast situations, as well as having a larger area where they are parallax-free. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2011 12:13:14 PM EDT
[#28]
Quoted:
Quoted:
The ability of the RDS to function in a less than perfect head position is because it requires two points to be lined up (dot and target) not three (target, front, rear) like iron sights. It doesn't matter if its a T1 or an Eotech, neither require 3 points of alignment. This is a misconception - peep sights are also parallax-free, and only require two points to be lined up (post, target). As long as you can see the front post through the rear aperture, the bullet will hit where the post is, even if the post is it not centered in the rear aperture. The advantages of RDSs are their faster acquisition in low-contrast situations, as well as having a larger area where they are parallax-free. Peep sights are only parallax-free if the rear aperture is smaller than 0.100" or thereabouts. The 0-200 peep on a standard A2-type rear sight is bigger than that, but that's probably the one you'd be using within the RDS' effective operational envelope. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2011 3:11:53 PM EDT
[#29]
Quoted:
looks interesting. solar power though? really? The solar collection on my Trijicon Reflex works great. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2011 5:48:07 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: Quoted: looks interesting. solar power though? really? The solar collection on my Trijicon Reflex works great. The Reflex uses a fiber optic to light the reticle without the use of electronics. The SRS uses a photovoltaic cell to electrically power the diode used to project the dot. Apples to oranges. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2011 6:16:19 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
looks interesting. solar power though? really? The solar collection on my Trijicon Reflex works great. The Reflex uses a fiber optic to light the reticle without the use of electronics. The SRS uses a photovoltaic cell to electrically power the diode used to project the dot. Apples to oranges. Thanks for the clarification. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2011 6:39:43 PM EDT
[#32]
The Zeiss Z-Point/Hensoldt RSA-S sight does use a photovoltaic cell to power the electronics. Never heard of any problems with them. One advantage that this gives the Z-Point is the automatic brightness system isn't dependent on the amount of light hitting the PV cell the way Trijicon's light tube system is. There's a front-facing sensor on the Zeiss/Hensoldt that tells the circuits how bright the FOV is, and that's what they use to adjust the brightness of the dot. So if you're in a dark room looking out a window the dot is bright, if you're outside looking into into a dark doorway then the spot is dimmer to match the dark background. Not as nifty as the through-the-lens system that the Browe scope uses, but head-and-shoulders above the light tube system.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2011 7:28:48 PM EDT
[#33]
For people with astigmatism, it is good news as they have a choice outside of aimpoint until the SRS comes along. While aimpoint has very good battery life and reliability, it is common knowledge that, for eyes that are less than perfect Aimpoint recticle will appear to split into eclipde. While it does not matter too much within close range, it is a bit of an issue if a magnifer is to be used or the range extends to 200m and beyond.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2011 7:45:36 PM EDT
[#34]
Quoted:
For people with astigmatism, it is good news as they have a choice outside of aimpoint until the SRS comes along. While aimpoint has very good battery life and reliability, it is common knowledge that, for eyes that are less than perfect Aimpoint recticle will appear to split into eclipde. While it does not matter too much within close range, it is a bit of an issue if a magnifer is to be used or the range extends to 200m and beyond. how will this make a diff? because if it really does it will be my next optic it looks promising but if the diode works just like aimpoint i fail to see how itll be better for those with astigmatisms |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2011 8:05:23 PM EDT
[#35]
Quoted:
Definitely interested in this.. Trijicons are built like tanks and there is a lot of Arizona sunlight for that solar powered goodness Yup. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2011 8:09:31 PM EDT
[#36]
Hopefully it doesn't have blue tint and the reticle is actually a dot.... these things made me sell my Aimpoint.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2011 8:25:05 PM EDT
[#37]
As a point of fact, the solar charging is not a new idea. Tom Lyons, who used to post on here as TWL, was doing conversions of members Eotechs to add a small solar cell on the hood, to charge the battery.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2011 8:56:33 PM EDT
[#38]
Quoted:
As a point of fact, the solar charging is not a new idea. Light emitting diodes, holographic projection, and fiber optics weren't new ideas either, but making them rugged enough to survive as an illumination source on a combat optic were certainly lucrative ones. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2011 3:39:20 PM EDT
[#39]
Sub Thousand? I think they been sucking a large government tit for far too long - if they price it down here in the regular atmosphere (3-500) then maybe.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2011 8:18:08 PM EDT
[#40]
I'm interested if the retail is at or below the M4's. If it's close to $1k there's no way.
Trijicon is obviously targeting the same market as Aimpoint and EOTech, so I'm guessing they will make the price competitive. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2011 5:45:31 AM EDT
[#41]
RIght now thought I'm running everything using CR123 batteries. Going to the AA I'd have to think about switching out my weapon light for something that runs on AAs.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2011 6:03:40 AM EDT
[#42]
Not to shabby looking.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2011 6:34:22 AM EDT
[#43]
I like it, but you'll be lucky to see it for less than $800. What in the Trij lineup would suggest it to be in anyone's price ballpark. Not sure how this would help astigmatism as a red dot it would still look infinite to your eye problem. The only red dot I can see is on the top of my G36 optic as the tube is so small it helps. Kind of like if you line up a peep sight before a red dot, it clears up the bloom. Or if I just put on my glasses.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2011 7:51:23 AM EDT
[#44]
Assume about $100-125 of the cost will be in the mount. At a $750 price point, low $600ish isn't bad compared to comparable offerings where everyone runs out and buys a $100 ADM/Bobro/LaRue mount anyway.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2011 4:47:41 PM EDT
[#45]
old school tag,
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2011 1:02:48 PM EDT
[#46]
I'd be willing to try one out, but not if it's anywhere near $1000. I'm thinking any more than $600 and I'm not very interested. The big RDS makers have been getting silly with their prices lately.
I like Trijicon products, but I'm a die hard Aimpoint fan when it comes to RDSs. That, and Trijicon's previous attempts at 1x optics have been less than impressive. Just a couple thoughts from looking at the pics (without actually handling one): the windage/elevation adjustments seem a little exposed. Maybe unnessary but I'd prefer some sort of caps, or at least something recessed into the housing a bit. Second, personal preference, but I don't like the placment of the brightness adjustments (+ button on one side, - button on the other). Again, I prefer knobs like the Aimpoints because is just quicker and easier to get the brightness you want. But other folks might prefer buttons. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2011 3:30:10 PM EDT
[#47]
This will probably leed me to buying another rifle
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2011 4:45:42 PM EDT
[#48]
So how would this optic be better for someone with an astigmatism
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2011 10:48:21 PM EDT
[#49]
Seeing as it uses the exact same principle as an Aimpoint, I highly doubt it would work any better for someone with an astigmatism then a CompM4 or any other RDS or holographic sight. All of these are still based on the same optical principle (collimator sight), which do not play well with astigmatisms. Only optics I know that bypass the issues with astigmatism are ultra-low magnification optics such as Leupold Prismatics, Mini-Acogs, and the Russian Rakurs and PK-AS sights, plus 1-4x variable scopes. In short, anything that has multiple lenses.
Now, if they made it so that it uses a NiMH AA battery and the solar panel recharges it during the day, they would have something I'd gladly fork over $800-$1000 for. As-is, I am hard-pressed to see anything substaintial that it offers over a aimpoint. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2011 11:04:22 PM EDT
[#50]
Quoted: Seeing as it uses the exact same principle as an Aimpoint, I highly doubt it would work any better for someone with an astigmatism then a CompM4 or any other RDS or holographic sight. All of these are still based on the same optical principle (collimator sight), which do not play well with astigmatisms. Only optics I know that bypass the issues with astigmatism are ultra-low magnification optics such as Leupold Prismatics, Mini-Acogs, and the Russian Rakurs and PK-AS sights, plus 1-4x variable scopes. In short, anything that has multiple lenses. Now, if they made it so that it uses a NiMH AA battery and the solar panel recharges it during the day, they would have something I'd gladly fork over $800-$1000 for. As-is, I am hard-pressed to see anything substaintial that it offers over a aimpoint. That wouldn't be a big selling point for me, seeing as how $10 worth of AA's would probably run it for a decade. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
