Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 5/31/2003 7:07:01 AM EDT
A couple months ago I called Trijicon about when the Tripower would be available. They told me mid-May to early June. I called the other day and they told me some issues came up with the last R&D batch and they need some more developement. She would not give me any time frame when they might be available.

Can't wait anymore. Guess I settle for an Aimpoint.
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 9:56:22 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2003 9:57:45 AM EDT by NYPatriot]
Stipilot, I wouldn't exactly call the purchase of an Aimpoint [i]settling[/i]. I would call it a wise & informed choice.
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 10:18:19 AM EDT
I wanted a Tri-Power also and finally "settled" on an Aimpoint. I have absolutely no complaints about it yet.
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 11:27:45 AM EDT
Originally Posted By NYPatriot: Stipilot, I wouldn't exactly call the purchase of an Aimpoint [i]settling[/i]. I would call it a wise & informed choice.
View Quote
I agree and think the Aimpoint is a much better sight then the prototype Tri-Power I have used. buy an Aimpoint, the latest and greatest might not be better then what is on the market right now. for a tube red dot, I take the Aimpoint any day.
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 12:37:38 PM EDT
F o r g e t A b o u t I t !
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 1:05:27 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/1/2003 1:16:33 AM EDT
I've also been waiting for the Tri-Power. It's a shame it's taking this long, but Trijicon doesn't seem to be the kind of company to put out an inferior product. I'm sure when it hits the market it will live up to their high standards. I just hope I'm still around to see it. SMGLee: Any reason you liked the aimpoint better? What was wrong with the Tri-Power? Steve.
Link Posted: 6/2/2003 3:21:20 PM EDT
From Cal's Sporting Armorie's website: "This unit has no predicted release date, due to manufacturing problems. Trijicon is trying to fix these problems before releasing this unit. The following information was provided to us by a Trijicon employee at the 2003 Shot Show in Orlando. Trijicon wants the the fiber optic window on top of the unit to be white, but they can't find an adhesive that will bond the white window to the polymer housing of the TriPower. Currently the fiber optic window will only bond to the polymer housing, if the window is made into a smoke colored version. Adding the smoke colored pigment to the resin aids in the bonding process. ****(This is why you may have seen pictures of the TriPower with a white and smoke colored fiber optic window) When using the battery power the TriPower light source back feeds into the fiber optics illuminating the fiber and the window on top of the unit. ****(thus the rubber cover was made to help prevent the glow from being seen at night) While the TriPower is mounted on top of an M4 Carbine, while suspended upside down the weapon is dropped, upon impact the fiber optic window brakes. ****(this breakage problem must be fixed before Trijicon will release the TriPower) " FYI -Sul2
Link Posted: 6/2/2003 6:01:20 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SMV: SMGLee: Any reason you liked the aimpoint better? What was wrong with the Tri-Power? Steve.
View Quote
Steve, The tri-power I used was not impressive to me for several reason. 1. The reticle has a potential of wash out under bright sunlight. the chevron reticle used in the demo tri-power that afternoon was weak at best under the Southern California afternoon sun. 2. The choice of chevron reticle is questionable since it is worst kind of reticle for CQB, it is just too fine for fast action work 3. All that control module on top seem to block lots of vision, it might just need getting use to, but it is a big hulk of part sticking on top of the sight. 4. The front objective is still coated with that blue tint which can distort target at dusk during a long distance engagement.
Link Posted: 6/2/2003 7:43:47 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/2/2003 7:58:19 PM EDT
It seems like their chasing the Aimpoint, etc. already. Trying for the rest of the Mil. contract on certain optic fields. Sounds like reinventing the wheel to me. Nothing sooo new that it'll be worth the wait. Who knows? Maybe?
Link Posted: 6/3/2003 1:32:33 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SMGLee:Steve, The tri-power I used was not impressive to me for several reason. 1. The reticle has a potential of wash out under bright sunlight. the chevron reticle used in the demo tri-power that afternoon was weak at best under the Southern California afternoon sun. 2. The choice of chevron reticle is questionable since it is worst kind of reticle for CQB, it is just too fine for fast action work 3. All that control module on top seem to block lots of vision, it might just need getting use to, but it is a big hulk of part sticking on top of the sight. 4. The front objective is still coated with that blue tint which can distort target at dusk during a long distance engagement.
View Quote
and add that it is made of plastic too, PP out
Link Posted: 6/21/2003 3:45:50 PM EDT
I still don't understand how companies can continuously get away with "price fixing", ummm.... I mean "minimum selling prices", in today's day and age...
Link Posted: 6/21/2003 4:43:24 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/21/2003 4:48:01 PM EDT by amuroray]
"minimum selling prices"
View Quote
Mimimum selling prices are the number allowed to be advertised. However, dealers can sell you the products below these "mimimum selling prices". There are many dealers doing this practise. Down to the bottom line, the question goes back to the dealers that how much profit they want to make. Is it a $20, $50, $100 or $150 profit?
Top Top