Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 10/31/2003 7:05:02 PM EDT
Well, after anxiously awaiting the release of this up-till-now vaporware, I decided to buy the one RBPrecision had. I kinda like trying things out for myself & not purely going by what a few others had written. I got to fondle a few protos at the last SHOT Show in FL, but it still seemed it was in its infancy, w/ a few issues to be worked out before it was truly "soldier-proof". More about this later.

This is how it came from Trijicon:

Which is just a fancy covering over the standard plastic foam-filled lockbox all ACOGs (& I'm sure other Trijicon products) come in.

Here's everything inside, minus the sight & scopecoat it comes w/:

Obviously, you get alot of stuff w/ this "civilian" version.

Here's a size comparison pic:

L to R: TriPower, Aimpoint ML2, EOTech 552.A65, & ACOG TA31F.

Here's a couple Aimpoint comparison pics:



& a couple more of the TriPower itself:



Observations:
1. the reticle isn't nearly (not even half) as bright as my TA31
2. the caps for the battery & cyalume stick compartments aren't tethered
3. it requires TWO 1/3N batteries to function properly - that's right, two

Not to say this isn't a great sight (I'm really trying to like it) but the points above are really the only bad things I could find to say about it right out of the box. Granted, I haven't tried the sight in daylight, only used it inside my office using incandescent illumination. The story may well be very different by the time I get to the range. As for the caps, if you'll notice in the last 2 images there's a small "nipple" (for lack of better verbage) located between the caps & under the button controls, as well as well-designed caps that will easily allow a string/wire (like the early Aimpoint ones) or aftermarket rubber tethers to be attached. I'm sure these will be available later, & most definitely on the military version. The battery issue may or may not be an issue at all, as they're supposed to be a backup anyways & this will only be properly addressed w/ the range session I'm now trying to schedule w/ a few LEO friends.

I'll post my results of practical shooting using this thing. I think I'll like it, but admit I'm just being optimistic. Alot of us have been waiting on this thing to come out for awhile (what, 3 years or so now?) & time will tell if it was/is worth the wait.

& if you didn't notice in the close-up pics, I have ended up w/ serial number 223
Link Posted: 10/31/2003 7:54:03 PM EDT
Nice pics. I can't wait to read yours and others reviews of this optic. You say that it is not as bright as the ACOG, that suprizes me. It seems with 3 or really 4 ways to illuminate the recticle that the last thing the wanted was for the recticle not to be bright. I hope it is everything you want it to be.
Link Posted: 11/1/2003 3:50:28 AM EDT
man what is it with trijicon and those funky rubber speedo scope covers?
Link Posted: 11/1/2003 4:31:58 AM EDT
Is that red in the FO normal or did you have the back up light source on? And how bright is it with the light source on? Did they give an expected battery life with it? Thanks for the pics, I've been wanting to see some.
Link Posted: 11/1/2003 5:23:21 AM EDT
The fiber optic appears to glow in the photos, but it's just the flash reflection. I found out while playing w/ it in the dark why they include the cover for the FO. In a dark room using either the batteries or cyalume as supplemental reticle illumination the FO glows discernably. Not bad enough for me to ever use the FO cover but I guess from a spec ops standpoint it's a nice option to have. According to the manual, the official battery life is rated at 10-110 hours (which correspond to 20 illumination levels, the bottom 7 of which are supposedly NV-compatible) which is, of course, a joke. I'm going to play w/ it outside a bit today & see how the reticle fares under sunlight. I'd also forgot to mention in the above post that both ends of the sight are threaded internally, & look to be exactly the same dimensions as the Aimpoint. I also closely examined the 2 ARMS mounts & found the 22M68 is a little shorter in height than the one for the TriPower. This is due to the TiPower's forward end "bell" being a little fatter than the Aimpoint's, & it is also alot closer to the mount itself. So the mounts ARE different for clearance, Clarence. (Roger - what?) Of course, the mount that comes w/ it would work like a charm, but it/s not QD. After reading the manual last night I found an exploded diagram showing what looks to be a formed tether for the caps, but it has no # assigned to it. Again, I'm sure this will be available later (shame not NOW, though.)
Top Top