Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 9/9/2010 4:42:50 AM EDT
I have narrowed it down between the Trijicon Accupoint 5-20X with green mil-dot and Swarovski AV 6-18 with ballistic reticle on sale at Midway now. Any personal experience or recommendations please. Big purchase, want to get it right. No one around me has either to check them out.
Link Posted: 9/9/2010 5:38:51 AM EDT
I own neither, but those are two very different scopes. With the Trijicon you're paying for illumination, not glass. The glass in an Accupoint is typically compared to $400 Leups & Nikons, not $1000 Swaros. If you want or need illumination, you won't find too many bad reviews on the Accupoint. If the glass quality is your main concern, get the AV.
Link Posted: 9/9/2010 5:43:01 AM EDT
I'd get the Swaro. I haven't owned one, but did look at them when shopping. Very nice. Flats had it right. With the Trijicon, you're paying for the illumination and are only getting decent glass. You can get much better glass for the money.
Link Posted: 9/9/2010 7:07:48 AM EDT
Image clarity will be much better on the Swarovski, without a doubt.
Link Posted: 9/9/2010 7:20:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/9/2010 7:24:43 AM EDT by TNVC]
Link Posted: 9/9/2010 7:24:53 AM EDT
Originally Posted By TNVC:
I'm curious here with the posters thus far. Have you all actually looked through the Accupoint side by side with the Swar? I've looked through both optics in question and the Accupoint has superb glass and is no slouch and is close IMHO. When I first looked through the Accupoint, I was caught completely off guard how clear, bright and crisp the image was.

Vic


Not these two scopes in particular, no. But I've used a Trijicon TR24 and a Swarovski Z6i side by side and it wasn't even close.
Link Posted: 9/9/2010 7:29:51 AM EDT
Haven't looked through either but I can vouch for the Leupold VXIII with Varmint Hunters reticle.

Plenty good clarity and the range lines are pretty much on the money. Probably about a G less too.
Link Posted: 9/9/2010 7:47:37 AM EDT
Originally Posted By TNVC:
I'm curious here with the posters thus far. Have you all actually looked through the Accupoint side by side with the Swar? I've looked seriously through both optics in question and the Accupoint has superb glass and is no slouch and is close IMHO. When I first looked through the Accupoint, I was caught completely off guard how clear, bright and crisp the image was.

Vic


TNVC is correct, you are getting advice from people who are just guessing. I do have an AccuPoint 2.5-10x scope and the glass is superb even at the highes magnification setting. Now, I don't doubt that the Swaro is better - it better be for the price difference, but the difference is probably (I am guessing here since I have not look through a Swaro) slight and so the question you have to ask yourself is it worth the extra signficant cost for the slight difference. My advice is to go to a place that has both and look through them both. I really like the FO lit reticle on the scope and the glass is very clear.
Link Posted: 9/9/2010 8:00:33 AM EDT
Originally Posted By jlow:
Originally Posted By TNVC:
I'm curious here with the posters thus far. Have you all actually looked through the Accupoint side by side with the Swar? I've looked seriously through both optics in question and the Accupoint has superb glass and is no slouch and is close IMHO. When I first looked through the Accupoint, I was caught completely off guard how clear, bright and crisp the image was.

Vic


TNVC is correct, you are getting advice from people who are just guessing. I do have an AccuPoint 2.5-10x scope and the glass is superb even at the highes magnification setting. Now, I don't doubt that the Swaro is better - it better be for the price difference, but the difference is probably (I am guessing here since I have not look through a Swaro) slight and so the question you have to ask yourself is it worth the extra signficant cost for the slight difference. My advice is to go to a place that has both and look through them both. I really like the FO lit reticle on the scope and the glass is very clear.


I will reitterate that I have, in fact, looked through Trijicon and Swarovski glass side by side. The Trijicon glass is good, but the Swarovski glass is definitely better.
Link Posted: 9/9/2010 8:01:59 AM EDT
Originally Posted By jlow:
Originally Posted By TNVC:
I'm curious here with the posters thus far. Have you all actually looked through the Accupoint side by side with the Swar? I've looked seriously through both optics in question and the Accupoint has superb glass and is no slouch and is close IMHO. When I first looked through the Accupoint, I was caught completely off guard how clear, bright and crisp the image was.

Vic


TNVC is correct, you are getting advice from people who are just guessing. I do have an AccuPoint 2.5-10x scope and the glass is superb even at the highes magnification setting. Now, I don't doubt that the Swaro is better - it better be for the price difference, but the difference is probably (I am guessing here since I have not look through a Swaro) slight and so the question you have to ask yourself is it worth the extra signficant cost for the slight difference. My advice is to go to a place that has both and look through them both. I really like the FO lit reticle on the scope and the glass is very clear.


No crap he should go look at both if he can. But if he could do that, he probably wouldn't be asking for advice on an internet forum. Saying that the glass on an Accupoint won't quite measure up to the glass on a $1000 Swarovski isn't an insult to an Accupoint, and it's something a little more than "just guessing". I see you had no problem jumping to the conclusion that "the Swaro is better".

They're two very different scopes, and I was surprised that someone was choosing between the two, and was simply offering information to help him make his choice. Information that you apparently agree with.
Link Posted: 9/9/2010 6:27:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/9/2010 7:21:57 PM EDT by Jetpig]
Hey guys. Thanks for the input. Yes. Two different scopes. I am not going to get to look thru either till I get one in the mail.
For me:
Trijicon: just about bit on a TA01 with crosshair but I feel it will not fit the bill for cridders beyond 250 yards. The highlight for me is that I was looking for a batteryless illuminated reticle for low light. So
In comes the accupoint. Leaning towards the 2.5-10X 56mm over the 5-20X 50mm. Illuminated dot in the reticle with no battery. Reviews are really good on these scopes
In comes the Sworovsky. I like the reticle a lot but no illumination. Reviews are great for the glass. I want the illumination but if the glass is so much better, then illumination may not be nesessary. HELP! I was going to order the Trij then saw the Sworo on sale.
Link Posted: 9/9/2010 9:32:20 PM EDT
I'm not guessing. I compared lots of different scopes when I was shopping and I didn't find the Trijicon to be anything special at all in terms of glass quality. The shop that I went to stocked Swaro, Trijicon, Nightforce, Hendsoldt, blah, blah, blah.
Link Posted: 9/10/2010 2:46:01 AM EDT
I had a TR23 glass quality didn't do anything for me.

Will it get the job done? Sure thing, I just didn't feel it was worth the price.

I exchanged it for a Nightforce along with a couple hundred bucks more. Much better.
Link Posted: 9/10/2010 5:53:56 AM EDT
Just make sure your reticule is not bigger than those Wyoming Prairie Dogs. I've made that mistake on a Varminter.
Link Posted: 9/10/2010 5:57:03 PM EDT
There is basically two ways to look at optics – relative and/or absolute. Relative is how good it is compared to another. This scale is less useful as unless you buy the best and most expensive, it is always not quite as good. Absolute is more useful as it looks as how good it is as a function of what you need it to do.

On the relative scale, the Trijicon Accupoint scopes are definitely not the best or the most expensive – that is a no brainer. On the absolute scale, the Trijicon are not your cheap optic, mine cost over $800 and so it is expected to provide good glass, robust construction, and reliable service – it scores very good on all three parameters. I shoot up to 600 yards high power matches with it and don’t find it deficient and can hit the x-ring with this scope. When I miss, it is mostly a reflection of my skills (or lack of), environmental conditions, and imperfection in the ammunition that I still need to work on. Buying a more expensive scope will help, but only in a very limited sense and in my opinion pretty much a waste of effort with limited returns.
Link Posted: 9/10/2010 8:38:52 PM EDT
over on sniper central mel just done a review on the trijicon 5x20 with a lit mildot .it got pretty good reviews
Link Posted: 9/11/2010 3:02:31 AM EDT
I am headed over there right now to read up. I think I've settled in on one of the two Trijicons. Either the 2.5-10 or the 5-20. Prob get the 2.5-10. Swarovsky has got to be a great scope but I don't think it is what I am after. Again, thanks all.[

quote]Originally Posted By jwb47:
over on sniper central mel just done a review on the trijicon 5x20 with a lit mildot .it got pretty good reviews[/quote]

Top Top