Which Trijicon should I get?

[lumwilliam]

I've owned an Daniel Defense XV AR-15 for the past few years and have been using its iron sights to shoot out to 100 yards with groups of about 5" with gunshow reload ammo. I would really like make a significant ($1,000+) investment only once and buy optics I'll always be happy with. I'm looking at Trijicon as the "best" but am frankly overwhelmed by the number of choices just in the ACOG family alone, and given the large price tag, I don't want to buy something and then regret it.

I'll never use this AR for hunting. My home range (Escondido Fish/Game) goes out to 150 yards, which will be my primary practice (about 1x per month). I hear South Bay Rod & Gun has a range out to 300 yards which I would like to start doing once or twice a year.

I plan to do the Appleseed training when they're down here in San Diego (been putting it off waiting for ammo prices to come down), and would like to take at least one Front Sight class, but that will be in a future year as I will take the pistol first when time and budget allow.

My AR-15 is in the safe and I consider it a backup home defense weapon to my Springfield XD-40. I'd like the scope/red dot to be at least usable for that (HD) purpose, and the even highly unlikely civil unrest situations (riots, earthquakes, zombie invasions) that will hopefully never happen. Finally, I know nothing about competitive shooting sports, but a bonus would be having a scope that I could use to try these out if the opportunity ever presented itself.

Sorry to drag on so long. I will take very seriously and appreciate any recommendations you wise people can give me.

[Droppin Deuces]

Try to find a good price on a TA31-CH-G. Nevermind the horseshoe and chevron reticles.

[SuperSet]

If 3-gun is in your future, look closely at the Trijicon TR24 1-4X. That's only if you stay within the Trijicon line as there are other good 1-4x scopes available.

[Press Check]

I've owned the Chevron and Horseshoe models, but switched to the Crosshair reticle (TA31-CH) quite some time ago and never looked back. The only (personal) issue with the Tritium / Fiber Optic version is that the ACOG illuminates the reticle so efficiently that the 100 and 200 stadia lines clustered together, so I eventually switched to the LED (TA02) Crosshair model to control the intensity of the illumination, or simply turn it off and use standard (black) Crosshairs. Fantastic piece of hardware.

The stadia lines take the guesswork from the 200 holdover points located within the Chevron and Horseshoe reticles, in addition to the 300 holdover points located at the base of both those reticles.

I've participated in Carbine Courses and Defensive Classes with all reticles, and still prefer the Crosshair, so for anyone that questions the merit of a Crosshair for social work, target and reticle acquisition is just as fast as a Chevron and a Horseshoe. In the case of the LED version, at the highest illumination setting, the stadia lines completely cluster together, so you essentially have the equivalent of a 12moa red dot (LOL).

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

[ocabj]

I've owned an Daniel Defense XV AR-15 for the past few years and have been using its iron sights to shoot out to 100 yards with groups of about 5" with gunshow reload ammo. I would really like make a significant ($1,000+) investment only once and buy optics I'll always be happy with. I'm looking at Trijicon as the "best" but am frankly overwhelmed by the number of choices just in the ACOG family alone, and given the large price tag, I don't want to buy something and then regret it.

...

Sorry to drag on so long. I will take very seriously and appreciate any recommendations you wise people can give me.

I ended up getting the TA31RCO-M150CP (red chevron) for a new build I threw together just the other night: http://instagram.com/p/kSrXMeqVWj/

It's actually my first ACOG and I 'settled' on it because I had no idea what optic I wanted to go with on an 18" upper to be used on an A2 stock'ed lower in an emergency (since my 'active' rifles are configured for Service Rifle competitions).

I'm not sure how close you are to Camp Pendleton, but I plan on being at the 300/500/600 match this Sunday (Feb 16) to use the course of fire to test the BAC on the ACOG. If you want to go there during the match, I'd be more than willing to let you check out the ACOG. There *might* be Marines at the match zero'ing in their rifles for the Western Division Matches at the end of the month, too, but their ACOG is basically the same as mine with regard to reticle and magnification.

Some pics from the SMGC clinic last month. My friend Jim was there coaching and helping some guys in his unit zero rifles.

[A1sauce]

I've owned the Chevron and Horseshoe models, but switched to the Crosshair reticle (TA31-CH) quite some time ago and never looked back. The only (personal) issue with the Tritium / Fiber Optic version is that the ACOG illuminates the reticle so efficiently that the 100 and 200 stadia lines clustered together, so I eventually switched to the LED (TA02) Crosshair model to control the intensity of the illumination, or simply turn it off and use standard (black) Crosshairs. Fantastic piece of hardware.

The stadia lines take the guesswork from the 200 holdover points located within the Chevron and Horseshoe reticles, in addition to the 300 holdover points located at the base of both those reticles.

I've participated in Carbine Courses and Defensive Classes with all reticles, and still prefer the Crosshair, so for anyone that questions the merit of a Crosshair for social work, target and reticle acquisition is just as fast as a Chevron and a Horseshoe. In the case of the LED version, at the highest illumination setting, the stadia lines completely cluster together, so you essentially have the equivalent of a 12moa red dot (LOL).

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

^ Agreed crosshair is the way to go for any sort of precision vs just straight up quick target acquisition. Also check out the 4x fixed elcan which would be my choice at that price point. GL

[crazyalskn]

Have you thought about spending less and buying ammo with the difference? I am also in the market for optics but I'm staying under $500. Right now, I'm deciding between the Primary Arms 2.5x cqb, the 1-6x acss, or possibly a Leupold 1.5-4x AR mod. All 3 have awsome glass/reticles. Biggest gripe I have heard about acogs was the short eye relief...good shooting

https://www.primaryarms.com/Rifle-Scopes-s/911.htm

[ocabj]

My AR-15 is in the safe and I consider it a backup home defense weapon to my Springfield XD-40. I'd like the scope/red dot to be at least usable for that (HD) purpose, and the even highly unlikely civil unrest situations (riots, earthquakes, zombie invasions) that will hopefully never happen. Finally, I know nothing about competitive shooting sports, but a bonus would be having a scope that I could use to try these out if the opportunity ever presented itself.

Re-reading this portion of your original post, I'd recommend you forgo the ACOG or a scope and go with an Aimpoint Micro T1 with a Larue mount (buy the combo direct from Larue). This will work fine for CQB to 200 yards, and be perfect for HD and competitive shooting with a carbine (e.g. action carbine, 3-gun, dynamic/adaptive carbine class, etc). As long as you're not trying to shoot benchrest-style groups, then this is the way to go. I think the T1+Larue combos is under $700, and if you decide you want to add some magnification, you can spend later for a 3x magnifier on a flip mount.

[pterrell]

I'm a big fan of the TA31RCOs. The M4 version is calibrated for a 14.5 in barrel and will very closely match up with a 16 in barrel. The A4 version is calibrated to a 20" barrel. I can't speak for the Army's M150, as I haven't used it, but the two that we've used on our M4's and A4's are outstanding when taken care of. I have one on my AR.

As far as the "super illumination" or bloom as I call it, I take a piece of electrical or duck tape and cover a section of the fiber optic. This effectively controls the brightness of the chevron.

For those of you hating on the chevron, you should really look at this...


Basically, each point is about as wide as a person's chest at it's respective range at 300m and beyond. The aiming point for 200m is actually, although poorly illustrated, the tip of the non-red triangle or the inside angle of the chevron. It's very light, but if you look at the 500m and 600m marks, you can see a silhouette target (B-Mod). The BDC is meant to be used, unlike many other magnified optics, where you adjust the elevation.

Having talked with many people who swear by crosshair ACOGs, many are swayed to try a chevron again once they learn how it actually is meant to be used. I hope I've helped!

[Echidin]

Tried the chevron, crosshair and horseshoe reticle before coming to a decision. I found the chevron to be the best fit for me with the CH coming in a not too distant second. Find a shop near you that carries them and examine them for yourself or if you have a friend or two that happens to own one, even better.

[Droppin Deuces]

I'm a big fan of the TA31RCOs. The M4 version is calibrated for a 14.5 in barrel and will very closely match up with a 16 in barrel. The A4 version is calibrated to a 20" barrel. I can't speak for the Army's M150, as I haven't used it, but the two that we've used on our M4's and A4's are outstanding when taken care of. I have one on my AR.

As far as the "super illumination" or bloom as I call it, I take a piece of electrical or duck tape and cover a section of the fiber optic. This effectively controls the brightness of the chevron.

For those of you hating on the chevron, you should really look at this...


Basically, each point is about as wide as a person's chest at it's respective range at 300m and beyond. The aiming point for 200m is actually, although poorly illustrated, the tip of the non-red triangle or the inside angle of the chevron. It's very light, but if you look at the 500m and 600m marks, you can see a silhouette target (B-Mod). The BDC is meant to be used, unlike many other magnified optics, where you adjust the elevation.

Having talked with many people who swear by crosshair ACOGs, many are swayed to try a chevron again once they learn how it actually is meant to be used. I hope I've helped!

The crosshair works the same way. It's simply more well defined. I had an RCOM4 and ended up with an ECOS-G. I wanted to love the RCO, but couldn't stand having to use the inside of the chevron for 200 yard shots. It covers too much of the target.

[ExtremeX]

Have you thought about spending less and buying ammo with the difference? I am also in the market for optics but I'm staying under $500. Right now, I'm deciding between the Primary Arms 2.5x cqb, the 1-6x acss, or possibly a Leupold 1.5-4x AR mod. All 3 have awsome glass/reticles. Biggest gripe I have heard about acogs was the short eye relief...good shooting

https://www.primaryarms.com/Rifle-Scopes-s/911.htm

Many of the benefits far outweigh the short eye reflect of the TA31 series... look though one and the glass is beautiful along with a wide FOV. Plus, if you want the eye relief, there are other models that bring that to the table so it’s really a non-issue. I have met many shooters who prefer the 3.5x model which delivers on eye relief.

Optics… if you think the glass in what you have listed is awesome, shoot with an ACOG and you might not want to go back. Optical performance and durability alone is one of the main reasons I picked one up myself.

Saving money is great, but I won’t let if influence my optics selections because I believe buying the best you can afford will really pay off in the long haul, especially when it comes to optics.

Regardless of what the OP buys, I think he has the right mindset, looking at optics purchase as an investment IMO is the right way to go about it.

[crazyalskn]

will really pay off in the long haul, especially when it comes to optics.

Regardless of what the OP buys, I think he has the right mindset, looking at optics purchase as an investment IMO is the right way to go about it.

There lies my problem...lol but I totally agree and would love to use an acog, don't get me wrong..

[lumwilliam]

Have you thought about spending less and buying ammo with the difference? I am also in the market for optics but I'm staying under $500. Right now, I'm deciding between the Primary Arms 2.5x cqb, the 1-6x acss, or possibly a Leupold 1.5-4x AR mod. All 3 have awsome glass/reticles. Biggest gripe I have heard about acogs was the short eye relief...good shooting

https://www.primaryarms.com/Rifle-Scopes-s/911.htm

This seems to be the standard argument between ACOGs and the 'lesser' optics. Many others are still 'great' and at a much lower price tag.

I bought my AR when Obama was first elected and I was worried I might not be able to for much longer. Crazyalskn, of course I've thought about spending less! I've thought about it every time I went shooting with my iron sights for the past 5 years, slowly squirreling money into my gun budget for optics.

I've heard too many people tell me ACOGs are superior to ignore it. I hope to be staring down these optics once a month for the next 20 years. Now if I were hearing "at your level, you'll never notice the difference", then I would seriously consider something else. $500 is a lot of money to save and I don't want to buy "the best of the best" for its own sake, but it seems like there are tangible benefits to shelling out for Trijicon, and the price difference spread over satisfied decades should wash out.

[lumwilliam]

Tried the chevron, crosshair and horseshoe reticle before coming to a decision. I found the chevron to be the best fit for me with the CH coming in a not too distant second. Find a shop near you that carries them and examine them for yourself or if you have a friend or two that happens to own one, even better.

^ Agreed crosshair is the way to go for any sort of precision vs just straight up quick target acquisition. Also check out the 4x fixed elcan which would be my choice at that price point. GL

The crosshair works the same way. It's simply more well defined. I had an RCOM4 and ended up with an ECOS-G. I wanted to love the RCO, but couldn't stand having to use the inside of the chevron for 200 yard shots. It covers too much of the target.

Is that the biggest complaint about the chevron? I always thought it was the standard for 'tactical' shooting over using the crosshairs.

I live under 200 yards, and don't look forward to always looking through the illumination. I would imagine there must be tactical advantages to this tho? Echidin, would you mind expanding on your preference?