View Full Version : Trijicon TR24 mount questions
I haven't been able to check one of these out in person yet, but am very interested in purchasing one. Do people find that with the eye relief of the TR24 (3.2 inches, according to Trijicon's website), one needs a mount that has a forward throw on it, to move the scope further forward?
Also, I am pretty short, 5'4, with short arms, and use an ACE skeleton stock with a stock length of around 7.75 inches. My nose is pretty close to the charging handle. I also prefer a higher, lower third cowitness height for my optic. I was looking at the ADM high mounts, but at nearly two inches high, they seem way too tall. I'm looking for a mount that is close to the Larue LT150 height (1.7 inches). Any recommendations?
Trijicons QD mount is a Bobro standard mount. Mounted all the way to the front of the receiver only gets the scope about 3/4" in front of the charging handle. Works fine for me, but not if you put your nose on the charging handle.
Also, cowitness is not usable with this scope. You have to use a folding rear sight and the front sight is actually magnified a bit. You have to remove the scope to go to backup irons.
I haven't been able to check one of these out in person yet, but am very interested in purchasing one. Do people find that with the eye relief of the TR24 (3.2 inches, according to Trijicon's website), one needs a mount that has a forward throw on it, to move the scope further forward?
Also, I am pretty short, 5'4, with short arms, and use an ACE skeleton stock with a stock length of around 7.75 inches. My nose is pretty close to the charging handle. I also prefer a higher, lower third cowitness height for my optic. I was looking at the ADM high mounts, but at nearly two inches high, they seem way too tall. I'm looking for a mount that is close to the Larue LT150 height (1.7 inches). Any recommendations?
The standard Larue SPR scope mount is 1.5" over the rail. The taller scope mounts are really meant for getting over a laser, and place your cheek pretty high above the stock which is less than ideal for magnified optics.
FWIW, I have my TR24G mounted in a US Optics single-ring mount on a KAC SR15. Sights are out of the way and the single ring allows alot more fore-aft location without getting off the receiver. I wish they made a QD because you will need a wrench to remove it in case of a failure. Otherwise, it is a nice solution.
BrigandTwoFour
11-03-12, 17:56
I have my 24G in an ADM Recon-H, as everyone told me that it is great for a more "heads up" deal. If your intent is to run-and-gun and such, I think the H height (same as the tall Larue) is pretty good.
As I've gotten more into target shooting at range (200-500 yards), I have found the tall height to be uncomfortable on my neck when laying prone. I am about to replace the Recon-H with a regular ADM Scout.
As far as eye relief, don't get the extended version. Those were pretty much meant for the predecessor to the 24, which needed much longer eye relief. If you're talking about one of the slight forward cants compared to straight up rings, then I can't really compare. IMO, the best route is the Larue, ADM, or Bobro options with the slight forward cant.
SeriousStudent
11-03-12, 20:54
I have a TRG-24G mounted in an LT-139 on a Colt 6920.
I actually do like the height, it makes it faster for me to pick up the triangle. The eye relief is not an enourmous issue for me, since I tend to shoot more squared up and my ACS stock collapsed almost all the way down.
I honestly do wish I could have bought a Bobro mount for it instead of the Larue. But I'd have had a better chance of tracking down a unicorn than one of those mounts when I bought the scope.
I am pretty much convinced on selling it, and just going back to the Aimpoint H-1 and a Aimpoint 3x magnifier in a Larue flip mount. I do think it would fit my particular needs better. OP - your needs are likely different.
I ran mine in the standard LT-104 for the longest time, but had a chance to swap mounts for the SPR 1.93 (Tall) mount, and I'm really glad I did. It's a really exceptionally fast optic at low magnification, and if you're able to get a stable position (eye relief and shadow) at higher magnification it's worth choosing. For me at least (I'm one of the oddballs who can shoot really fast and well with the fixed mag ACOGs up close) the taller mount really makes the TR24T model shine, but if you're unsure, it's still worth evaluating whether or not an H-1 on LT660/ADM Socom/DD Fixed mount would work better.
I would recommend trying out both a standard height (1.5") and raised height (~1.9") mounts to see what works for you.
Mine is mounted on an ADM Recon X. Perfect for shooting NTCH, and give more latitude for mounting options. However mount is fairly low (at least for someone like me who is 6'3"+ with a giraffe neck). It does force a good cheek weld @ 4x. I kind of wish that I had gotten the chance to try the Recon H before making up my mind though, I can see how the higher mount would be a little easier for shooting on the move.
YMMV.
Mysteryman
11-13-12, 13:32
I'm running the ADM Recon mount. I had a Larue Lt139(I believe) it worked well but I prefer the no tools adjustability of the ADM.
MM
LaRue LT-139
I have been running mine in the LT-139 for 3 years now. The taller mount was a little too tall for me. The LT-139 SPR-E is perfect for me in-terms of height and eye relief.
I think you will be very satisfied with the TR24. I am selling mine only because I am moving up to a 1-6x for a more precision/DMR type role.
I've got one set up in the Larue 1.93 tall mount.
I use mine on duty/SWAT the taller version is great for a more heads up moving type of shooting.
If your more a bench shooter I would go for the standard height either the Bobro, Larue, or ADM.
Ready.Fire.Aim
11-13-12, 16:37
I have two TR24 in standard LaRue mounts, I forget the model number. It doesn't have extra eye relief.
I don't need any additional eye relief probably because I don't hold nose to charging handle.
I move one with the German style cross hairs to a deer rifle (with classic ring mounts) in the fall. The other is green triangle on post, a very fast handling optic for shooting pigs.
TR24 is good glass for the price and the green dot or triangle makes it easy on my older eyesight.
RFA
polymorpheous
11-17-12, 13:31
How far forward are these optics running on an ADM Recon X mount?
BrigandTwoFour
11-17-12, 19:13
Pretty far forward from what I've seen, but workable. I mean, you can scoot the scope back a bit, but the regular recon mount provides the right amount of eye relief off the bat.
At 1X, the TR24 is very forgiving about eye relief and the eye box. At 4X though, it's a bit pickier and I would think the Recon-X mount is too far forward.
polymorpheous
11-17-12, 19:17
I would imagine that moving the mount back on the receiver would not leave enough room for a BUIS.
A Matech folding sight will just fit under a TR-24 in a Bobro mount with the scope even with the end of the charging handle. It's a tight fit, though.
Mysteryman
11-17-12, 22:14
I would imagine that moving the mount back on the receiver would not leave enough room for a BUIS.
My optic sits as far foward in the mount as possible and I have the mount sitting flush with the front of the receiver. I shoot NTCH(give or take) and there's plenty of room for my Troy folding rear sight.
MM
polymorpheous
11-18-12, 06:00
That seems to be the way it has to be.
Is anyone running into issues with the mount's height?
Redbeardsong
11-18-12, 08:26
I just mounted a TR24 on a customer's 6920 today in an ADM Recon-H.
I tried the Recon-20moa mount but at 1x power the front sight base took up too much field of view in the optic (even at 1x the FSB is magnified, unlike when seen through true red dot optic.).
With the Recon-H, you see just a little bit of the front sight at 1x, but it disappears at about 1.5x and up. The Recon-H gives more of a heads-up (or chin weld vs. cheek weld) positioning.
polymorpheous
11-18-12, 09:07
Co-witnessing is possible when in the 1X magnification?
I run a lower 1/3 with my Aimpoints.
The FSB doesn't bother me.
Besides, I will be mounting this optic on a RECCE upper.
Redbeardsong
11-18-12, 09:18
Co-witnessing is possible when in the 1X magnification?
I run a lower 1/3 with my Aimpoints.
The FSB doesn't bother me.
Besides, I will be mounting this optic on a RECCE upper.
NO, I don't believe co-witnessing is practically usable (if even possible) because the front sight is magnified through the optic. It's not like looking through an aimpoint.
If this is on a RECCE, I would use a lower mount and offset 45deg BUIS.
polymorpheous
11-18-12, 10:04
Yeah.
I didn't think so.
The magnification is closer to 1.25X
The 45* BUIS's are not going to be used on this upper. (I don't 3-gun or anything.)
As long as the ADM 30mm Recon can clear a Troy, I should be OK.
BrigandTwoFour
11-18-12, 13:20
Depending on your BUIS, I don't think you'd have a problem with the Recon mount. You couldn't deploy the sight, but it would still be there for when you take the optic off. The only BUIS that I've seen not work with the standard height recon is the first generation MBUS. The Troys, KACs, Gen 2 MBUS, and the other common folding ones I've seen around here will all fit right under the optic.
The Recon-H does make you have more of a chin weld. It's great for 3 gun running around and being quick, as it feels like a lower 1/3 cowitness. But if you plan on getting proper cheek welds and shooting prone, the H model is too high IMO.
If you were planning on using offset BUIS, then I would skip past the TR24 and go with something other than a 1-4x. The offsets seem more at home on rifles with 3x-9x, 2.5-10x, or fixed mag scopes. Otherwise you are adding complexity for no real gain. The TR24 is very fast on 1x, just as good as most any other RDS I've used as long as it's from conventional shooting positions.
The TR24 1x is actually 1X, not 1.25. But its 1X from the objective end of the scope, which is almost a foot closer than your eye. That's why it doesn't cowitness with irons very well. From a practical standpoint, its more like 1.1X. If you look at things further away than a few yards, then it becomes nearly true 1X
polymorpheous
11-18-12, 13:23
Sounds like the ADM Recon is the mount for me then.
Thanks guys!
I actually like the concept of having the off-set iron sights as a back-up to the variable 1-?x scope on a patrol rifle or fighting carbine and plan to go to that set-up once a set of off-set irons come to market that don't cost outrageous $$$. Having to dismount the scope, regardless if which QD mount I am running, and flip up a set of back-up iron sights is not something I want to have to worry about in a fight.
I actually have experience with a TR-24 failure and mine is at Triji getting fixed right now. I had one of the internal lenses come loose and through the scope off by 9" at 100 yards when using 4x. This happened in the first hour of a two day class and was discovered during the zeroing phase of the class. The good news is that when using 1X it held zero for the rest of the class. We had a T-1 (or H-1) that failed to hold zero and it wasn't usable at all. Other than taking a bullet right to the scope, it would be tough to render a TR-24 useless at close range.
polymorpheous
11-18-12, 14:04
I actually like the concept of having the off-set iron sights as a back-up to the variable 1-?x scope on a patrol rifle or fighting carbine and plan to go to that set-up once a set of off-set irons come to market that don't cost outrageous $$$. Having to dismount the scope, regardless if which QD mount I am running, and flip up a set of back-up iron sights is not something I want to have to worry about in a fight.
Understood completely.
In my case, the upper I'm putting together is just a range toy.
We go out to 600+ at my range.
I want to get in on that action
BrigandTwoFour
11-18-12, 14:37
I actually like the concept of having the off-set iron sights as a back-up to the variable 1-?x scope on a patrol rifle or fighting carbine and plan to go to that set-up once a set of off-set irons come to market that don't cost outrageous $$$. Having to dismount the scope, regardless if which QD mount I am running, and flip up a set of back-up iron sights is not something I want to have to worry about in a fight.
I suppose in that context it makes sense. But I have a RDS equipped AR for those purposes. My TR24 equipped rifle is not for self defense/duty use. It tends to get used more for local competition and steel silhouette.
If needs dictate the offset irons, then have at it. I plan on going that route for my new project.
BrigandTwoFour
11-18-12, 14:40
Understood completely.
In my case, the upper I'm putting together is just a range toy.
We go out to 600+ at my range.
I want to get in on that action
Having attempted to use my TR24G out to 500, I will say that you may better better off with a different scope for shooting at that range. The triangle on a post reticle works fine for me out to about 250 or so. Beyond that, there is no effective way to determine holdover. The turrets, for me, are not confidence inspiring for dialing either. If you plan on regularly shooting out to longer ranges, I would suggest checking out the SWFA offerings, which are in the same price class and offer a FFP mil dot system and exposed turrets.
polymorpheous
11-18-12, 14:53
It would not be a regular thing.
Likely out to 300 on steel would be.
Mysteryman
11-18-12, 15:10
Yeah.
I didn't think so.
The magnification is closer to 1.25X
The 45* BUIS's are not going to be used on this upper. (I don't 3-gun or anything.)
As long as the ADM 30mm Recon can clear a Troy, I should be OK.
The Tr24 is a true 1x on the bottom end. That being said, you still can't reliably co-witness through glass. Its "doable" for short range and immediate threats/shots but I would be dumping the glass ASAP.
I actually like the concept of having the off-set iron sights as a back-up to the variable 1-?x scope on a patrol rifle or fighting carbine and plan to go to that set-up once a set of off-set irons come to market that don't cost outrageous $$$. Having to dismount the scope, regardless if which QD mount I am running, and flip up a set of back-up iron sights is not something I want to have to worry about in a fight.
Offset irons are fast, but I find that having to roll the rifle is something new to learn and it doesn't work in an ambidextrous capacity. If your offsets sit on the right side its difficult to impossible to lay on your right side and shoot under cover/concealment. Its infinitely difficult to shoot from your right side from your left shoulder with offset sights.
Optical failure is a very low probability, and removing an optic can be done very quickly, especially with some mounts like a BOBRO or the Scout series from ADM with a single lever.
MM
I actually like the concept of having the off-set iron sights as a back-up to the variable 1-?x scope on a patrol rifle or fighting carbine and plan to go to that set-up once a set of off-set irons come to market that don't cost outrageous $$$. Having to dismount the scope, regardless if which QD mount I am running, and flip up a set of back-up iron sights is not something I want to have to worry about in a fight.
That's been my plan for a considerable amount of time. I'm still trying to work out optimal weaponlight placement so that it's still really usable with the rifle canted if a need arises for that, but yeah, that works.
I'm willing to give up some ambi flexibility in the case of an optical failure and needing to go to BUIS - I'm already functioning with compromised capability, if I'm reduced to point shooting off the support side it's not the end of the world there, I like having persistent iron sights available in a hurry, especially if I happen to have the scope cranked to max zoom and need a quick up close sighting solution without removing my support hand to crank away at an optic.
CavReconScout
11-19-12, 12:53
I have had several occasions where I have been setup outside in the cold for an extended period of time, and then entered a warm structure. The optic lenses fog, and twice were covered in ice. I like the Dueck sights, because I can just roll the rifle, and drive on. Oh, and I run my TR-24 in a Larue LT139.
Wish Dueck or someone else would come out with a set of off-set sights without the rear elevation knob which I feel is useless for the application. It wouldalsobring the price down a bit.
The flip-out off-set sights from DiamiondHead look pretty slick, but think I would rather have a set of fixed off-sets. Would think Troy or DD would have brought something to market by now???
Agree 100% on the optic fogging. Cant tell you how many times I have stepped to the line for a drill when it was chilly out and just as "Stand-by" is called on the line, I let out a deep breath with my AR in the low-ready only to bring my TR24G up to my line of sight to shoot the drill and it is completely fogged from my breath:o
Wish Dueck or someone else would come out with a set of off-set sights without the rear elevation knob which I feel is useless for the application. It wouldalsobring the price down a bit.
A fixed sight should be set it and forget it if they aren't built for precision use - i agree.
Has anyone tried the xs big dot offset sight?
http://www.xssights.com/index.php?nID=specialty&cID=Specialty%20Products&pID=specialty
LaRue LT-139
I have been running mine in the LT-139 for 3 years now. The taller mount was a little too tall for me. The LT-139 SPR-E is perfect for me in-terms of height and eye relief.
I think you will be very satisfied with the TR24. I am selling mine only because I am moving up to a 1-6x for a more precision/DMR type role.
Question for anybody
Do you run a backup rear site? Which backup rear sites clear?
I had a Magpul MBUS BUIS previously that I think would work. I have a Troy folding rear battlesight that does NOT fit. While it clears in terms of height when folded, it is too long to fit on the rail. The magpul fit because the site folded down to the rear (towards the charging handle) while the troy folds forward (into the scope mount's base)
What is the best backup rear site that will clear the TR24 under an LT139 SPR-E? I'd really like one with two aperture sizes, like my stock carry handle site or like the Troy that doesn't fit.
(I just installed mine today)
http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g105/austin3161324/Firearms/20121130_154156_zps6e4d49e5.jpg
Troy fits all day long. Sounds like you installed your Troy rear sight sight backwards if im understanding you correctly. It should fold to the rear just like the MBUS.
ETA (Pic):
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/3844/nsr135.jpg
SeriousStudent
11-30-12, 21:46
I have one of the original Magpul MBUS sights mounted under my Larue LT-139 with a TR-24G. It's riding on a 6920 with a DD RIS II rail.
The Magpul sight does not deploy with the scope mounted. I don't know one that does. I have to dismount the scope, in order to deploy the BUIS. Not the best solution in the world, I know.
Having said that, the TR24 does not have batteries, and seems to be robust. I also kept the fixed FSB on the carbine as you did, and can make reasonably accurate hits to 50 meters just using the scope as a giant ghost ring.
Someday, I'll swap the Larue for a Bobro, which I could dismount much quicker. The Larue needs two mules and an ape to get on and off the rail. I'm honestly not worried about it, that carbine is third in line for defensive carbine duties.
I have seen guys run their MBUS backwards, just for the reason you describe. All my other carbines have a fixed front and rear BUIS, with an Aimpoint H-1 mounted between them.
Troy fits all day long. Sounds like you installed your Troy rear sight sight backwards if im understanding you correctly. It should fold to the rear just like the MBUS.
Never forget to check the operator's headspace. lol
I have a TR24 in a Bobro QD mount on my rifle. My particular mount is the extended eye relief model which I like a lot because I've taken to shooting NTCH. BUS are Magpul Gen 2 front and rear. The rear BUS will deploy with the optic mounted but co-witness is most definitely out of the question. Due to the optic's magnification you cannot get a clear sight picture through the BUS. The front sight is blurry and it's difficult to distinguish the sight post. Overall I'm happy with the setup though.
http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo98/fireman325/DSC03878-1.jpg
Troy fits all day long. Sounds like you installed your Troy rear sight sight backwards if im understanding you correctly. It should fold to the rear just like the MBUS.
As long as you use the extended mount you are good to go. If you are like me and didn't order one, then the BUIS isn't going to flip up. Nick, can you actually use the BUIS through the scope anyway?
I wish I had the mount above, but I'm not a NTCH kind of shooter, so the one I have works well. Just can't flip up the BUIS, I just remove the scope (one lever Bobro) and move on.
As long as you use the extended mount you are good to go. If you are like me and didn't order one, then the BUIS isn't going to flip up. Nick, can you actually use the BUIS through the scope anyway?
I wish I had the mount above, but I'm not a NTCH kind of shooter, so the one I have works well. Just can't flip up the BUIS, I just remove the scope (one lever Bobro) and move on.
After reading your post I got out my rifle and double checked whether I could deploy the BUS or not with the optic in place. It turns out you can. I revised my previous post with the pertinent information.
While you can somewhat see the irons while looking thru the scope it us not a useable sight picture as the front sight is magnified just enough to make it unuseable. Same with every 1-?x variable on the market.
That's what I figured Nick. That's been the reason I haven't been too concerned with my BUIS being able to deploy with the scope in place.
Sent from my iPhone on tapatalk
Yup, same reason I'm moving my flips to a new upper I'm building with a red dot and getting some fixed off-set sights for the one pictured above with the TR24G.
Slight derail but can someone tell me if a TR22-2 56mm will fit on a flat top ar with the LT 139 or do I need the taller LT 135?
CavReconScout
12-02-12, 21:26
Slight derail but can someone tell me if a TR22-2 56mm will fit on a flat top ar with the LT 139 or do I need the taller LT 135?
Larue sells it with the LT104, so the LT139 should also be the correct height.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.