Trijicon TR24 vs Aimpoint M4S Comparison

[Crow Hunter]

Another chapter in my ongoing saga to find the "perfect" optic for my uses. Please bear with me, typing all this in helps me work stuff out in my mind.

My uses defined:

I want an optic that I can put on my "stock" 6920 that can reside under my bed most of it's life but be able to be called upon when there is the proverbial bump in the night. (Which living out in the sticks with 2 rambuncious Labs outside happens more often than you would think)

I would like to find an optic that can be dual purposed for hunting/ranch rifle use so that I will get more familiarity. (Beware the man with one rifle)

It needs to be an optic that will allow me to shoot muskrats/crows/coyotes from 85 yards out to a little over 300 yards.

Lastly, if the SHTF, a New Madrid earthquake in my case, I need it to be capable of being used defensively to defend myself and family. The 2 potential scenarios are sheltering in place or travel roughly eighty miles east to the family retreat by vehicle.

Last night I got in a Aimpoint M4S with a Larue mount and Larue BUIS. I mounted them on a 6920 last night to compare to the Trijicon TR24 w/Green Triangle mounted in a Larue SPR mount that I already had.

Initial impressions:

1. The viewing area within the optic was smaller than I had expected. It is significantly smaller than the TR24. However, it is mounted further forward. The frame of the optic completely ghosts out with both eyes open on both optics. The difference is the feeling of looking through a TV screen (TR24) vs looking through a tube (M4S).

2. The M4S mounted was noticably lighter that the TR24. I was not expecting it to be so much better.

3. The lower 1/3 cowitness is not a problem. The sights aren't even noticeable, especially if you pull up the large aperature on the BUIS, it just ghosts out and if you don't get a good cheek weld you can look right through them or focus on the front sight, your choice.

4. No problem at all with washout with the red dot. But you do have to constantly fiddle with the brightness controls if you go from a dark area to light area. If you don't want to have a flaring dot. If you have it set for a not flaring condition in a dark area and move into a light area, it almost disappears. It is easily usable but it wasn't what I was expecting. I was hoping for a set it for my eyes and forget it. I noticed a big difference when I got up this morning versus when I went to bed last night. The setting that I had it on last night was almost invisible this morning. Towards that point, I think the M4 might have a better battery/switch position that could be more easily adjusted without having to block my LOS with my left hand. The TR 24, there really isn't anything to fiddle with for me, only in the brightest sunlight was the triangle too bright and that was really because I was trying to sight it in, it has an advantage going from bright sunlight to shade because the reticle adjusts to the abient light automatically.

Right now I am actually leaning towards the TR24 as being better for my needs.

Hopefully, I will get the opportunity to sight the M4S in this weekend and do a shooting comparison between the 2.

[fnslpmark112]

Thanks for the review. I have the M4, M3, and TA11F with a T1 on the Larue offset mount. I have been pondering the TR24 for a gun that has no optic. You reviews have been helpful to me. Here are a couple comments:

1. The M4 is meant to be used with both eyes open. So, the looking through the tube thing will not be an issue.

2. For a self defense situation, set the dot to allow you to see it in the worst case environment and leave it alone. It is no big deal if it blooms a bit. Self defense usually means reacting to bad guys at close distance. They will be close enough that blooming does not matter. If they are far away, you have time to turn down the dot if you wish.

[Crow Hunter]

Even using the M4 with both eyes open there is still a sensation of looking through a tube. What I see is a ghosted out tube with a red dot floating, you can still see the inside of the optic.

The TR24, being alot closer to my eye and being larger diameter magnified optic, is literally like looking at a round TV screen right in front of my eyes. You don't see the inside of the optic, just the image and a very faint ghosted out ring of the housing.

I am much more used to "standard" scopes so the Aimpoint sight picture looks strange to me. Not bad, just different.

I have been playing with the Aimpoint settings. I still haven't found one yet that is "good" for me both in the house/outside. Anything that I have for outside the house, when I go back into the house and into a dark room, I get a huge dot and a bright red ring around the inside of the optic. In all honesty, if I were actually going from outside to inside looking for someone, I would be using a light, which would probably reduce the flare. But I won't be using mine this way. The only transitional use it would get would be the difference between going outside at O'Dark Thirty to find out what the dogs are having a fit about versus using the same gun setup to take shots at those damn muskrats in the lake behind the house. Neither of which would require instant changes. It was just something I noticed and something I will need to be cognizant of if I decide on the M4S for this role.

I am glad that you found my little review helpful.

Thanks for your comments.

[fnslpmark112]

Changing the dot intensity gets to be second nature. When I hunt with my Aimpoints, I start before sun rise. It has become automatic to start increasing the dot intensity as the sun comes up. I don't even think about it anymore.

What exactly was it about the TR24 that you didn't like?

[Rated21R]

If I could find a TR24 with the green triangle I would jump all over it like a hobo on a ham sandwich but for now I am happy with my Aimpoint C3 or H-1.

[Crow Hunter]

What exactly was it about the TR24 that you didn't like?

I don't know that there is anything about it that I don't like.

Right now I am actually leaning towards selling the M4S and getting another TR24 to put on my backup rifle but I want to get some actual trigger time behind both together before I make that decision. Right now, I only have dancing in the dark comparisons.:dance3:

The things that I like more about the M4S
1. Noticably less weight that the TR24
2. Reticle is more visible behind a flashlight.
3. Easy transition to BUIS
4. Perceived increased durability. FJB throws his M4S all over the place. I wouldn't want to do that with the TR24.
5. This is going to sound really stupid but, I play Battlefield and COD online with friends and I use a red dot all the time. The first time I put the M4S on my Colt and pulled it up, it felt "familiar".:sarcastic: (I told you it was stupid)

Things I like more about the TR24
1. Magnification
2. More "open" sight picture.
3. I am used to magnified scopes with a zoom feature. When looking out across the lake while playing with the M4S this morning, I kept starting to take the rifle off my shoulder to push up the zoom to see what that great blue heron was doing 200 yards away.
4. I actually like the triangle on the post, it is alot like a big front sight post.

I don't think that you would dislike a TR24. I can just about guarantee you could sell it if you didn't like it.

Last time I checked both SWFA and Cabela's still had some in stock. From talking to Larue, Trijicon had a huge military order and they haven't been making anything for civilians for a while but should be getting back to civilian production soon.

[caporider]

Try shooting the TR24 from a well-shaded position into a brightly lit area to see if the reticle works for you.

Losing the TR24 reticle when you activate your white light in a darkened area is also an issue.

And since your TR24 has a defined eye box, you will be less than pleased trying to shoot your rifle in less than ideal positions like SBU prone.

Decide what your 70% activity is. If it's hunting and plinking, the TR24 is GTG. If it's home defense and fighting your carbine, the M4s gets my vote. And if you want to add a bit of magnification to the M4s, get a 3x magnifier.

[Steve]

Funny i have zero issue running my tr24 in Sbu or rollover or supine

I have had zero wash out issues with it either in shoot house runs and indoor/outdoor transition

and i also have them on slug guns as well

[caporider]

Funny i have zero issue running my tr24 in Sbu or rollover or supine

I have had zero wash out issues with it either in shoot house runs and indoor/outdoor transition

and i also have them on slug guns as well

So you're saying that the TR24 is usable even without a good cheekweld? That hasn't been my experience with ANY variable optic.

Can you be more specific about the shoot house lighting conditions and which TR24 reticle you're using? Thanks.

[bp7178]

From a dim room to outside on a bright sunny day the reticle will not appear bright green as if you were standing outdoor.

The reticle will look like an all black post with a pointed tip. This doesn't effect me.

The eye box of the TR24 is much better than with other scopes i've tried, and the other 1-4x i've owned, the CMR. But, the CMR was pretty shitty.

On 1x with the diopter setting at 0, the TR24 is very quick and easy to use. The scope doesn't present a large obstruction in your field of view. All you see is a blurry black ring.

The glass is very good. It almost looks brighter than not looking through it, its that clear and sharp.

In low light, the scope seems to have an ideal amount of illumination. I would almost call the illumination of the TR24 an enhancement more than illumination. It isn't meant to be super bright. It's meant to enhance the reticle.

The TR24 isn't a red dot, it isn't meant to perform like one.

I bought mine at a local shop for $740 out the door. Money well spent.

In AR optics the magnification problem can be solved one of three ways. Varibable power (1-4x) scope, RDS with magnifier, and fixed power with RDS backup. All of these systems present their own problems and advantages. One major one being cost. Some of these options are well over $2500.

[Steve]

So you're saying that the TR24 is usable even without a good cheekweld? That hasn't been my experience with ANY variable optic.

Can you be more specific about the shoot house lighting conditions and which TR24 reticle you're using? Thanks.



Yes that what im saying, i have used it in several classes and matches in many off axis positions without issue

its pretty much a true 1x actually its .97 if i recall correct.

I posted the first pics of that unit in 2007 we were some of the first users of that optic and RMR's in classes and matches

best money in optics i have ever spent

[Crow Hunter]

So you're saying that the TR24 is usable even without a good cheekweld? That hasn't been my experience with ANY variable optic.

I can say that at 1X it is VERY forgiving of cheek weld. Not quite as much as the Aimpoint but it is getting pretty close. It is definitely usable in Rollover prone and Supine, I tried them both. (Dry not shooting)

I can can still see 75% of the viewing area even with my arms fully extended. The diameter of the viewing area is actually a little bit larger with the TR24 than with the M4S. I go down to approximately the same amount when I put my nose to the charging handle. Of course with the M4S, there is no change.

Left to right bias is not as good. I only get about 1/2 of the head movement with the TR24 as I do with the M4S.

I was genuinely surpised at how generous the eye relief and cheek weld allowance was.

You should really try one out. It will grow on you. :p

Now I am off to do some exterior/vehicle night time dancing ops comparisons. :dance3:

[fullmetalredhead]

If I could find a TR24 with the green triangle I would jump all over it like a hobo on a ham sandwich but for now I am happy with my Aimpoint C3 or H-1.

I believe Palmetto State Armory has them in stock:

http://www.palmettostatearmory.com/984.php

[pilotguyo540]

Thanks for this discussion guys. I have never bought glass for my ar. Part because I am cheap, part because I don't need them and part because of my ignorance. After getting in lots of range time I am very unhappy with my 15 moa front sight post. It is holding me back. I have been pondering an optic purchase for some time and have been on the fence between cco with a fts magnifier or a 1-4x. After this discussion, I am sold on the TR24. Now about that new upper purchase...

[bp7178]

Don't get me wrong, there are strong points for using a RDS/magnifier setup too.

However, if precision shooting is your thing, you will be much happier and save some money with a TR24...or really any QUALITY 1-4x setup.

The magnifiers magnifiy everything, including the reticle. So your 4moa dot is now three times bigger. I think people often overlook this.

Don't go cheap on the mount. It kills me to see pictures of even a $300 dollar scope in a $35 mount.

Go American Defense or Larue, or in the very least maintain a QD capability. If for any reason the optic fails, you want to be able to flip a few levers and be at irons.

[BSHNT2015]

http://militarymorons.com/weapons/ar.optics.html

Check out MM's reviews, they may help you.

[JohnnyC]

The magnifiers magnifiy everything, including the reticle. So your 4moa dot is now three times bigger. I think people often overlook this.


Not in relation to the target. Sure it's 3x bigger but so is the target.

[bp7178]

A TR24 gets smaller compared to the target when increasing magnification.

Dot distortion is also magnified three times too.

A magnified (3x) 4moa dot isn't the best thing for precision shots. There is hub bub on the internets about using the top arc of the circle as poa/poi, but with a distorted dot this is harder than it sounds.

I like the 2moa dots better for magnifier use. I know there is a lot out there about 2moa vs 4moa dots, but for magnifier use I liked the 2moa ones better.

IMO, the magnifiers are more suited for target identification than for magnified precision shooting. I liked the ability to leave it swung out of the way and canting the rifle to look through the optic.

That being said, the field of view is MUCH better through a TR24 than a RDS/magnifier setup.

I've never like the Eotechs for the simple reason that while having a big window to look through, they take up a huge amount of your perpherial (sp?) vision. The TR24 is very minimal in that regard.

You just have to match what you are going to use your optic for. Not dreams of communist revolts or canadian invasions, but actual use.

Either one of these options works very well within their spectrum of limitations. All of the magnified optic solutions compromise one way or the other.

The other function I would consider for a "SHTF" rifle, whatever that means anyway, the the importance of the diopter adjustment. I wear glasses or contacts. If I am without said devices, I can dial the diopter adjustment into the negative (i'm nearsighted) and the view through the optic is the same as my corrected vision. I think this feature is really overlooked in terms of importance.

Another thing; guys get all wrapped up in the true 1x crap, then loose their shit when something two feet in front of them looks magnified. I saw a picture where a photo was taken through an Accupoint of two wires just in front of the rifle, which was to imply "Ahh ha! look it is magnified!"

I can assure you, the TR24 is VERY useable at close ranges. IMO the field of view is better than an Aimpoint or Eotech and the scope body presents much less of an obtrusion into your field of view.

[Gasman]

Another thing; guys get all wrapped up in the true 1x crap, then loose their shit when something two feet in front of them looks magnified. I saw a picture where a photo was taken through an Accupoint of two wires just in front of the rifle, which was to imply "Ahh ha! look it is magnified!"

That's right up there with people who insist that their CQB optic have a FFP ranging reticle... :confused:

[Crow Hunter]

Well, this weekend, I finally got to go out and sight in the M4S and do a comparison to the TR24.

First of all, if you have a M4S with a Larue mount, make sure you use the little vial of Loc-tite on the screws before you take it out to sight it in.:big_boss: Even if it feels tight, they will shoot loose.:suicide2:

Surprisingly enough, having fired both from the same rifle at the same distance, at the same time, I actually prefer the M4S (Larue mounts rock for this by the way). I really wasn't expecting that. Shooting at paper/clays offhand and in several different shooting positions along with malfunction clearance and a little low light, I felt much more confident with the RDS than the TR24.

I also used the TR24 for a couple of shots on the muskrats. I didn't like the triangle in actual "dynamic use" as much as I thought I would. The brightess of the reticle kept drawing me to place the triangle on the rat rather than using the tip like I had it sighted in for. I believe this is something that I could overcome with additional practice/training. Changing the aiming point won't work because the triangle obscures the rat at 150 yards. :sarcastic: Another thing that I noticed with the TR24 that I didn't like was at 4x, although I can't "see" the FSB there are certain lighting conditions that the reflection of the ears/post will flare. It looks alot like a hair that has gotten between my eyes and the lense. It doesn't keep me from using it, but it is distracting and annoying (the 1st time it did it, I kept trying to find the hair that was hanging in front of my eyepiece.)

I believe, that based on MY needs rather than my Red Dawn dreams (like bp7178 said), the M4S is going to be the better option. I think I am going to keep my home defense/bump in the night rifle seperate from my hunting/other uses rifle. I have more than one gun so I don't think I need to compromise and try to find a "do all" optic.

I might wind up trying a magnifier at some point to see if it can be used against the evil muskrat population but I think I will try it by itself 1st.

I am still torn on whether or not to sell the TR24. It is a very good optic, just not what I think I want/need at this time.

[Failure2Stop]

I didn't like the triangle in actual "dynamic use" as much as I thought I would. The brightess of the reticle kept drawing me to place the triangle on the rat rather than using the tip like I had it sighted in for. I believe this is something that I could overcome with additional practice/training.

I am not a fan of the triangle either.
I am waiting on Trijicon to release the TR24 with other reticle options.
*cough* Horseshoe *cough*

[bones]

I am not a fan of the triangle either.
I am waiting on Trijicon to release the TR24 with other reticle options.
*cough* Horseshoe *cough*


I agree....

[Crow Hunter]

I am not a fan of the triangle either.
I am waiting on Trijicon to release the TR24 with other reticle options.
*cough* Horseshoe *cough*

I think I would like that one better myself based on my very limited experience with dots vs triangles. But even with that, I think I would still prefer the M4S.

[bp7178]

Depends on the dot size.

I like triangles and chevrons because you have the ability to use the point. With circles you can guestimate the 12 o'clock index of the circle and use that. Really depends on the dot size and the user if that works out.

[Crow Hunter]

Depends on the dot size.

I like triangles and chevrons because you have the ability to use the point. With circles you can guestimate the 12 o'clock index of the circle and use that. Really depends on the dot size and the user if that works out.

I was actually able to turn the dot WAAYYY down (almost invisible) on the M4s and use it better than I could use the tip of the triangle when I wanted to be very "precise" (for me anyway).

Now that takes some time, not something that I could do while shooting on the move but while shooting at swimming vermin on the move at around 100 yards with the TR24, I could not get a good repeatable sight picture. I found myself having a similar problem shooting at the clay pigeons, that were not moving. I have yet to try the M4S on the lake monsters but I "feel" confident that I will do better than I did with the TR24.

I really don't know why that is. Since most of my formative years were with iron sights and a 6:00 hold, I was really expecting to be better with that setup than dot on the target, but I wasn't.

[fullmetalredhead]

I've owned a TR24 with the triangle reticle for awhile now and I don't believe it's a scope that one can appreciate after a just a couple of outings. It definitely takes some time and training to get used to the triangle post. Also, reticle on these scopes is so bright that it is essential you dial it down. The bright glowing halo around the reticle conveys false information to the eye as to where the tip of the triangle really is. You've got to dial it down to where the triangle is nice and bright, but not glowing like a light bulb. Once I figured this out, my accuracy with the scope at long distances improved tremendously.

[3CTactical]

I was a little aprehensive about going with the triangle at first, but after using it for awhile now, I really like it. I use the tip of the triangle for longer range precision shooting and at closer ranges, I just center the triangle over COM and press the trigger. I have mine sighted in at 50 yds, so at closer ranges using the triangle as somewhat of a red dot works great and somewhat mitigates the height over bore issues you experience up close with a red dot. Of course when you're real close you still have some height over bore offset to contend with.