1-4 options

[nickdrak]

Nick,

Have you experienced any of the moisture related issues above? Do you / have you used the optic in rainy conditions?

Never had a moisture issue. I have shot several matches in the rain & snow over the past two years. It rides on my daily carry work gun.

[BrigandTwoFour]

I have been running my Trji TR24G for just about 3 years now. I snagged one as soon as they hit the shelves.

I think it is an ideal 0-200yd optic. Out past 250-300yds things get a little sketchy but as long as you know your holds it is plenty useable. I run a 100yd zero on mine and I have used it @ 600yds and get consistent hits on a fullsize IPSC steel target all day long.

Big +1 to this.

I've used a TR24G for about two years now on one of my ARs. From bad breath range to 250 yards or so, I am very very happy with it.

However, the lack of any sort of reference within the reticle for measurement at range makes it much more difficult for 300 and beyond when compared to something with mil dots, BDC, or some other reference mark.

I have heard great things about the SWFA scope, as well. I have been toying with the idea of buying a 1-6 to replace my TR24 (or even the 3-9), as the rifle has been getting used more for shooting out to 400-600 and the TR24 is not suitable for that purpose.

[TangoSauce]

There are several SWFA 1-4 on their refurb site fyi since many traded up for the 1-6.

I'd throw a Vortex PST 1-4 on the list too if you want bang for your buck. They're about to release a Razor 1-6 too.

[newyork]

I see they are $100 off. hmm. $100 off the SWFA or a TR24?

[Failure2Stop]

I see they are $100 off. hmm. $100 off the SWFA or a TR24?

I would steer you toward the SWFA over the TR24. Not that the 24 is "bad", just that in my opinion the SWFA 1-4 is better, especially if you intend to do anything past 300, or want to hit smaller targets past 200.

A Mil based reticle will provide more opportunity for growth as a precision shooter over the 24s triangle.

Then again, this may all be irrelevant to your needs.

Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.

[newyork]

Thanks F2S! The range I belong to that also has a few matches per year only goes to 200. There is a range out here that goes to 300. Not sure if they have matches there.
How is the SWFA at close range compared to the TR24? I like having more ability in the scope as long as its not taking away from close range since most shooting won't go past 200.

[Failure2Stop]

How is the SWFA at close range compared to the TR24? I like having more ability in the scope as long as its not taking away from close range since most shooting won't go past 200.

The difference in the reticles themselves will be transparent. Individual shooter capability and preference will be the major determining factor in performance.


Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.

[newyork]

Meaning you still recommend the SWFA? I shoot with my nose very close to the charging handle, will I need an extended eye relief mount? I have with other scopes. I run a Sully stock.

[newyork]

Do you recommend the circle dot or T reticle?

[Failure2Stop]

Meaning you still recommend the SWFA? I shoot with my nose very close to the charging handle, will I need an extended eye relief mount? I have with other scopes. I run a Sully stock.

I think that the SWFA 1-4 is one of the most cost efficient low power variables out. It has a lot going for it, but at the end of the day it isn't a S&B or a Swarovski. Not that they are perfect either though.

Before the SWFA hit the market, the TR24 was one of the best "bang for buck" 1-4s available.

If you are using a Sully, and NTCH, or close, you will get a bit more leeway in mounting position with an extended mount.

Eta after re reading the initial post:
Illumination is not a necessity with the SWFA or USO optics at 1x in daylight.

Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.