1-4x Trijicon Tr24 vs SWFA SS

[usnavydoc]

I've been debating variable powered scopes for a while? I've settled on these two but can't make up my mind on which is the better buy. Both seem to have attributes. I'm leaning towards the tr24g.

My set up is a 16 in Daniel defense rifle in 556 I built and use for short to medium(0-300m) hunting. I also want to be able to press the rifle in a defense capability as well as take some longer shots at the range. Best of all worlds I guess. I'm new to scopes as well.

Originally I wasn't sure the 1-4x would be powerful enough so I was thinking 3-9 and an offset RDS or irons. But that would bring the weight up some. Anyway I just wanted to get some opinions from people with more experience.

[jet66]

I can't comment on the TR24, but we have an SWFA SS 1-4X. (On my wife's carbine, currently.) I've only had the opportunity to shoot it out to 200 yards, and it works well for that distance. I'm sure another 100 yds/m would be perfectly doable as well. You're not going to see fleas crawling around on a deer with 4X, but you should be able to make shots to the vitals at that distance.

With the illumination on and the scope set to 1X, it works well as a CQB/RDS with both eyes open, and there is very little distortion at that setting. On 1X, only the center is lit up (as you can see in the link.) On 4X, the section that is illuminated is zoomed to fill the eye piece (first focal plane? I confuse the two...) with the illumination being variable in power, with it 'off' in every 'in between' notch. The version we have uses covered turrets, but the adjustments beneath are easily turned via fingers, so no need looking for a tool.

Overall, I really like it, but it was too much extra weight for most of my shooting. My wife loved it when it was on my rifle before, so she swiped it for her build. So, no regrets on the purchase, at any rate.

[Aaron_B]

I currently have the tr24 w/ BAC reticle (even though currently up for sale pm me if interested lol). It's a great optic and have had no issues with at all. The only reason I am selling is because I have determined variable optics is not for me. The TR24 has been great while using it out hunting deer especially right at dawn and dusk with the tritium reticle. It's a pretty fast optic to me at low power as well. Also, I have had no problems reaching out to 300yds with a light weight colt.

[Warp]

I just made that exact decision last week. I narrowed it down to either of those, and spent hours upon hours reading up on them.

I went with a TR24G. The biggest deciding factors, for me, were Trijicon's reputation (and my personal preferences and bias) and the lack of batteries.

What I liked about the SWFA was the illumination (the triangle of the TR24 will go black in certain lighting conditions...totally usable but doesn't jump out at you as much), the FFP reticle, and the mil/mil turrets/reticle.

I don't know if it's justified or not, but I came to the conclusion that the Trijicon would be more rugged and durable, and had a more established track record.

They both seem like very nice scopes that should serve you well if you like what they have to offer.

If I expected to do more shooting beyond ~250 yards, I would have gone with the SWFA for the mil/mil setup. But I don't.

[BrigandTwoFour]

I have a TR24G.

The SWFA is every bit as rugged and durable as the Trijicon.

To me, the TR24 with the glowing triangle reticle is great in the same way that a RDS with magnifier is great. You have the option of a big glowing point of aim up close, or the opportunity to zoom up and get better target ID.

However, as I've been shooting at 250 yards and up, the limitations of the reticle become apparent. The size of the triangle and the thick post below it are not good for holdovers. The BAC reticle is designed for speed, not accuracy (which, I presume, you would want for hunting). Accurate shots at 300 and beyond would require uncapping and dialing the turrets, which isn't what the scope was designed for.

IMO, the SWFA with mil reticle and uncapped mil adjustments would be more useful beyond 250 yards. However, the TR24 with the German #4 reticle would serve the same purpose.

My opinion, they're both great scopes. Take either the SWFA or the TR24 with the German reticle. Which ever fits your budget better (or laws...here in Montana, you can't hunt with an optic powered by batteries). Both should give you good useful life.

[usnavydoc]

I appreciate all the responses. Im kinda torn. I started thinking about a 3x9 again. That kinda craps on my closer range but Im just not sure. Im guessing as much as I would shoot over 300m it prob really doesnt matter but for those occasional shots Ill prob get the swfa if I stay in 1-4. If I go 3-9 I guess I have to again consider another option for up close shots. offset RDS vs offset irons. either way it gets heavier

[ICANHITHIMMAN]

Some day Trijicon will come through for us and this will be an easy choice.

[AKDoug]

I have no issues at all using my TR-24 at 300 yards. Yes, the triangle isn't as friendly as some reticles, but it can get the job done. It is excellent at close range too. I already went down the road with exposed turrets and I won't be doing that again on an AR.

[Pi3]

Shot show 2013 may present some new options.

[MegademiC]

I appreciate all the responses. Im kinda torn. I started thinking about a 3x9 again. That kinda craps on my closer range but Im just not sure. Im guessing as much as I would shoot over 300m it prob really doesnt matter but for those occasional shots Ill prob get the swfa if I stay in 1-4. If I go 3-9 I guess I have to again consider another option for up close shots. offset RDS vs offset irons. either way it gets heavier

Have you looked at the ss1-6? I'm torn between that and the vortex pst1-4 cause I don't know if ill tap into that extra $500. Maybe trijicon will come out with something before I buy one.