Trijicon TR24 vs Aimpoint M4S Comparison

[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.

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

[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...

[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. Even if it feels tight, they will shoot loose.

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. 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.