I had a TR24 with red triangle on my 16" DDM4. The weight was there, but that wasn't the reason I dumped it. I had issues with eye relief and shooting up close with both eyes open. Just didn't work for me. Back to using Aimpoints.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Member
I had a TR24 with red triangle on my 16" DDM4. The weight was there, but that wasn't the reason I dumped it. I had issues with eye relief and shooting up close with both eyes open. Just didn't work for me. Back to using Aimpoints.
- Jeff
“Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.” ― George Orwell, 1984
Senior Member
Which is impossible due to the way the fiber optic is built into the optic. IMO the biggest weakness of the TR24 is the reticle and the fiber optic channel running up into it. The tip isnt very precise since it blooms under bright light making you adjust the fiber optic cover to get it pointy again. The largeness of the triangle and forementioned channel makes it so you are pretty much covering your entire target when holding over.Originally Posted by ra2bach
Senior Member
=======================================
That crowbar reticle is what I don't like. Seems like a common complaint.
Seems like a a variation of a "Y" looking reticle with the top portion of the "Y" hiding the fiberoptics and a thin bottom portion of the "Y" under the triangle for holdovers, ranging, etc.
But maybe it's just me...
.
Last edited by ucrt; 07-07-11 at 18:04.
Senior Member
That is one of the things that I have wondered about. I have no idea what the guts of the TR24 look like BUT. I ASSUME that the light is piped into the reticle through the double bars under the triangle.
What if they made just crosshairs with a lit circle instead of a dot like they have on the German. You could have thicker bars coming in that taper to a fine crosshair in the middle, like a standard Duplex and put the ring around the point that the thick crosshairs tapers down to the fine crosshairs. Instead of a BDC, just having reference tic marks would be better, like a TMR so that you could setup your own "BDC" for quick shots and do come ups if you have more time. Of course you would need to put "tactical" turrets on it, so that you don't have to unscrew the cap and fumble that around.
But again, I don't know ANYTHING about building scopes, so most of this probably just plain isn't possible....
Senior Member
ok, chevron if you prefer. I was just saying that without any way to index this scope for different ranges, IMO it really offers no advantage over a RDS and flip-up magnifier.
FWIW, this has been the single biggest complaint about this scope so at least one other person agrees...
never push a wrench...
Senior Member
well if they can put this reticle in the TA31F
or this one in the TA31H,
why can't they put it in the TR24?
Last edited by ra2bach; 07-07-11 at 22:55.
never push a wrench...
Senior Member
Having used both systems quite a bit the TR24 does off some things over a RDS with a flip to side magnifier. The TR24 can be used on 1x 2x 3x and 4x not just 1 and 3 for starters. Secondly the turrents on the TR24 make dialing in for a particular range and back again to your zero easy. That is not the case with a RDS. The TR24 does need a BDS reticle I agree and I think its coming.
Pat
Serving as a LEO since 1999.
USPSA# A56876 A Class
Firearms Instructor
Armorer for AR15, 1911, Glocks and Remington 870 shotguns.
Member
I love the TR24. I don't mind not having bullet compensation.
One thing I like, though, is that the turrets are easy to turn by hand. So I can shoot 55gr on the range, but a few memorized clicks and I"m zero'd for my 69 or 77's too.
Senior Member
The chevron reticle of the TA31F would be the best option for he TR24 in my opinion.well if they can put this reticle in the TA31F
why can't they put it in the TR24?
I think a BDC for anything further than 400yds on a 16" fighting gun is useless since a 16" AR is basically a 0-300yd gun due to the 5.56 round loosing most of it's ballistic effectiveness on-target once the velocity drops below 2500fps.
If you need to be able to put threats down past 300yds, then use the proper tool for the job. The 5.56 AR is not the proper tool. If you are just shooting paper out past 300yds then I guess it doesn't matter much.
While I have been completely happy with the big green triangle out to 300yds, I do think the chevron reticle shown above would be a little easier & faster to use at 300yds if they can make it work in the TR24.
Senior Member
yeah, maybe my example was a little simplistic. but what I was trying to convey is that with only a single point of reference in the magnified view, it doesn't give you much more than a magnified dot ( dialing the turrets, notwithstanding...
my question, and the question that has confounded many others over time, is if they can put a BDC reticle in the Acog, why not in the TR24?
if you say it's coming, well it's a good thing I didn't hold my breath when I first heard this rumor or we'd not be having this conversation now...
for grins and giggles though,.. if the point of the triangle is zeroed at 200, does anyone know what hold for 100? maybe the bottom of the triangle???
never push a wrench...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks