Follow up review on the Trijicon SRS

[ChopperDoc]

After a factory repair of the initial problem.

http://www.thebangswitch.com/trijicon-srs-follow-up/

Good read if you are thinking about buying one of these.

[son of liberty]

Trijicon remains to be by and large, surviving on there name created by the one and only optic they ever made that was worth a damn.... the Acog. On top of that if you look at the ACOG now , it again falls grossly short of the many budget optics of today. The ACOG was a decent scope in the early 90s , but now its micro scope like eye box, and fixed low power is only remotely acceptable due to its quality glass, that in all honesty is only on par with the vortex viper series of scopes. There larger rifle scopes are have nice glass and marginal erector setups but they blow the whole series with cross hairs that are grossly large and not well suited to precision. They maintain a strong fallowing by the tacticool crowd , I mean what else looks that cool on top of a rifle, and while one could do much worse then the ACOG, one could also do much better at a 3rd of the cost. They are so behind the curve that I dont even look at them as an option anymore , they will have to blow there next offering out of the water to even peak some interest.

The RMR is the best thing they produce now and thats not even theirs , its a product they bought and stamped their name on.


Trijicon is going to need to get with the times pretty quick to remain a viable option in optics , there next offering needs to blow everything else out of the water , otherwise they should just focus on making the RMR cheaper for them to manufacture and stop spending R&D money as its driving the cost of there optics up and giving nothing in return

[justang1997]

When it comes to the ACOG I'd have to disagree. The ACOG needs no further improvement. It doesn't matter how old the design is. Tritium is THE single most expensive element. I'm sure that factors into the cost of the ACOG. It needs no batteries. It works at night. It has back up iron sights. It's back up iron sights also need no batteries and work at night. It has enough magnification to be of use but not so much that it can't be used across a room. It is very very rugged.
Modern red dots can't compete. They require batteries. They are heavier and longer when magnified and cost more when magnified.
When it comes to reticle nothing beats the acog bdc reticle because not only can it correct for bullet drop, it also provides for accurate ranging which none of the red dots can do.

Sent from my Q10 using Tapatalk 2

[ChopperDoc]

You can range estimate with ANY optic (and iron sights) if you know what to look for. The ACOG does not have the market cornered on this. hell, i figured out how to get a rudimentary range estimation from my pins on my compound bow on a white tail just by shooting at 3D targets.

EOTECH range estimation

[son of liberty]

Honestly your comparison is more about any magnified optic VS a red dot. I would have to agree that in some areas a magnified optic has some advantages , just like in some areas a red dot has advantages. When the ACOG is compared to modern optics such as the Vortex Razor 1-6 HD that is priced the same as an ACOG , well ..........sorry but there is just not a single area where the ACOG wins out. Even tritium has a life span, and its equal to that of a modern aim point , yet to change it requires it be sent in and to change the battery in an Aimpoint dose not even require a screw driver.

Compare it to some of the 2.5-10 variable power optics that can still be used much like a red dot but can dial out to great range and you again see the limitations of the ACOG. They to have BDC (Generic drop lines suck) or the more effective mrad system. They do not have tritium , they have batteries , and while they have a more limited life , so do bullets. I do not understand how one could be willing to store thousands of rounds , but not the extra set of batteries for the optic, its a doomsday prepper worry that is more often used to justify ones like of a given optic over that actual use, much like a 308 vs 223 debate.

In any case if you are happy with the ACOG thats great and by all means run it , though I think its a relic , its still a viable quality option . Though my opinion remains that it was Magnum opus of trijicon and that all efforts to make it more affordable would be much better then every dollar they have spent on R&D that to date have yielded nothing but failure , at least if they just threw the money away they would be remembered for the single great optic of the 90s rather then the string of failures that fallowed.

[justang1997]

You can range estimate with ANY optic (and iron sights) if you know what to look for. The ACOG does not have the market cornered on this. hell, i figured out how to get a rudimentary range estimation from my pins on my compound bow on a white tail just by shooting at 3D targets.

EOTECH range estimation

While that's all good and true the acog is more precise in that it allows measurements at 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, and 600. I love eotechs. But I give the acog the edge.
Sent from my Q10 using Tapatalk 2

[justang1997]

Honestly your comparison is more about any magnified optic VS a red dot. I would have to agree that in some areas a magnified optic has some advantages , just like in some areas a red dot has advantages. When the ACOG is compared to modern optics such as the Vortex Razor 1-6 HD that is priced the same as an ACOG , well ..........sorry but there is just not a single area where the ACOG wins out. Even tritium has a life span, and its equal to that of a modern aim point , yet to change it requires it be sent in and to change the battery in an Aimpoint dose not even require a screw driver.

Compare it to some of the 2.5-10 variable power optics that can still be used much like a red dot but can dial out to great range and you again see the limitations of the ACOG. They to have BDC (Generic drop lines suck) or the more effective mrad system. They do not have tritium , they have batteries , and while they have a more limited life , so do bullets. I do not understand how one could be willing to store thousands of rounds , but not the extra set of batteries for the optic, its a doomsday prepper worry that is more often used to justify ones like of a given optic over that actual use, much like a 308 vs 223 debate.

In any case if you are happy with the ACOG thats great and by all means run it , though I think its a relic , its still a viable quality option . Though my opinion remains that it was Magnum opus of trijicon and that all efforts to make it more affordable would be much better then every dollar they have spent on R&D that to date have yielded nothing but failure , at least if they just threw the money away they would be remembered for the single great optic of the 90s rather then the string of failures that fallowed.

I'd say the acog wins out on size. Also ease of mounting due to no scope rings. It may be lighter too. Idk. Either way I wouldn't bitch out over a few oz but then again oz add up to lbs. I like the lack of a zoom on the acog. Less stuff inside to break. I agree that the price should be lower on the acog by now.

Sent from my Q10 using Tapatalk 2

[DDgunslinger]

I think we can all agree there is the right type of optic for every job. However, you need to compare apples to and apples and oranges to oranges. Trying to compare: red dots, magnified optics and fixed magnified optics is like comparing apples to oranges to pineapples. There is no one size fits all in these comparisons and there are many pros&cons to be considered with each type of optic. Anyway that's just my .02 and as for the OP I'll personally will stick with my T-1.

[ChopperDoc]

You can range estimate with ANY optic (and iron sights) if you know what to look for. The ACOG does not have the market cornered on this. hell, i figured out how to get a rudimentary range estimation from my pins on my compound bow on a white tail just by shooting at 3D targets.

EOTECH range estimation

While that's all good and true the acog is more precise in that it allows measurements at 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, and 600. I love eotechs. But I give the acog the edge.
Sent from my Q10 using Tapatalk 2

Let's be more precise: the ACOG allows a pretty good BDC when you zero it at 100m and when you are using the ammunition (remember this thing was designed in the 90's) that was used to design the BDC.

And like others have stated, the ACOG is certainly a good option, though dated. And this post is not about the ACOG. It is about an expensive optic that Trijicon is marketing that obviously did not get tested very well before making it to market last year. I posted this review from the bang Switch so others can have an informed opinion about the optic and whether or not they want to drop that kind of coin on it. When you think of Trijicon you think of quality, and this optic is, apparently, not living up to that name and yet this review is the ONLY place I have heard about this. There may be other places reporting it, but the initial reviews I read (gun mags...go figure) were drooling over the SRS and finding no drawbacks. The issues addressed here seem to be a common problem with the SRS but it is not a big story on other gun boards I read and I have seen nothing here.

Just looking out for you guys.

[ChopperDoc]

I think we can all agree there is the right type of optic for every job. However, you need to compare apples to and apples and oranges to oranges. Trying to compare: red dots, magnified optics and fixed magnified optics is like comparing apples to oranges to pineapples. There is no one size fits all in these comparisons and there are many pros&cons to be considered with each type of optic. Anyway that's just my .02 and as for the OP I'll personally will stick with my T-1.

Word. Still need to get me one of those.

[justang1997]

I'm not trying to shit up your thread here. I thought were were discussing optics.

Sent from my Q10 using Tapatalk 2

[ChopperDoc]

I'm not trying to shit up your thread here. I thought were were discussing optics.

Sent from my Q10 using Tapatalk 2

not shitting it up at all, good discussion, but the point was about the SRS originally. The ACOG has been tested and found worthy, for technology of it's time.