New Trijicon SRS Red Dot Sight

[leadpersuasion]

This looks like the future of red dots. The price may be its only caveat.

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/2011/10/10/trijicon-srs-the-evolution-of-the-red-dot/

[Kobalt]

Thats awesome.

[Boonedawg]

 That is a sweet little optic.

[NOLA556]

Awesome looking red dot, the fact that it runs off of an integral solar device is an extremely amazing added benefit; especially if you consider the aspect of being in a situation where you run out of batteries. I still can't get over the price of some of these high end optics though. I wish they'd make them a little more affordable for us normal guys. I've spent around $1,100 on my AR so far...with more parts and upgrades needed. And spending another 64% of the cost of my rifle for an optic just makes me grind my teeth a bit. So I guess I'm stuck with irons for the time being.

hey man, nothing wrong with irons.

that being said, I hate to be that one dude that's always gotta be preaching about EOTech, but the price is right, man. standard EOTech 512 runs just over $400..
I know that's alot of money also, but for the quality of the product, and also compared to the outrageous price of similar products, it's really not a bad deal.
there are drawbacks of course. my personal peeve about EOTech is that in order to get any magnification, you're spending just as much as you'd spend on a Trijicon... but if you're cool with 1X mag then like I said, the price is definitely right. without a doubt, it's something that I don't plan to get rid of.

one thing that's pretty badass about that Trijicon in the article is the solar feature, but honestly, I don't consider it to be worth what they're asking for it. AA's ain't too much of a drawback. probably the most common battery in existence and it's not difficult to stock plenty of them. and worse comes to worst, I've always got my flip-up rear sight if the optic runs out of juice.

[Kentactic]

If i had an AR and Wanted to run a Red Dot id be very seriously considering that optic assuming it lives up to the hype in the video. ive got no problem with spending decent money for quality glass..thats what makes the bullets hit the target where your aiming... cant be skimping on optics. and that solar features pretty trick too.

[Dave_M]

I wish they'd make them a little more affordable for us normal guys. I've spent around $1,100 on my AR so far...with more parts and upgrades needed. And spending another 64% of the cost of my rifle for an optic just makes me grind my teeth a bit. So I guess I'm stuck with irons for the time being.

R&D costs money. American labor costs money. High QC means more rejects which costs more money.

Shitty Chinese sweat-shop optics have none of those restrictions.

[Kentactic]

Yeah i hear ya Allshallperish, some times its not worth the money...like i said "if i wanted to run a red dot".... which i probably wouldnt if i even owned an AR or similar rifle. but in the precision long range world you really wont get by with a cheaper optic...you will get what you pay for. in the AR world that money becomes less noticable when you compare a $500 Red dot to a $1000 Red dot because the accuracy isnt as required so almost any red dot will do the job aslong as it stays zero'd and powered.

[Dave_M]

$500 Red dot to a $1000 Red dot because the accuracy isnt as required so almost any red dot will do the job aslong as it stays zero'd and powered.

The argument isn't between a $500 RDS and a $1k RDS--it's between a $40 RDS and a $300 RDS (protip: The only advantage to the Chicomm sight is price. Everything else is lesser.) No one buys a shitty chinese sight if cost isn't the sole issue.

[Dave_M]

If you buy a Vortex, you deserve what you get (I say this as I guy who has had cost-free T&E from them before). You can't buy my approval. Sorry (but not, cause' they weren't good.)

[Kentactic]

$500 Red dot to a $1000 Red dot because the accuracy isnt as required so almost any red dot will do the job aslong as it stays zero'd and powered.

The argument isn't between a $500 RDS and a $1k RDS--it's between a $40 RDS and a $300 RDS (protip: The only advantage to the Chicomm sight is price. Everything else is lesser.) No one buys a shitty chinese sight if cost isn't the sole issue.

im pretty sure no one was talking about a $40 RDS... the point is... in the red dot world.... your bank for your buck and the need to get crazy expensive glass goes down. its not like you need high end glass to be able to see 1000 yards on a cloudy day with your 2x RDS

[technique]

the point is... in the red dot world.... your bank for your buck and the need to get crazy expensive glass goes down. its not like you need high end glass to be able to see 1000 yards on a cloudy day with your 2x RDS

Disagree. You still need to consider a lot when purchasing RDS.
Some are far more expensive for several valid reasons.
On an aside, I don't see this sight doing much better than the Tri-power.

[leadpersuasion]

If you read the article closely, the author believes they will get the price down closer to what the Comp M4 is selling at right now by Shot Show 2012. Maybe so....but the fact of the matter is....in most cases YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR!!!

[Kentactic]

the point is... in the red dot world.... your bank for your buck and the need to get crazy expensive glass goes down. its not like you need high end glass to be able to see 1000 yards on a cloudy day with your 2x RDS

Disagree. You still need to consider a lot when purchasing RDS.
Some are far more expensive for several valid reasons.
On an aside, I don't see this site doing much better than the Tri-power.

Im not a Red dot person...never owned a quality one but im guessing "glass clerity, contrast, vividness"... arent really the top things on the list for shooting 300 yards. im guessing more like reliaiblity of the optic, precisness of the red dot. true and repeatable click values, battery life etc are much more important.

[sledge]

LOL, I'm getting a kick out of this thread.  Everyone that's posted so far is right and everyone has their reasons for their position.

I'll just say this.  A Rolex and a Timex both tell time.  That's from 10 grand down to 39.99.

Just like with hookers the more you pay the more you get.  It all depends on what you can afford.  Get the best that you can.

Red Dots are about quicker target acquisition within a limited range.  Most at any price range will accomplish that.  So if you aren't shooting that mile and a half cannon you should give one a try.  Just make sure you put it on see through mounts.

I know this is going to catch crap from our pros, and that's fine.  I like Trijicon.  It's a nice tag to hang on your rifle.   

[leadpersuasion]

LOL, I'm getting a kick out of this thread.  Everyone that's posted so far is right and everyone has their reasons for their position.

I'll just say this.  A Rolex and a Timex both tell time.  That's from 10 grand down to 39.99.

Just like with hookers the more you pay the more you get.  It all depends on what you can afford.  Get the best that you can.

Red Dots are about quicker target acquisition within a limited range.  Most at any price range will accomplish that.  So if you aren't shooting that mile and a half cannon you should give one a try.  Just make sure you put it on see through mounts.

I know this is going to catch crap from our pros, and that's fine.  I like Trijicon.  It's a nice tag to hang on your rifle.   

Hell, Sledge....even a fucking broke watch is right twice a day! LOL! Just yankin' your chain. But your right, most of us here have all had valid points on the issue. The main thing when it comes to sights in my mind, is to get as proficient as possible with your irons. Optics fail, irons usually don't.

[Ghost]

Optics fail, irons usually don't.

Best, quote, ever.

[Dave_M]

Optics fail, irons usually don't.

Actually there is a higher rate of failure of iron sights than ACOGs in the Marine Corps.

[leadpersuasion]

Optics fail, irons usually don't.

Actually there is a higher rate of failure of iron sights than ACOGs in the Marine Corps.

Damned Marines can break anything! Guess that's what their trained to do. Semper Fi!

[thekiltedpatriot]

About time Trijicon got on the red-dot wagon....it was only a matter of time.  I'm sure it will be of equal quality as their other sites.

That said, I'm an EOTECH kinda guy.  I've seen 512's in the mid $300's recently (shop around people!) and for normal combat ranges (50-150 meters) that is more than adequate, barring the AO-specific details of course.  Any further than that, and I'd be looking to my DM for an assist anyway.

The point was brought up about iron sites.  Don't get a red-dot until you are fully comfortable with iron sites....and even after you get the red-dot, take it off occasionally and train routinely with BOTH.

[sledge]

About time Trijicon got on the red-dot wagon....it was only a matter of time.  I'm sure it will be of equal quality as their other sites.

That said, I'm an EOTECH kinda guy.  I've seen 512's in the mid $300's recently (shop around people!) and for normal combat ranges (50-150 meters) that is more than adequate, barring the AO-specific details of course.  Any further than that, and I'd be looking to my DM for an assist anyway.

The point was brought up about iron sites.  Don't get a red-dot until you are fully comfortable with iron sites....and even after you get the red-dot, take it off occasionally and train routinely with BOTH.

See through mounts.  "Cause batteries go dead at the worst times."

[thekiltedpatriot]

See through mounts.  "Cause batteries go dead at the worst times."

Yes, all mine are co-witnessed.   

[Kentactic]

Optics fail, irons usually don't.

Actually there is a higher rate of failure of iron sights than ACOGs in the Marine Corps.

im guessing thats because theres a lot more guys without ACOG's and the guys without ACOG's treat there rifles like shit because they are not really seeing battle and dont really care. the guys who are running ACOG's probably really want them to keep working so they can shoot the next mofo that shoots at them. so bassically they take care of there rifles a lot better... maybe im way off i dont know... but i thought most guys arent issued ACOG's so based on that assumption thats what i came up with to explain the stats.

essentially what im saying is im GUESSING that out of every guy who was issued an ACOG that they had many more ACOG failures then iron sights amongst them.

[Dave_M]

im guessing thats because theres a lot more guys without ACOG's and the guys without ACOG's treat there rifles like shit because they are not really seeing battle and dont really care. the guys who are running ACOG's probably really want them to keep working so they can shoot the next mofo that shoots at them. so bassically they take care of there rifles a lot better... maybe im way off i dont know... but i thought most guys arent issued ACOG's so based on that assumption thats what i came up with to explain the stats.

essentially what im saying is im GUESSING that out of every guy who was issued an ACOG that they had many more ACOG failures then iron sights amongst them.

Your guess would be incorrect. It was percentages of failures (number failed / number issued) for each unit. Also, ACOGs, unlike several years ago, are absolutely everywhere. The goal set many years ago was, 'For Every Marine and ACOG' and now it's at the point it's even being used in basic training.

[Kentactic]

im guessing thats because theres a lot more guys without ACOG's and the guys without ACOG's treat there rifles like shit because they are not really seeing battle and dont really care. the guys who are running ACOG's probably really want them to keep working so they can shoot the next mofo that shoots at them. so bassically they take care of there rifles a lot better... maybe im way off i dont know... but i thought most guys arent issued ACOG's so based on that assumption thats what i came up with to explain the stats.

essentially what im saying is im GUESSING that out of every guy who was issued an ACOG that they had many more ACOG failures then iron sights amongst them.

Your guess would be incorrect. It was percentages of failures (number failed / number issued) for each unit. Also, ACOGs, unlike several years ago, are absolutely everywhere. The goal set many years ago was, 'For Every Marine and ACOG' and now it's at the point it's even being used in basic training.

right i knew you meant failure rates in a percentage not total failed but since it sounds like everyone has them then nevermind my theory.

[v0dka]

If you buy a Vortex, you deserve what you get (I say this as I guy who has had cost-free T&E from them before). You can't buy my approval. Sorry (but not, cause' they weren't good.)

I haven't had a problem with mine and i drop my rifle alot and bayonet things with a m9 bayonet.

what don't you like about them?