Trijicon 3-9x40 Accupoint vs 3-9x40 Credo

[Igloo]

Hello all,

Looked through what I could of the board and didn't see this specific question, so...

What would you be feeling between a Trijicon 3-9x40 Accupoint duplex with green dot or mil with green dot vs a 3-9x40 Credo with Precision Hunter reticle in red?

What if the Credo was a few hundy cheaper?

They both seem like pretty solid and rugged entry level set and forget style scopes according to the testing done by Form here. Curious as to any preference?

Use will most likely be on a Tikka Roughtech or CTR in 308 and for shots on game out to 350 yards max. I may put a Credo on a Tikka in 223 as well.

 

[ScreamingPotato]

I don't own either one but both are on my radar, figured Accupoint for hunting rifles and Credo for range rifles. In for answers to see what everyone says.

 

[Igloo]

I don't own either one but both are on my radar, figured Accupoint for hunting rifles and Credo for range rifles. In for answers to see what everyone says.

Happy if it helps us both!

 

[BAKPAKR]

I haven’t looked through the Credo but I bought one 3-9 Accupoint with the green mil-dot and I liked it enough that I bought a second one.

 

[Igloo]

I haven’t looked through the Credo but I bought one 3-9 Accupoint with the green mil-dot and I liked it enough that I bought a second one.

I like the duplex version quite a bit, in green too. But I've also never tried a Credo.

The Accupoints a nice hunting scope though! Agreed! The mil dot would give me some hold over capability at least too.

 

[Shō[t]gun]

Following, I’m very unfamiliar with Trijicon scopes. I’ve read a time or two that meopta makes the glass for at least one of their lines but couldn’t confirm that anywhere official.

 

[Caseknife]

I've got the Credo 3x9 green precision hunter moa and I like it a lot from first impression, still waiting for the rifle that it is going on. Haven't looked through an Accupoint which is about 4 oz lighter due to no electronics. Hunter precision reticle looks like it will be pretty nice in the field and is easily seen without illumination. I like that it has an off position between each setting and it has a good portion of the reticle that is lit. Looks like it is a finer reticle than the Accupoint but that may be just Trijicon's web site. I picked up one of the Huron 3x9 on sale at Eurooptic and it is now on a Howa Mini 6 ARC. These two are my first Trijicon scopes.

 

[Igloo]

I've got the Credo 3x9 green precision hunter moa and I like it a lot from first impression, still waiting for the rifle that it is going on. Haven't looked through an Accupoint which is about 4 oz lighter due to no electronics. Hunter precision reticle looks like it will be pretty nice in the field and is easily seen without illumination. I like that it has an off position between each setting and it has a good portion of the reticle that is lit. Looks like it is a finer reticle than the Accupoint but that may be just Trijicon's web site. I picked up one of the Huron 3x9 on sale at Eurooptic and it is now on a Howa Mini 6 ARC. These two are my first Trijicon scopes.

It probably is thinner, the duplex on the Accupoint is thicc lol.

Fan of the Huron here too.

100 others, I think the glass for both Credo and Accupoint is Japanese made but I could be wrong. The Accupoint is made in Japan but assembled in America because of the tritium, the Credo is made and assembled in Japan.

 

[Caseknife]

It probably is thinner, the duplex on the Accupoint is thicc lol.

Fan of the Huron here too.

100 others, I think the glass for both Credo and Accupoint is Japanese made but I could be wrong. The Accupoint is made in Japan but assembled in America because of the tritium, the Credo is made and assembled in Japan.

The thick duplex would turn me off. The illuminated dot looks to be about 3 minutes.

 

[Macintosh]

I would not call them “entry level”. Plenty of experienced shooters choose a point and shoot scope for hunting and these seem to be as solid as anything else out there in the category.

Cant comment on accupoint, but based in the reticle diagrams they are thicker reticles—the diagrams online show exactly how thick they are. The credo duplex is thin compared to most duplex reticles, so that alone could be the deciding factor for some people. The accupoint dot is 0.4moa at 9x according to the diagram: https://www.trijicon.com/uploads/pr...nt_Standard_Duplex_Reticle_TR20-1_TR20-1G.pdf

 

[Igloo]

I would not call them “entry level”. Plenty of experienced shooters choose a point and shoot scope for hunting and these seem to be as solid as anything else out there in the category.

Cant comment on accupoint, but based in the reticle diagrams they are thicker reticles—the diagrams online show exactly how thick they are. The credo duplex is thin compared to most duplex reticles, so that alone could be the deciding factor for some people.

What I mean, specifically, is the level where a scope starts to hold zero when subjected to Form's drop testing etc.

 

[bnsafe]

I went with the accupoint, only because of the weight difference and no battery to look at. well, the thicker reticle was a factor to because my eyes suck. the low light ability in the accupoint is great, good glass, love the green dot and dont have to mess with batteries. If I had one issue it seems like the fov is not great. I think thats in my head cause the specs are not much diff than the scope I used previously.
overall I have zero complaints with the accupoint, tho if they made a 3x9x50 it would be perfect

 

[Fritz D]

I like the reticle options with the Credo. Have a 3-9X40 of same on an AR10. Thinking about another for my Sako 300 WM.

 

[Crow Hunter TN]

Something I can help with!

I own 4 of the Credo 3-9X40 Mil Square scopes and 1 of the Accupoint 5-20X50 Mil Dot scopes.

The Accupoint scopes are made in Wixom MI out of parts that Trijicon sources from different companies. I have also read that they get glass from Meopta but I don't know that for sure. They use a wire reticle (which can break) because they have to run the fiber optic to the reticle. The fiber optic won't glow if there isn't some type of light overhead, so if you use a box blind or heavy tree cover, only the tritium will glow. The tritium is guaranteed for either 12 or 15 years and it can be replaced by sending it back to Trijicon. The Accupoint that I have no longer has the tritium and it really only glows where I can see it when I have light on it. If I am in the shade or inside, there is no glow. Doesn't really show in twilight either but the reticle is so bold, I don't need it.

The Credo scopes are heavier by around 4 oz. They are made at LOW in Japan, not by Trijicon. They have etched reticles (which can't break unless the lens does) and the illumination is battery powered. The warranty on the illumination is only 5 years.

I personally think the .05 Mil reticle on the Credo is right on the verge of being too thin. At around 5 min before the end of shooting light (30 min after sunset) to see the reticle against anything that is dark or mottled, I have to turn on the illumination.

The also, supposedly .05 Mil thick mil-dot reticle on the Accupoint is noticeably easier for me to see in all lighting but it also looks noticeably thicker to me. Which is why I said supposedly.

The Accupoint 3-9X40 duplex has .5 MOA thin crosshairs that are 8.6 MOA across.

The Credo 3-9X40 duplex has .125 MOA (.04 Mil) thin crosshairs that are 20 MOA across. So if you are wanting thinner crosshairs, definitely go for the Credo.

For reference (at max magnification):

A Leupold 2-7X33 Duplex has .3 MOA thin crosshairs and is 7.6 MOA across.

A Leupold 2-12X42 Duplex is .3 MOA thin crosshairs and 15.3 MOA across.

I have trouble with thinner crosshairs in low light, so I prefer thicker.

Also the human eye can see more shades of green than any other and it will appear brighter for longer than red. The battery life on the green Credos is significantly longer than the red.

Personally, if I were doing it over, I would get the Accupoint because of the thicker crosshairs, lower weight and better warranty but it isn't worth the cost/trouble to change from the Credos that I already own and have mounted.

Hope this helps.

 

[Crow Hunter TN]

If you guys are around the West TN area, shoot me a PM and I can meet you somewhere and let you look through mine.

 

[waterengineer]

I’ve been doing the same comparison and am leaning towards the credo due to price and this comparison: https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/trijicon-credo-3-9x40mm-q-a.318093/page-4#post-3407061

Crow Hunter TN, how do you think the eye relief compares between the two?

 

[Crow Hunter TN]

I’ve been doing the same comparison and am leaning towards the credo due to price and this comparison: https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/trijicon-credo-3-9x40mm-q-a.318093/page-4#post-3407061

Crow Hunter TN, how do you think the eye relief compares between the two?

I haven't tried the 3-9 Accupoint, just the 5-20X50 (and a 1-4X24 with the triangle reticle that I used to have, it was so nice that is why my brother bought the 5-20X50 and has left it and his rifle with me while he is out of state).

The specs say the Credo has better eye relief and someone on 24hr Campfire measured it on his with the flashlight method and it was shorter than the Credo. That was the secondary reason why I chose the Credo over the Accupoint. The primary reason was the Mil/Mil option.

I don't have a problem with the eye relief or getting behind the 3-9 Credos that I have at all. 9X is tighter than lower mags but I don't feel cramped or feel like I am sticking my head out like a turtle when I am using it.

However, I don't shoot from a bench or prone much at all. I am usually shooting from standing/sitting using shooting sticks.

ETA:

I have them on a .308 and .223 Tikka T3X and also on a Tikka T1x in .22 LR. I use the T1x for shooting pests around the place quite a bit. Works really good, no real problem with parallax, which I was surprised about. However it is supposed to be parallax set to 100 yards and most of my shooting is 50-80 yards or more at 4-6X magnification which isn't much parallax error even if I didn't cheek it right. (Being primarily a shotgunner, I am anal about cheeking, which might also contribute. )

 

[gerry35]

Something I can help with!

I own 4 of the Credo 3-9X40 Mil Square scopes and 1 of the Accupoint 5-20X50 Mil Dot scopes.

The Accupoint scopes are made in Wixom MI out of parts that Trijicon sources from different companies. I have also read that they get glass from Meopta but I don't know that for sure. They use a wire reticle (which can break) because they have to run the fiber optic to the reticle. The fiber optic won't glow if there isn't some type of light overhead, so if you use a box blind or heavy tree cover, only the tritium will glow. The tritium is guaranteed for either 12 or 15 years and it can be replaced by sending it back to Trijicon. The Accupoint that I have no longer has the tritium and it really only glows where I can see it when I have light on it. If I am in the shade or inside, there is no glow. Doesn't really show in twilight either but the reticle is so bold, I don't need it.

The Credo scopes are heavier by around 4 oz. They are made at LOW in Japan, not by Trijicon. They have etched reticles (which can't break unless the lens does) and the illumination is battery powered. The warranty on the illumination is only 5 years.

I personally think the .05 Mil reticle on the Credo is right on the verge of being too thin. At around 5 min before the end of shooting light (30 min after sunset) to see the reticle against anything that is dark or mottled, I have to turn on the illumination.

The also, supposedly .05 Mil thick mil-dot reticle on the Accupoint is noticeably easier for me to see in all lighting but it also looks noticeably thicker to me. Which is why I said supposedly.

The Accupoint 3-9X40 duplex has .5 MOA thin crosshairs that are 8.6 MOA across.

The Credo 3-9X40 duplex has .125 MOA (.04 Mil) thin crosshairs that are 20 MOA across. So if you are wanting thinner crosshairs, definitely go for the Credo.

For reference (at max magnification):

A Leupold 2-7X33 Duplex has .3 MOA thin crosshairs and is 7.6 MOA across.

A Leupold 2-12X42 Duplex is .3 MOA thin crosshairs and 15.3 MOA across.

I have trouble with thinner crosshairs in low light, so I prefer thicker.

Also the human eye can see more shades of green than any other and it will appear brighter for longer than red. The battery life on the green Credos is significantly longer than the red.

Personally, if I were doing it over, I would get the Accupoint because of the thicker crosshairs, lower weight and better warranty but it isn't worth the cost/trouble to change from the Credos that I already own and have mounted.

Hope this helps.

Lots of good info, thanks. This really helps a lot, 3-9 Credo or Huron for me.

 

[waterengineer]

I haven't tried the 3-9 Accupoint, just the 5-20X50 (and a 1-4X24 with the triangle reticle that I used to have, it was so nice that is why my brother bought the 5-20X50 and has left it and his rifle with me while he is out of state).

The specs say the Credo has better eye relief and someone on 24hr Campfire measured it on his with the flashlight method and it was shorter than the Credo. That was the secondary reason why I chose the Credo over the Accupoint. The primary reason was the Mil/Mil option.

I don't have a problem with the eye relief or getting behind the 3-9 Credos that I have at all. 9X is tighter than lower mags but I don't feel cramped or feel like I am sticking my head out like a turtle when I am using it.

However, I don't shoot from a bench or prone much at all. I am usually shooting from standing/sitting using shooting sticks.

ETA:

I have them on a .308 and .223 Tikka T3X and also on a Tikka T1x in .22 LR. I use the T1x for shooting pests around the place quite a bit. Works really good, no real problem with parallax, which I was surprised about. However it is supposed to be parallax set to 100 yards and most of my shooting is 50-80 yards or more at 4-6X magnification which isn't much parallax error even if I didn't cheek it right. (Being primarily a shotgunner, I am anal about cheeking, which might also contribute. )

Thanks for the reply and the great info you have added to this thread!