Trijicon model differences

[thinhorn_AK]

Yeah I forgot about the HX credo. The stupid HX vs non HX delineation which makes no sense. Basically boils down to a different exterior coating and MOA (HX) vs mil but then they have some MOA in the non HX as well.

I have a tenmile HX that is mil.

 

[SDHNTR]

I think you're right. The Leopold doesn't have a focus ring unless I'm mistaken. Can one focus the accupoint scopes?

Depends on the model. The higher magnification ones do.

 

[TxLite]

I have a tenmile HX that is mil.

Same, but it’s been discontinued

 

[Slick8]

Really? Huh. It seems like at 14x and 500 yards the center of my reticle is damn near cover the medium steel target. But maybe heat distortion and whatnot would just eat up the advantage of more magnification?

Sounds like a parallax or more likely reticle size issue.

I have 2 of the Trig Ten mile scopes and like many other scopes of this type, they have a very small / precise center to the reticle. It covers up very little at range. For example at 25x, I use a 1 inch aiming dot at 300 yards.

I've shot several animals from 5-6ish and one at 700. I've only once used 25x but prefer it for the bench and always like to have the horse power. Most of my shots are taken at 12-18x for clarity, ease of eye relief and field of view.

I also feel like any scope becomes more sensitive at max power to eye relief which is why I prefer to overpower.

 

[Macintosh]

Reticles arent all the same. The 14x reticle that covers a target on one scope, will look totally different with a different reticle on a different 14x scope. Has everything to do with the reticle, the magnification is only correlated based on the reticle.

That said, there is a tradeoff. The reticle that doesnt cover your tiny target dot may be invisible at low power, and depending on where and how you hunt that might be a FAR bigger problem.

 

[thinhorn_AK]

Same, but it’s been discontinued

Yeah, too bad too. It’s a great scope. I want to get one for my dad but no dice.

 

[Shraggs]

I have a tenmile HX that is mil.

Lots of respect for trijcon - but their naming scheme is inconsistent like this example. Another is sfp/ffp.

OP, trijcon is solid and worth your money. I’d first get a good understanding of sfp/ffp, dialing for long shots vs hold over with appropriate reticle, mil/moa if not already and magnification needs. Then you’d be able to carefully read each scope’s features.

Many here, myself included would use 6x ish for 500 yards, and some prefer a bit more as noted above. It’s more than the reticle on target, there is value in the perspective a larger FOV offers: reticle on target and the animals true orientation, and an improved opportunity to see your impact if recoil is moderate to low and what did animal do when hit or direction it took.

 

[JimIsland]

I prefer the accupoints for hunting for several reasons:
1) The tritium dot is smaller and more precise, also doesn't require batteries.
2) The accupoint 56mm is crazy good in low light if that's important to you.
3) I like the reticle options of the accupoints, and are more user (hunting) friendly to me.
4) I like clean reticles on my hunting scopes.

I don't know where and how you hunt but if the majority of your shots were under 300 yards, I'd go with a 2.5-10X56 accupoint. If you take long pokes out to 500ish yards routinely I would look at either 4-16X50 or the newer 3-18X50. I'm trying to find a reason to buy the 3-18 myself!

 

[barrister]

The Accupoint 4-16x50 is the sweet spot for me. Really good and bright look, view is not crowded at all. The scope doesn’t feel too big. I like it for my use, which is from point blank to 600 yards. I also have the 2.5-12.5x42. Also a good scope, but it doesn’t feel as right for my eyes as the larger version. It’s good and I have it on an inside 200 yards Savage 99, but it’s not the same as the larger objective.