Illuminated Reticle vs. Heavy Duplex?

[dbateman]

For me illuminated reticle is the way to go, I umd and arred about it but once I went that way most scope I buy now have that option.

I hunt from time to time with just the moon light and my ret on the lower settings, that alone is worth the extra $$ at least for me.

[spyderco monkey]

From your requirements (0-300, dim light, most shots within 90 yards) I think you would be well served with the Trijicon Accupoint TRG24. It's tritium and fiber optic illuminated, and on top of that, has a very thick, easy to see aiming post reticle. The scope only weighs 14oz's, and you can find them pretty regularly on the forums for around $600-$700.

[Crews]

Another endorsement for Accupoint here... the illumination always seems to be at the appropriate brightness for the conditions in hunting scenarios, without any batteries to die or manual adjustments to worry about. Plus pretty impressive glass quality for the money in low light conditions. I have always liked them for hunting scopes. I'd suggest the 3-9 version for more light gathering.

[BillSWPA]

I would question the choice of tritium illumination over battery power. Replacing a battery is a 1 minute job, and costs $$1-$2 if the batteries are ordered online. Tritium will eventually get dim and require sending the scope in for replacement, which will cost much more than a battery and will mean being without the scope for at least a few weeks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[txdpd]

I have an accupoint as well. There's no way that's I'd ever choose a heavy duplex reticle for lowlight hunting if an illuminated reticle was available. I can see a regular reticle during legal hunting hours, but I find it to be slower than an illuminated reticle and have to keep track of the cross hairs or I can lose track of them. The illuminated reticle is always there and I subconsciously keep track of the reticle. If i put a timer to it, I'm probably only saving a half second, but it seems to take a lot of pressure out of the entire process.

[spyderco monkey]

I would question the choice of tritium illumination over battery power. Replacing a battery is a 1 minute job, and costs $$1-$2 if the batteries are ordered online. Tritium will eventually get dim and require sending the scope in for replacement, which will cost much more than a battery and will mean being without the scope for at least a few weeks.

If we were talking red dot's I would agree, but none of the existing 1-4/1-6 LPVO's have battery life in any way comparable to what we've come to expect from an Aimpoint.

Most of the spec's I've seen put battery life around 160-300hrs.

Meanwhile for outdoor daytime use, if there's any ambient light (even on a cloudy day) the TRG24's fiber optic glows quite brightly. And the tritium is still at 50% brightness 10 years later (and 10 years is a long time in the world of optics.)

Until LPVO's improve their battery life, I personally think tritium/fiber optic remains the way to go for reticle illumination. I just wish Trijicon would spend the R&D to create a TRG24 with the ACOG horseshoe reticle.