Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Primary Arms 1-6x24 low light comparison

Gents, fwiw...

Did a low-light comparison with a new Primary Arms 1-6x24 KISS reticle and a Trijicon TR24 AccuPoint 1-4x24 w/amber triangle, both intended for hunting. Not recommending either or preaching, just saying how they did up for me.

Personally, sitting for deer in the woods, inevitably under conifers in Michigan, I use a 2.5-10x50mm Zeiss or S&B on a bolt action along with a 10x56 bino as optimum. The bino will make tough IDs in the shadows better than any riflescope and will show you a standing deer you missed scanning with your eyeballs. My BIL and I still-hunt and track to break the monotony of sitting and to scout new and re-visit old country. Every once in awhile it affords a jump-shot at a buck. I carry a 7-08 BAR with the Trijicon on 1x for that purpose. We usually make a full day or half day of it and sit the last hour before dark, somewhere that looks promising, so I then end up using the 24mm scope for last light.

Tonight, the sky was bright, so I waited until 1 hour past sunset –10:00 est. Both scopes set on 4x looking under the trees at 100 yards and finally looking along the river bank at 70 yards. My GSD provided a deer moving imitation. I could see him easily on the riverbank but not well at all under the trees with my eyes only. At 4x through the scopes under the trees I could differentiate individual leaves and buck-brush at 100 yards and would have made a deer ID for a shot. It may have taken the bino to see a spike.

The PA did as well as the Trijicon. The illumination has to be used as the unlit black chevron fades against conifers or a dark background as the light fades. The dial turns either direction which is ok as turning it the wrong way is immediately obvious by the bright red--giving you guidance without looking at it. I used it on the lowest settings—the first and second setting. The first setting worked better later as it grew darker but was nearly too dim at first. Neither setting at 1 or 2 was obtrusive.

The Trijicon’ amber triangle is brighter but smaller—doable. In the daylight for me, however, it is the fastest get on target reticle I have tried so far for running whitetail—so it’s gonna stay…:) Nonetheless, either of these scopes would work for me in a last hour of hunting set-up.

The PA surprised me for this first comparison. It is inexpensive. The chevron reticle just works. The glass is certainly better than I expected on my sample. It has about the same amount of edge aberration on 1x as my Zeiss HT on 2.5x, say, somewhere around 30-40% from the edge in. Weighs 17.1 oz w/o the caps.

Tom,
I think the real difference in the two has to go to quality and the ability to stand up to hard use (or just regular use in some cases). The PA is made in the same factory in China which produces the extremely similar Vortex Strike Eagle scopes. Those Vortexes are not known for their robustness, ability to adjust properly, or holding zero. There are lots of threads about them failing in one way or another at about the same rate as other low and mid priced Vortexes. On the other hand, the Trijicon is known to hold up well to use, even hard use on heavy kickers, and still keep going. The reticle is awesome, once you get used to shooting with the triangle, and it transitions well between light and dark with the fiber optic and tritium.

For me, I have one of those Vortex Strike Eagles on my son’s AR. It has worked well for range work and plinking, but I would not put it into service on a hunt where failure would cause a great loss of a hunt or match. On the other hand, I have five trijicon scopes and one ACOG, and all have held up well to hard use on hunts, and have never failed to adjust properly, hold zero, or have any other issues. For me, that’s the difference between the two.

Thanks for your comments, Craig. The comparison was for reticle performance of two 24mm scopes during a period of low-light. My guess is most guys dismiss these offerings as not being practical for that time of day.

The scope's dependability will be well known in time by users.

In the last twenty years the low-end price-wise in optics had benefited greatly from better coatings and better glass. That is what is behind my interest--cheap scope performance improvement in low light. For me, specific low light performance's most important attribute in 2019 is reticle performance. Glass quality is not the issue it was in 1995. Things have changed for the better.

I liked the reticle and it worked well illuminated in low light. Yardage was short. Reading some of the You-tube comments, I was afraid it would not dial down sufficiently but that was not the case. Flare control, looking into a setting sun at 6x was also surprisingly well controlled.

Contracting out designs to factories out somewhere in Podunk for a build is a product of labor savings. Sooner or later the employees become skilled i.e. they learn the job. If Vortex continues to have issues with the Strike Eagle, then the design itself becomes suspect. As we know, management may choose to continue to make crap products like faulty turrets for reasons undisclosed--perhaps planned obsolescence or just profits.

SWFA is a good example of an inexpensive product with a design that just works. Mauser 98 actions are another. If PA is using the same factory that Vortex has been using then that is probably good news as hopefully in the manufacturing process the makers and employees learned something. Whether or not the design lends itself to durability is another question and my sample of one isn't going to answer that.

I concur with the Trijicon 1-4 w/triangle being the fastest thing I’ve seen in a LPV. It’s as fast as a dot for me. It’s never made me quit hunting in any legal light, either. Not saying it’s as bright as some 50mm, but it works for dual purpose better than anything I’ve tried.

Same. And it has a point--the triangle is easy to aim fine while obvious enough to be fast.

It shows up against any background--at least so far for me & no on/off needed. Noted that the black chevron on the PA had to be illuminated in the daylight to show up well for me against dark conifers like spruce with branches to the ground, .

The Trijicon has always looked interesting to me but I've not used one of them.

There's two scopes I used a bit last year that are somewhat related to this power range.

One is the NX8 1-8x24. For a fast reticle this one is really good. The reticle is pretty bold on the higher powers, maybe a bit to bold for fine work, and the illumination is daylight visible. For a "fast" scope at low powers it's awesome. Low light it suffers a bit as the illumination is too bright on the lowest setting, glass isn't bad but isn't great, and there are some optical tradeoff's above 6x but it's understandable. The reticle is bold enough on this one, and the illumination so bright, that I think around 5.5x with illumination off is it's best low light setting.

Second is the S&B Stratos 1.1-5x24 with the FD9 reticle. Pretty quick on the low powers. Reticle is fine enough in the center for detail work but the circle and outer bars make it fast enough to pick up quickly....and the illumination can be cranked up to daylight visible. I really like the FD9 reticle for hunting. In low light this one really performs. Small dot that can be set to very low illumination and the glass is really a difference maker. For me this one really accentuates the difference good glass can make in low light....comparing it to other scopes 1/2 hour past sunset looking at a broken background the difference really made me take notice. I do notice the smaller exit pupil when using it in low light so I have to really stay lined up, but the image I see is way better than it should be. For a lower power low light scope this one really is sweet, even with the smaller exit pupil and limited 5x power.

Looks like S&B has gotten stingy with the reticle choices on the website. A number of choices gone...at least today...

For jumping deer, an eye grabber works best for me. After about four hours of moving along slowly seeing nothing (michigan UP) a buck jumping can really rattle me. I need an obvious reticle center for quickies in the woods...gross motor skills and all. They seldom expose themselves long enough to think about it--like bucks everywhere bedding in a spot seemingly to make the maximum fool out of you. Have tried heavy 4's and 1's over the years but the Trij stands out for me. The 1-6x24 would have been preferred except for my desire to keep the weight down.

I do like a fine illuminated dot for distance, provided it dials way down in the evening like the Zeiss and S&B Polar have.

Paid the going rate 289.00 for the PA kisser. Carol really like it mounted on an AR last night. I am very, very happy that she prefers it over the S&B's...:)

I've accumulated three of the PA optics over the last couple years. The 3X prism with 7.62x39 ACSS reticle, the 5X prism with 5.56 ACSS reticle, and a 1-6x24 with the 5.56 ACSS reticle.

I'm not disappointed with any of them. They are a great value.

The prisms have big enough objective lenses that they do very well in low light. And of course all three have illuminated reticles.

The reticles on the 3X 7.62x39 ACSS , and the 1-6x24 5.56 ACSS both feature the chevron tip for precise aiming. I find I like that a lot. The 5X prism with the 5.56 ACSS has a 1-moa center dot. That works too, but I prefer the chevron tip.

Another really nice feature on the PA prisms, is the diopter adjustment ring. That's a big deal for older eyes.

appreciated

did not look at the 3x prism

The 3X has a 32mm obj lens. The 5X has a 36mm obj lens. They pull in a lot of light.

They have a 2.5x, as well. I have one on a beater AR. Seems to bridge between the 1x and 3/5x.....almost as fast with both eyes open, but enough magnification for quick 300 work.

The chevron is the ticket for me with the PAs.

But that said, I don't care for using two eyes open on powers higher than 1x. The 1x works better for me than even the 1.5x of the 1.75x Leupolds for deer...particularly that triangle on the Trij.

btt

While a big triangle/chevron seems fastest, the doughnut of death ain’t too shabby. I have a Leupold 1-4 w/ German #1 that’s doggone fast, as well.

Grinning, yeah, no doubt about the doughnut.

I seldom have to break a door to shoot a buck, so I do like the point on that chevron for fine-tuning a longer shot...:) Particularly in evening, post sunset. I was surprised that PA dialed down as low as it did for an inexpensive scope and certainly on the first setting it was not too bright at all for any evening hunting condition--as some of the other illuminated offerings have been that I have tried.

The #1 certainly shows up. IIRC, it was the most commonly used reticle for German & Russian snipers in WWII and 6x was the most common long range magnification--for the Germans at least. They didn't let low light stop slow them down, either. Objective sizes were relatively small and the coating technology used today gives us a big advantage. That said, the #1 user needs to either have more finesse or learn younger than I tried. I shot over the top of a very large racked running buck in Kansas with a #1 in a Leica and the scene keeps getting played back in my mind. Grim.... Did score a #11 reticle in an FFP however, which has a lower center post and made the shooting high issue go away for me.