Just mere life is not victory, just mere death is not defeat.

Search The Knowledge

Trijicon SRO - Preuse impressions

The Trijicon SRO came out earlier this year and I have been looking to pick up a 1moa version, which has proven to be very difficult to source.  I have, however, found one and will be doing some testing with it, against its older, smaller counterpart the RMR and against its number one competitor the Aimpoint ACRO.

This SRO will go on a Thompson_Leh Glock 19 Gen3 slide which I have been testing out.  It's tolerances are very good and I trust it remove all the issues which an MOS plate system, or unknown tolerances, would offer.  The TL slide comes with specific optic screws and the OEM Trijicon screws should not be used, so they can be left in the box.

The SRO and RMR have the same pedigree, but the SRO fixes a lot of the issues the RMR never knew it had.  Specifically the battery compartment being on top of the optic, which allows for the optic to be zeroed and not removed to replace the battery.  It uses the same battery as the RMR the CR2032, which per Trijicon will last for more than a year on setting #4 (out of 8).  This is completely inline with the Aimpoint ACRO, which people seem to complain about having battery issues (since it uses a smaller battery) but that's a completely different topic I'll cover at a later time.

One of the issues the RMR had was the battery randomly getting knocked out of place and/or losing contact.  People used to shim it with various objects, and I ended up using a Battlewerx anti-flicker plate which worked exceedingly well.  So if you have an RMR of any kind (I know that the type-2's fixed the flicker issue), you should get one, the fact is that better safe than sorry, especially with a carry gun.  The SRO has a covered belly with the same footprint (or within .5mm on all sides) since the battery is required to be put through the top, this helps resolve a lot of issues the RMR had.

The SRO has the same button setup as the RMR though with one or two little tweaks.  While the RMR only has a lock out mode, the SRO also has this mode but also a lock in mode.  The plus and minus buttons do not have the same tactile feedback as the SRO does, which a muted click.  The SRO has the same type of scannable stamp with a serial number, and bible verse print on the side of it.

How does it stack up against the ACRO?  The ACRO is really on a different level, as its a self contained dot system, and even though its a big block (on top of a glock) it has a really crisp dot to apply against the target.  However, the ACRO only comes in 3.5moa, which I personally do not like.  I want a 1moa dot on all my RDS setups, even rifle.  The dot is a scalpel and it should be used as one or else why have it?  The SRO's glass starts further up in front of your face, and allows you to see a really big window before you hit the target.  I was able to consistently, in dry fire, pick up the 1moa dot repeatedly while doing fast draws.  During dryfiring, I continue to draw and point the gun the way I have always done, with the front sight post being my focus point during the draw.  With that same draw stroke I am able to pick up the dot on the SRO each time.  I need more time on the SRO to see if it competes with the ACRO in terms of speed, but just doing dryfire I believe it may be very close.  Also, the "bubble" of the SRO glass is very easy to see through, its not as thick (to the naked eye) as the rim of the RMR.

As you can see the glass of the SRO is slightly larger than the ACRO, and the SRO is slightly taller.  I still need to do a bunch of shooting with both optics to see what exactly this does in terms of application.

I know others have done various testing with the SRO and rated it not for duty application.  I believe that just dryfiring with it and getting used to it I can agree with that assessment, main factor being the open emitter which I do not believe is applicable to duty use.  However, I believe that the SRO may be destined for a concealed carry role in some capacity, but I still need to do some end user testing to see if it is in fact a viable concealed option.

As it looks now, the SRO is definitely the successor to the RMR which we all believed it was going to be.  I want to see the real extent of application the SRO can manage to do, from concealed carry to NVG application.  Once I get more time on the optic I will post my findings, good or bad.

If you want to see the dot image comparison between all three check out my video on my instagram page.