anyone have this scope and if so, what are you observations/thoughts? Going to put it on a 16" recce style with rmr atop.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Trijicon Credo 2-10x36
- Thread starter RUTGERS95
- Start date
Rifle Scopes - Trijicon Credo 2-10x36 FFP Review
After a few months of searching for the perfect optic for my coyote rifle (Howa Mini 6.5 Grendel), I settled on Trijicon's new 2-10 Credo. I wanted something near 20oz in weight, FFP, illuminated with a usable MRAD tree-type reticle, a max power of around 10x, and a price tag in the mid-range...
www.snipershide.com
thank you, my initial search only had a few tidbits here or there. appreciate itRifle Scopes - Trijicon Credo 2-10x36 FFP Review
After a few months of searching for the perfect optic for my coyote rifle (Howa Mini 6.5 Grendel), I settled on Trijicon's new 2-10 Credo. I wanted something near 20oz in weight, FFP, illuminated with a usable MRAD tree-type reticle, a max power of around 10x, and a price tag in the mid-range...
I've had several of these Credos. The best feature on it is the Precision Tree reticle. Once I zeroed the scope I never had to dial. The reticle is thin , and perfect for longer precision with your 16" rifle. The only thing missing on this scope is side focus parallax but for 10x scopes it's really not needed .
why atop and not at a 45 to the side?
I know its the "new" thing
just curious.
Piles of discussion on Rokslide (but they are for sure fanboys of the scope.
Curious your thoughts, as I have thought about going this way vs the 1 - 6 or 1-8 too. at least on my 18"
I wish they would not have made the reticle so thin. The Weaver had better reticle for a 2-10 scope, for someone who is going to use 2x as much as 10x.
I just bought one 3 weeks ago and have it on a mk12. To me it's a great optic. It does not have parallax some guys will say thats a big no no. I had no problem zeroing at 100 with no movement of reticle. That's the furthest I've used it for though. I used the A.R.M.S clone correct rings and didn't have to lap or anything scope was good to go. The reticle though even at it's highest setting is very dim so not daylight bright what so ever. Clear glass, does what it needs to for me so far.
I have one and it has a good combination of features for the price, although a mountain has been made out of a molehill about its lack of side parallax.
The precision tree reticle is great, especially for an AR platform, but a little on the small side; the drops aren't very visible until about maybe 5x or so, depending on lighting conditions and how good your vision is. Below that, the crosshair is still useable, and the thick outer stadia lines help draw your eye, but if you live in a very wooded area, it's kind of easy to lose because the stadia lines don't extend out all the way across the scope. It's kind of a con or pro depending on your use case. The pro being that it doesn't take up much view on the low end. The illumination would be visible enough to help under the wooded area conditions though. If you live in a wide-open mountainous area, no problem.
The glass is good for its price range, definitely a step up from the vortex viper pst gen2 line of scopes and handles errant light sources pretty well compared to the aforementioned. There's good resolution, light transmission and no noticeable chromatic aberration.
However, compared to my other FFP scopes, this one seems particularly sensitive with the diopter setting and required noticeably less correction for a sharp reticle than other scopes, which initially caused me a little trouble with image quality. So, you really need to take your time when setting it up, only making very small adjustments in between checking the reticle. It's easy to overcorrect and still have a sharp reticle, but a soft image. When you take your time, you'll get a pretty sharp reticle and image to infinity. I think this is where most people have had problems with its lack of side parallax. You'll definitely want to mark your diopter setting after you've got it set perfectly.
The precision tree reticle is great, especially for an AR platform, but a little on the small side; the drops aren't very visible until about maybe 5x or so, depending on lighting conditions and how good your vision is. Below that, the crosshair is still useable, and the thick outer stadia lines help draw your eye, but if you live in a very wooded area, it's kind of easy to lose because the stadia lines don't extend out all the way across the scope. It's kind of a con or pro depending on your use case. The pro being that it doesn't take up much view on the low end. The illumination would be visible enough to help under the wooded area conditions though. If you live in a wide-open mountainous area, no problem.
The glass is good for its price range, definitely a step up from the vortex viper pst gen2 line of scopes and handles errant light sources pretty well compared to the aforementioned. There's good resolution, light transmission and no noticeable chromatic aberration.
However, compared to my other FFP scopes, this one seems particularly sensitive with the diopter setting and required noticeably less correction for a sharp reticle than other scopes, which initially caused me a little trouble with image quality. So, you really need to take your time when setting it up, only making very small adjustments in between checking the reticle. It's easy to overcorrect and still have a sharp reticle, but a soft image. When you take your time, you'll get a pretty sharp reticle and image to infinity. I think this is where most people have had problems with its lack of side parallax. You'll definitely want to mark your diopter setting after you've got it set perfectly.
on top is more effective for me and I don't want to change my axis angle
great responses guys and thank you!!!!!
I like what it has to offer by all accounts and parallax is overrated on a 2-10 I feel anyway
I like what it has to offer by all accounts and parallax is overrated on a 2-10 I feel anyway
Thats why I got it I can't remember the channel I watched but they did a review with it on an mk12 with 2 younger military-looking dudes. They said a DMR is not a sniper rifle, nor is it a precision tool. That the ranges you would use an mk12 in my case parallax or the lack there of shouldn't be a problem. At least when it comes to killing something the size of a man.
I hit a basketball sized target at 800M last week with my 18" 223 on the third round.
I had zeroed the scope, dialed for 500, hit an ipsc first round, then took it to 8. Went to 9 but my dope was starting to fail me.
Still pretty good to go from zero to 900m within about 7 shots.
I love it.
Some folks bitch about the lack of parallax but it isn't a noticeable issue.
I had zeroed the scope, dialed for 500, hit an ipsc first round, then took it to 8. Went to 9 but my dope was starting to fail me.
Still pretty good to go from zero to 900m within about 7 shots.
I love it.
Some folks bitch about the lack of parallax but it isn't a noticeable issue.
Last edited:
It is important keeping head in the right place and looking through the scope in same place every time when you can't adjust parallax. Otherwise you will move POI around for ranges its not set for. Its nice to be able to adjust that out, but with more attention, or less care if you are shooting tight, it is not an insurmountable problem.
Thats who it was I don't know there back ground I was going to subscribe to them but for some reason didn't. When I was looking for an optic that would look right on my mk12 that video came right up.
Not unless you’re willing to consider Chinese mfr’d optics. The Athlon Helos BTR Gen2 2-12x42 is surprisingly good and so far the only company to come out with a truly usable reticle at 2x, been hoping for a Japanese OEM of this scope from someone. If Leupold ever comes out with a usable reticle for their new 2-10 it may be worth taking a look at, until then you either have to live with SFP or the Credo or spend big $$$$ on the new March 1.5-15x42
I keep going back and forth about trying out one of these or a Tract Toric 2.5-15. I've almost bought the Credo about a dozen times but didn't follow through. A few weeks ago their was one NIB for $750. Only hold up is the lack of parallax. On the Tract its a non illuminated FFP. If only these two could have a scope baby together.
See my thread on Athlon. I wouldn't touch them with a 10 ft pole.
They are knowingly retailing glass with mfg imperfections in it. They admitted it to me on a phone call. They know they have an issue. When you turn the illumination on in many of their scopes it looks like you blew red pixie dust into the scope.
Does that surprised you from a manufacturer that puts their name on a chinesium OEM and peddles it?
They’re all the same. Athlon was flavor of the month for junk until enough people had them fail. Now I think we’re doing Arken and Burris.
Normally I wouldn't either, I do not like supporting CCP and would gladly pay more for almost any other country; however, the severe lack of options in this category (MPVO) almost forced me into trying one.
Like what bmxer said, we shouldn't be surprised. Apparently I got the golden child optic as my glass is better than a lot of $1k glass I've seen and illumination works well, I mostly bought it for the reticle.
Does anyone know what the parallax distance is on these? I can’t find it on the other thread, on any of the Trijicon literature or specs, or any of the dealer specs I’ve looking at.
I ran the numbers through a parallax error calculator using both 100 and 150 yards and the error really isn’t that bad. I’d be putting it on a hunting rifle that wouldn’t be used beyond 600 yards.
I ran the numbers through a parallax error calculator using both 100 and 150 yards and the error really isn’t that bad. I’d be putting it on a hunting rifle that wouldn’t be used beyond 600 yards.
I think I’m going to give one a try. I like it’s specs overall more than the Tract I think.
Honestly thats why I got mine. Optics planet had it marked way down before christmas. For me to be more clone correct and get the scope vs LPVO look with such small mag I had the choice of a nightforce, and leupold. Both rather pricey.
When I emailed Trijcon about it before they said it was 100 yards and added that all of their non-AO variables are fixed at 100 yards.
I've had this scope for a couple years now in MIL tree. It's a bomb proof scope, the lack of a parallax adjustment is more of a blessing than a hindrance. It's been on a 6.5cm 16" upper and recently moved it to a 16" 308 upper. It's taken hits, maintained zero, and is rock solid in the seekins precision mount. The thin reticle doesn't bother me and it's easier to use this scope on 2x with both eyes open than it is my PA 1x micro prism I have on my WASR with an attero mount. I could go on about the scope but really it's a good scope and I don't think the new Leupold is gonna be better other than better glass quality. I just wish it had locking top turret
FWIW: the primary arms GLx 2.5-10 is a good option to consider too, I've used both SXS and still prefer my triji, but for the price, the GLx brings some game to the table and has that adjustable parallax if it's a requirement. Again, having shot both SXS, I think I prefer the fixed parallax and not having to mess with it.
FWIW: the primary arms GLx 2.5-10 is a good option to consider too, I've used both SXS and still prefer my triji, but for the price, the GLx brings some game to the table and has that adjustable parallax if it's a requirement. Again, having shot both SXS, I think I prefer the fixed parallax and not having to mess with it.
Attachments
Last edited:
I'd go burris veracity 2-10 before chinese but do recognize that gap is narrowing
The MK5 has a lock on the elevation turret. Also has parallax so it’s not just better glass with that one. It’s what I’d be buying if it was offered with a decent reticle.
The GLX line is either Phillipino or Chinesium and not even comparable to a Credo as far as reliability.
The Phillipino made XTRII has a pretty good reliability record. I don't think Trijicon sells anywhere close to enough of these to say it has establish that kind of reliability record. Although the Weaver Tactical line is pretty much the only line {most companies included} that I have never gotten a bad scope from. But obviously in the Trijicon the erectors for windage and elevation adjustment are going to be different. I don't see much tracking data on them either.
The GLx line is Phillipines. I'm not saying that it'd be as reliable as a 2-10 credo, but my experience with both the credo and the 2.5-10 & 6-24 GLx makes me think that the GLx line is significantly better than its being given credit for. Theyre not Chineseium, they work, and they track as good as any other scope in their price point and are as reliable as any other scope in the same price range.
For the budget minded, you can get 2 2.5-10 GLx scopes for the price of a 2-10 Credo, and you can get 2 credos for the price of the new leupold. For that reason alone it should be obvious that yeah, they're not in the same tiers for optical quality.
Phillipino is better than chinesium but they still have a high failure rate across the board. They’re not anywhere near reliable as Japanese scopes and never have been.
The GLX 2.5-10 is $750 and the Credo 2-10 is under $950 a lot of places so I’m not sure where you’re coming up with that math.
I'll give you price, they've gone up a fair bit. I remember buying my 6-24 for $650 and remember the 2.5-10 being cheaper yet. I bought my credo for around that $950 mark.
Where is this objective data on failure rate?
I have one on my 16 inch Grendel deer hunting rifle. Works great. Very versatile optic.
Hopefully this helps
Attachments
100% what I found too. I just got mine and there are two "nodes" in the travel that will make the reticle focus clear, but one of them will blurry/soften the sight picture. I discovered this by setting the reticle focus indoors on a bright white wall. All my scopes require the eye piece to be dialed out 3-4 revolutions. (Happens when one gets older) I assumed the case with this scope. Went out to 1000yds to evaluate and found the blurry sight picture. Dialed the diopter again and found the first node where the reticle and image were clear. I only needed 1.5 revolutions for this setting.
This is why I highly recommend fine tuning (essentially what you did at 1000) your diopter for all scopes, the old method (dare I say archaic) of using blank wall or sky at infinity and highest mag really needs to be addressed better, especially with FFP optics.
0
Off subject but adjusting binoculars for your eyes is also important.
Same experience with XTRIII 3.3-18. Except for me the diopter is usually not turned out very far out, but ihad to turn it way out to get a good image and clear reticle on that scope.
Off subject but adjusting binoculars for your eyes is also important.
Since this thread is kinda resurrected, I will add my .$02
The credo is a solid optic, especially in the $7-800.00 price range.
Some guys prefer the Nightforce 2.5-10 x 40 which is not ffp. But performs very well.
The credo is a solid optic, especially in the $7-800.00 price range.
Some guys prefer the Nightforce 2.5-10 x 40 which is not ffp. But performs very well.
Still waiting for a reticle that works at 2x, until then the scope doesn't have much appeal for me, but with the right reticle it would replace my chinesium Athlon
Thats not what others have said previously, so you’re saying that at 2x the reticle is bright enough to be seen during daylight sun? It’s possible that Trijicon improved the illumination in newer versions but would like to hear some additional thoughts
For me I have found that the reticle works quite well illuminated or not at 2x.
