Competition Optics Red Dot Sights Reviews

Holosun 507COMP versus Trijicon SRO

Is the Holosun 507COMP the Trijicon SRO killer? A little head to head comparison might shed some light on the answer to that question.

I did say I would follow up with a comparison between the Holosun 507COMP and the Trijicon SRO very soon in my first impressions review of the Holosun 507COMP, didn’t I? That’s right. I did. I simply could not help myself. The thing is, it is no secret that I am a Trijicon SRO enjoyer. It’s been my absolute favorite competition pistol mountable optic for some time now. I’ve run an SRO on the H&K VP9 Match, the Staccato P, the CZ Shadow 2, and even on the CZ Czechmate. However, it’s also not a secret that I enjoy Holosun pistol mounted optics because they are very well built for their respective purposes and their multi-reticle technology offers several advantages over a plain dot. Even so, more often than not I opt for Trijicon optics on my defensive and competition pistols. That said, I’m particularly intrigued by the Holosun 507COMP. So much so in fact, that it has replaced the Trijicon SRO on the Shadow 2, which happens to be the pistol I primarily compete with. In my opinion, there is good reason to give the Holosun 507COMP a fair shake and I believe a comparison between the two will make it pretty obvious why.

One of the differences between the two optics discussed in the initial review of the Holosun 507COMP is that it is noticeably less expensive than the Trijicon SRO. As of writing the average street price for the Holosun, which is new to the market, is about $380 compared to the Trijicon’s average street price of $555. Even looking at the lowest prices I’ve seen to date, the 507COMP comes in at $365 compared to $444 or $469 depending on the SRO variant. It’s possible that the 507COMP will be available at an even lower price once the initial demand for it drops. However, the SRO might also see a price drop depending on demand shifts on the SRO given Trijicon’s new pistol mounted optics (like the RMR HD). Nevertheless, that’s all speculation. What isn’t speculation is that the Holosun 507COMP is available now at a lower and much more attractive price point. In terms of price, I have to give the win to the Holosun.

As we all know, price isn’t everything. This is arguably most true in the competitive shooting sports market where avid competitors frequently drop enough coin on a blaster to rival a car loan. At the end of day, competitors are more often than looking for a competitive advantage. That means the equipment has to perform. Reliability and durability are certainly nice, but that is often secondary to raw performance. In terms of optics or sighting systems in the context of competitive action pistol shooting sports, that translates into faster and more accurate target acquisition and shot placement. This is why competitors, including myself, tend to have a strong disposition to favor large windows and dots (up to a point) on their pistol mounted optics. With that in mind, let’s take a look at the lenses and “dots” on these two optics.

Starting with the lenses, both optics offer a large window, or viewport if you will. The Holosun 507COMP window is rectangular in shape and measures 0.87″ tall and 1.1″ wide. In comparison, the Trijicon SRO window is almost circular in shape and measures 0.98″ tall and 0.89″ wide. In other words, the 507COMP is wider whereas the SRO is taller. In my opinion, a taller window is preferable to a wider one. This is because the dot, or reticle in the case of the 507COMP, moves vertically under recoil and that vertical movement provides invaluable feedback. As such, a taller window provides more feedback than a wider one. Is the vertical difference of 0.09 inches significant enough to matter? That’s hard for me to say with absolute certainty, but I lean ever so slightly towards yes. As a result, in terms of window size, I have to give the win to the Trijicon.

As I mentioned already, in action pistol shooting sports a larger aiming reference point is preferable up to a point. For a deeper discussion on this, please refer to this previous blog post. The gist of it is that larger reference points are easier to perceive visually which in turn allows for faster, albeit coarser, aiming and shooting. Diminishing returns begin when the aiming reference becomes larger than the acceptable impact area on a target. For sports like USPSA and IDPA, the SRO 5 MOA dot variant does very well and is the variant most commonly preferred vy participants. However, some folks, including myself, would prefer an even larger dot even though larger dots make dialing a precise zero on the optic more challenging. Based on this, the Holosun 507COMP’s multi-reticle system obliterates the single dot aiming reference on the Trijicon SRO. One can leverage the 2MOA center dot only to dial in a very precise zero which can only be bested by the SRO 1 MOA variant and then configure the reticle to use the largest reticle configuration for the given competitive application. While I’m still testing a few of the settings on the Holosun, I’m noticing the 20 MOA ring only configuration lends itself well for IDPA and USPSA matches while the 8 MOA ring works very well for Steel Challenge. This may not be as big of a deal to folks who have specific pistols with specific optics for different competitive applications. However, I have to give the versatility of the Holosun 507COMP the win in this aspect.

One thing that is sometimes a sticking point for folks is the tinting effect the lens coatings have on optics. Too much of a certain hue can be problematic for some folks. Whether that problem really impacts one’s visual performance or it’s just personal preference is perhaps a topic for another discussion. However, I will note that the tint is more prevalent and darker on the Holosun 507COMP. I’d also argue that image distortion due to magnification also appears to be more prevalent on the Holosun 507COMP. I speculate that these lens quality differences may have something to do with the price difference, but that is neither here nor there. In terms of clarity and lens quality, I have to give the win to the Trijicon SRO.

Another notable difference is visible in the physical dimensions between the two optics. Aside from the SRO being slightly taller even though both optics share the same RMR mounting footprint, the SRO has a protruding overhang that results in an overall length of 2.2″ compared to the 507COMP’s 1.77″ overall length. This matters for some pistols as the SROs overhang has been known to cause pistol reliability issues when it interferes with cartridge ejection when it hangs too far forward over a pistol’s ejection port. While this is entirely pistol dependent, I have to give the dimensional win to the 507COMP as the lack of an overhang shouldn’t interfere with any pistol’s cartridge ejection.

Even though durability is a secondary concern for most pistol competitors, it is still a valid concern. While having a track record of being more durable than several other pistol mountable optics in the market, the SRO still has a track record of breaking or failing after a significant impact, such as being dropped. At this point, I don’t have sufficient experience with the 507COMP nor have I seen durability testing to suggest that 507COMP will take a beating better than the SRO. Nonetheless, the track record of Holosun’s 507 product line suggests that the 507COMP will be more durable than the Trijicon SRO. As I mentioned in the initial review, I’m not about to torture test the Holosun, but I am hopeful. Since I don’t have enough data to support my hypothesis, I will not declare a winner between the two optics on this front.

I’m still not certain that the Holosun 507COMP is the Trijicon SRO killer some are suggesting. Comparing the two optics, however, I think the Holosun 507COMP is a very promising competitive pistol mountable optic that, if nothing else, deserves serious consideration. I’m not about to begin actively replacing the SROs I have mounted on other pistols, but I’m going to hold off from picking up other competition optics for a good while. At least until, I declare either the Trijicon or the Holosun as a clear winner for the activities I participate in. Honestly, it is very possible that I might arrive at a conclusion where one optic is better at some of the activities I participate in while the other is better suited for others. If I counted wins correctly in this comparison post, the Holosun edged out the Trijicon. That said and given the SRO’s track record, the SRO is not out of the fight. At least not for me.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.