Skip to main content

I’ve read everything I could find here about the MRO, but still have questions. I recently bought an LMT mlok MRP for my patrol rifle and want to get an optic. I’ve messed with the EOtech and it was ok, but I didn’t trust it much. I’ve pretty much narrowed it down to an MRO or Aimpoint Comp m5. A lot of people have complained about the parallax on the MRO. I looked through one and the dot moved all over the place with the slightest head movement. Does this actually hinder real use? Has anyone noticed it during real use? Is the Aimpoint product better than Trijicons offering? 

Original Post

This is one of the advantages of the RDS.  The bullet goes where the red dot is when the weapon is fired assuming it's zeroed and you have a proper trigger pull.  

Aimpoint has been in business since 1975.  Trijicon since 1981.  That they are both in business says a lot about their products.  

Have you done a 'net search for articles comparing the two?

Perhaps you can better define your application.

The one MRO I have does seem to exhibit those issues if I don’t get my eye where it should be, like in certain asymmetric firing positions.  It has not been as extreme as others have noted, however, and this is an early MRO.

Having said that, the Comp M5 is (to me) a superior optic in every way.  Clarity, mounting options, battery type, you name it.  Especially if you intend to ever use a magnifier.  

I’ve got a Comp M5 on my go-to gun, a KAC CQB Mod2.  The MRO is on a spare beater upper in the back of the safe, if that’s any indicator as to how I rank them.

Thanks for the replies. My primary application will be an optic for my patrol rifle. It will lie in my trunk most of the time until I have to use it or train with it.  I’ve done searches on m4carbine and ar15 but it seems like most commenting haven’t actually used them in a capacity other than static range. Or the ones who have have said they returned their MRO or sold it because they didn’t like the view. There wasn’t much information on how the parallax affected their shooting. The last thing I want is an inferior optic that will throw a shot because I wasn’t able to get the perfect cheek weld in a stressful event. Maybe I’m overthinking it. 

It doesn’t to me, but I’ve been using Micros ever since Larue made a mount for a carbine. 

I would not feel under-equipped with an MRO, I just like my Aimpoints.  The newer MROs I’ve taken a quick look through seem to have fixed any of those early reports which might have been overblown anyway.

Many people do finds larger “tubes” (or rectangles) easier to use for passive nighttime use with head-mounted NVGs, but that’s such a narrow use case that I personally don’t give it much consideration.

Not necessarily a parallax issue, but I received a new Trijicon MRO HD model and there seems to be a reticle issue.  MAC has a video review of the MRO HD and describes the same issue starting at 16:15.  

MAC Review of Trijicon MRO HD

https://youtu.be/sFZu1AonOtw

Basically, when the target has a bright background, the reticle has all sorts of anomalies.  This occurred for me when MRO was in off position, dot position, and circle dot position.

[img]https://live.staticflickr.com/...19117_4d1429ab46.jpg[/img]

Last edited by Community Member
Bucknut posted:

Not necessarily a parallax issue, but I received a new Trijicon MRO HD model and there seems to be a reticle issue.  MAC has a video review of the MRO HD and describes the same issue starting at 16:15.  

MAC Review of Trijicon MRO HD

https://youtu.be/sFZu1AonOtw

Basically, when the target has a bright background, the reticle has all sorts of anomalies.  This occurred for me when MRO was in off position, dot position, and circle dot position.

[img]https://live.staticflickr.com/...19117_4d1429ab46.jpg[/img]

have you found any additional information on the reticle issue? I was considering an MRO or another CompM2 for a rifle sitting with no optic currently. 

ComradeBoris posted:
Bucknut posted:

Not necessarily a parallax issue, but I received a new Trijicon MRO HD model and there seems to be a reticle issue.  MAC has a video review of the MRO HD and describes the same issue starting at 16:15.  

MAC Review of Trijicon MRO HD

https://youtu.be/sFZu1AonOtw

Basically, when the target has a bright background, the reticle has all sorts of anomalies.  This occurred for me when MRO was in off position, dot position, and circle dot position.

[img]https://live.staticflickr.com/...19117_4d1429ab46.jpg[/img]

have you found any additional information on the reticle issue? I was considering an MRO or another CompM2 for a rifle sitting with no optic currently. 

This is the message I received back from Trijicon.

"Thank you for your patronage of Trijicon® products! What you are seeing there is a reflection of the LED structure, which is a larger size than our other red dots due to the complex reticle. This is inherent in all red dot sights when it is subject to a “perfect storm” of lighting conditions. It in no way affects the accuracy of the optic, and when used in almost any other lighting conditions, this will not be present."

There are others who have replicated this issue with the reticle.   I believe that this will be present in all MRO HD models (until/unless) Trijicon develops a workaround.  The "perfect storm" of lighting conditions occurs more often than suggested.   It was enough of a distraction that I returned the optic.

I don't know if this is relevant to the topic, but I have approximately 140 MROs in service in my organization, and we're definitely experiencing some issues with having them on pool rifles.  We're in the middle of an evaluation right now where I have known good shooters who are managing 3" groups at 100yds with shitty UMC 55gr shot out of Rock River AR-15s that haven't been maintained particularly well, but from one shooter to the next, we are seeing POI shifts of as much as 8".  I know there will be some variation from one shooter to the next without zeroing the gun to the individual, but that much POI shift at that distance is crazy, and it means at 200 yards some shooters will be entirely off target.

I know the 'A' answer is to issue individual rifles, but that ain't happening due to the associated cost.

Ten years ago we were using Trijicon Reflex sights and we weren't seeing these issues, and we had pool rifles then, too.

Trijicon makes good stuff, no doubt, but they are not a red dot company.  Their experience with battery-powered optics pales in comparison to Aimpoint, and while Trij is continuously improving (example: RMR Type 2), they simply do not have the expertise with battery-powered optics that Aimpoint does.  I wonder how much of our issue is because the MRO design just hasn't been around long enough to work out all the bugs.

Pat_E posted:

Casey, are these pool rifles for Patrol, or do you have any kind of Patrol Rifle program?  Full disclosure, I've never been a fan of 'pool rifles,' given the differing zeroing possibilities for those who handled the rifle last, and for exactly what you ID'd as an issue, the varying POIs.

Are you using the same type of mounts throughout your fleet of rifles?

Private security company.  I despise pool weapons.  We used to have individual-issue rifles but abandoned that practice about three years ago because it was cheaper to have fewer weapons that are handed off at shift turnover (both in terms of saving time arming up and disarming at turnover and in weapons maintenance costs).

We use two different mounts—one the OEM Trijicon lower-third mount, and Geissele 1.93" mounts on some rifles which have inline thermal optics.  We're seeing the issues on both setups.  I was personally involved in the transition from our previous ACOGs to the MROs, and I know we installed things correctly—properly applied threadlocker, manufacturer torque specs, and witness marks.  I don't think the issue is with the mounts.

Yes the MRO is not parallax free. Do you have any BUIS on your pool guns? I find that running a "fixed" front sight (either A frame or always flipped up folder) basically eliminates the parallax. If I'm shooting at any kind of distance, not up close and fast, I find that centering the dot over the front sight eliminates any eye out of alignment parallax issues. For what it's worth, I've seem at least that much shift with different shooters running IRON sights. That's what you deal with on pool guns. They will be zeroed to whatever eyeball did the initial zero. I've had to deal with an 80+ Officer pool rifle program, and had to deal with this all the time. I HATE pool guns. 

Last edited by Community Member

Sample of only one, but I haven't had issues with mine shooting out to 100 and 135 yards.  It's on a rifle intended more for close distance shooting anyway, and I have other rifles for anything other than typical CQB distances.

One of the notes of interest I found in the linked Sage Dynamics video was Aaron Cowan stating that he probably should have used the same rifle to conduct his tests with both optics.  I'm not saying that a polar opposite result would happen, but removing all other factors from the equation is just sound practice.

msstate56 posted:

Yes the MRO is not parallax free. Do you have any BUIS on your pool guns? I find that running a "fixed" front sight (either A frame or always flipped up folder) basically eliminates the parallax. If I'm shooting at any kind of distance, not up close and fast, I find that centering the dot over the front sight eliminates any eye out of alignment parallax issues. For what it's worth, I've seem at least that much shift with different shooters running IRON sights. That's what you deal with on pool guns. They will be zeroed to whatever eyeball did the initial zero. I've had to deal with an 80+ Officer pool rifle program, and had to deal with this all the time. I HATE pool guns. 

Yes, most of the guns have fixed front sights.  We’re going to do some more evaluation in-house in the next couple weeks.  Presenting Molon’s data to my department head got me a response of “this is from the internet.  I can find anything on the internet.”  So, I have to recreate those results myself to get any traction at all.

Add Reply

Post
Copyright Lightfighter Tactical Forum 2002-2020
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×