View Full Version : Trijicon mro or aimpoint t2
Which one would you buy? And doe's one work better than the other or made better?? I favor aimpoint.
I'd personally buy the Aimpoint. I don't have any experience with the MRO. That being said, I know what I'm getting with the Aimpoint: proven reliability.
TexasAggie2005
09-11-15, 08:36
I have not had any problems with Aimpoints, other than my slight astigmatism issue.
With that being said, I have an MRO on order to try out.
Aimpoint has set the standard for RDS, while Trijicon has made several attempts at RDS that have met with limited success. Even knowing this, if I had a need for a new RDS, I'd be tempted to try out the MRO.
If you favor Aimpoint and the the money is not an issue get the T2 and be happy. I know that the Aimpoint is a proven product and I know that there is a lot of HOPE for the MRO but it isn't proven yet.
Having said the above I preordered a MRO. The price point vs "projected" performance was good enough for me to take the gamble. Personally, I would not be able to pull the trigger on a T2 at the moment, too many other irons in the fire. For me it was a MRO or no new optic in my price range.
BrigandTwoFour
09-11-15, 19:21
I don't have either, but if I was buying right now it would be the MRO. The Aimpoint has a lot of followers (and rightly so); but, like Glock guys, they sometimes get too insular and focused on their preference and expect everyone else to do the same.
Trijicon doesn't make crap, and everything I've seen so far about the MRO is very favorable.
Singlestack Wonder
09-11-15, 20:51
I would wait for a while before buying a Trijicon MRO. Once a lot are out in the field and in use, see what the reports say. I personally hope Trijicon gets the MRO right as it would be great to have a quality RDS built in the US at a reasonable price.
I'm interested in the mro. Be great if someone could post a review after giving it some use! It's the price really that's peaked my interest. If it can compete with the t2 in quality and durability I'm going in the direction of the mro.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
As much as I love my Aimpoints, I'd be willing to give the MRO a go, once there are more real world experience. It's tough to say no at that price point.
Check out Travis Haley's thoughts on it on youtube. Seemed to like it. It does have a bigger objective. 25mm IIRC? So I guess if that makes a difference to ya
heres what it looks like looking through the mro if anybody was wondering, it sits higher than an xps and a t1.
http://i356.photobucket.com/albums/oo5/toppyjai/IMG_20150914_223756_zpsabxwyfwn.jpg (http://s356.photobucket.com/user/toppyjai/media/IMG_20150914_223756_zpsabxwyfwn.jpg.html)
TexasAggie2005
09-15-15, 15:47
heres what it looks like looking through the mro if anybody was wondering, it sits higher than an xps and a t1.
http://i356.photobucket.com/albums/oo5/toppyjai/IMG_20150914_223756_zpsabxwyfwn.jpg (http://s356.photobucket.com/user/toppyjai/media/IMG_20150914_223756_zpsabxwyfwn.jpg.html)
Who did you get it from?
gilbertsguns off ebay. i received it in 3 days after making payment. the other side is marked PSA 18:18 (You, Lord, keep my lamp burning; my God turns my darkness into light)
http://i356.photobucket.com/albums/oo5/toppyjai/IMG_20150914_223009_zpsmxh2ujgi.jpg (http://s356.photobucket.com/user/toppyjai/media/IMG_20150914_223009_zpsmxh2ujgi.jpg.html)
http://i356.photobucket.com/albums/oo5/toppyjai/IMG_20150914_223120_zpsp0edx0z7.jpg (http://s356.photobucket.com/user/toppyjai/media/IMG_20150914_223120_zpsp0edx0z7.jpg.html)
http://i356.photobucket.com/albums/oo5/toppyjai/IMG_20150914_223100_zps0uhdyuby.jpg (http://s356.photobucket.com/user/toppyjai/media/IMG_20150914_223100_zps0uhdyuby.jpg.html)
TexasAggie2005
09-15-15, 16:58
Cool. I pre-ordered one from Botach (https://www.botach.com/trijicon-mro-w-american-defense-tac-lever-quick-release-mount-package-deal/), who had it listed as "Taking orders now, Will Ship On or by 09/14/2015". And now apparently they are closed on the 14-15 for the Jewish New Year and no shipment yet. Though they charged my card on Friday when I placed the pre-order. Pretty pissed, as I was wanting in time for a class this upcoming weekend.
KalashniKEV
09-15-15, 20:28
http://i356.photobucket.com/albums/oo5/toppyjai/IMG_20150914_223009_zpsmxh2ujgi.jpg (http://s356.photobucket.com/user/toppyjai/media/IMG_20150914_223009_zpsmxh2ujgi.jpg.html)
This, to me, is a very useful shot.
Everyone has been comparing the MRO to the T1 because it's a mini-RDS, but it sits taller than a full sized, full performance XPS.
(...with a superior reticle and a common battery)
Thank you.
Cool. I pre-ordered one from Botach (https://www.botach.com/trijicon-mro-w-american-defense-tac-lever-quick-release-mount-package-deal/), who had it listed as "Taking orders now, Will Ship On or by 09/14/2015". And now apparently they are closed on the 14-15 for the Jewish New Year and no shipment yet. Though they charged my card on Friday when I placed the pre-order. Pretty pissed, as I was wanting in time for a class this upcoming weekend.
Same kind of thing here. Pre-ordered through SWFA on 8/16. Have a two day class this Friday and Saturday. Was told that they would start shipping on 9-1, then 9-14 and called today and they have none in stock as of yet. Frustrating when you see others having access to them. Now that I know that it won't be here for this weekend's training, I'll get it - when I get it and the pressure is off.
Same kind of thing here. Pre-ordered through SWFA on 8/16. Have a two day class this Friday and Saturday. Was told that they would start shipping on 9-1, then 9-14 and called today and they have none in stock as of yet. Frustrating when you see others having access to them. Now that I know that it won't be here for this weekend's training, I'll get it - when I get it and the pressure is off.
I had the same experience.
I ended up canceling my pre-order and bought a T2 QD mount combo. Shipped right away. Installed on rifle. GTG.
Also, theres already tons of quality QD mounts out for the T2.
I was hoping to have a 100% "Made in USA" rifle, but I got tired of being dicked around with ship times. Lost my business.
This, to me, is a very useful shot.
Everyone has been comparing the MRO to the T1 because it's a mini-RDS, but it sits taller than a full sized, full performance XPS.
(...with a superior reticle and a common battery)
Thank you.
you're very welcome bro! glad that I helped you and all other potential mro purchasers wondering the height compared to a common optic when mounted.
bigjack7440
09-18-15, 13:05
Any vortex sprac2 users
I love mine and I own a t1 and a t2
Nice optic for $200 . I used the Fortis mount
Sent from my rocket ship using
My cell'y
Leaveammoforme
09-18-15, 14:31
Any vortex sprac2 users
I love mine and I own a t1 and a t2
Nice optic for $200 . I used the Fortis mount
Sent from my rocket ship using
My cell'y
A guy at last carbine match was running one. He lost his dot after 1st shot on 3rd stage.
I handed him my bag-o-batteries and sent him to a different bay to swap it out.
When he returned I noticed my 2032 pack was unopened. I asked what was up. He said he removed/re-installed battery and dot came back. But now he couldn't adjust the brightness.
I know he'll send it in for warranty and probably get a replacement but that is worthless if optic craps at the wrong time.
I think Vortex makes decent RDS but they are nowhere near Aimpoint levels.
I expect the MRO will fall between EOTech and Aimpoint on the hierarchy chart.
bigjack7440
09-18-15, 15:11
A guy at last carbine match was running one. He lost his dot after 1st shot on 3rd stage.
I handed him my bag-o-batteries and sent him to a different bay to swap it out.
When he returned I noticed my 2032 pack was unopened. I asked what was up. He said he removed/re-installed battery and dot came back. But now he couldn't adjust the brightness.
I know he'll send it in for warranty and probably get a replacement but that is worthless if optic craps at the wrong time.
I think Vortex makes decent RDS but they are nowhere near Aimpoint levels.
I expect the MRO will fall between EOTech and Aimpoint on the hierarchy chart.
I 100% agree the Vortex is not the quality of the $750 Aimpoint no doubt there .
I haven't had any issues with mine and I've ran it on my KAC SR15 MOD2 for 300 rounds
Then swapped it on my 308 to give it a work out with the felt recoil of the 308 as you may or may not know the KAC SR15 MOD2 are amazingly SOFT !!! So moving it to the 308 was IMHO a good work out for it . Last week I ran 3 mags with same amo and 1 new paper target with every mag change with the Vortex and then I did the same thing with the Aimpoint .
1 with my KAC ( aim vs vor)
1 with my 308 ( vor vs aim)
And I'm happy to say I got same MOA at 50 and at 100 yrds
Now I did notice at different levels of daylight/darkness they are just a little different .
I'd say the Aimpoint had a cleaner dot in really bright sun and the vortex had a cleaner dot in cloudy sky's light .
Both were amazing at dusk
Both held 0 dead nuts
But the Aimpoints glass IMHO is a little better in certain light .
I will say the Vortex IMHO was damn well worth the $189!
But yes your right it's not a Aimpoint but is it worth the extra $550 that's a decision only the man forking over his hard earn bucks can say lolo .
I'll tell ya this tho , if one of my friends ask me for a RDoptic recommendation I wouldn't hesitate one second in recommending the Sprac2 . Id tell him 1st that if he has the $ and the $ wasn't a issues to get Aimpoint and maybe offer to let him try both of mine and let he or she make there own choice .
Good post tho and good luck to all
Sent from my rocket ship using
My cell'y
Leaveammoforme
09-18-15, 16:02
I agree that for the price, a Vortex is a great choice. But like I alluded to earlier, you get what you pay for.
I own a one of the original Strikefires that I have on my '3rd string' rifle. Love the green dot. Never had an issue with it.
1st and 2nd string rifles sport Aimpoints for obvious reasons.
Aimpoint, all day long, if you can afford it.
Pay once. Cry once.
Alright, I couldn't wait. I just pulled the trigger and ordered an mro from BCM. :eek: Should be here mid-week, hopefully I'll be able to get it out next weekend and put some rounds down range with it!
TexasAggie2005
09-18-15, 21:51
Just got it in today, shooting this weekend.
http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/09/18/ea4f55fa13f77deae2740010c90e93e0.jpg
BufordTJustice
09-19-15, 00:19
Alright, I couldn't wait. I just pulled the trigger and ordered an mro from BCM. :eek: Should be here mid-week, hopefully I'll be able to get it out next weekend and put some rounds down range with it!
Ry, pix once you get it in or it didn't happen. ;)
I love how everyone just dismisses EOTech.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Why didnt Trijicon go with external adjustment....?
I love how everyone just dismisses EOTech.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Everyone has had them take a dump, or seen someone have one take a dump, and reliability is the name of this game. At least, that's my .02 on it, from having had an EXPS3-0 begin de-laminating after only a year, and seeing numerous EoFailures on the square range.
Everyone has had them take a dump, or seen someone have one take a dump, and reliability is the name of this game. At least, that's my .02 on it, from having had an EXPS3-0 begin de-laminating after only a year, and seeing numerous EoFailures on the square range.
Some how I haven't. I have sent two in for warranty issues but both were bought used and they were minor IMO. Just like used X300s I've bought and sent in for minor things. I know very well that the military doesn't buy the best equipment usually, even SOCOM. But if they failed as much as this board likes to think, I really do believe most of them would've been ditched by now. At least unofficially.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Eotech is my departments issued optic for our SWAT team, I run my own Aimpoints/Elcans. Last range day 2 Eotechs went down dead batteries, have had a few that had to be sent back because they went tits up. ymmv.
does the mro have the emitter reflection that plagues the aimpiont micro line?
Haley mentions that topic in his YouTube video. I'd recommend it. Part one and part two. But the meat is in part two.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
If anyone is looking to get an MRO, optic planet is now offering a coupon code for 10% off more than $50. Just picked one up for $483, free shipping.
2DYSALE is the code.
I'm willing to be a beta tester for that.
I hate the Eotech and would love a larger tube diamater for a good red dot.
Plus 'Merica!
Whats the lowest mount one can get for the MRO that is compatible with AR sights?
Trijicon offers 3 mounts; the medium is a co-witness and the high is a 1/3 co-witness on ARs. The low mount is suitable1for shotgun use and such.
Trijicon offers 3 mounts; the medium is a co-witness and the high is a 1/3 co-witness on ARs. The low mount is suitable1for shotgun use and such. I also think that the lowest Trijicon mount is useful for putting the MRO on top of an AK.
http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/09/24/5c4c5017ddd1abb595ac3b19a5335ba0.jpg
http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/09/24/733346b5803cdd1412e74a42a303c0b9.jpg
http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/09/24/8dd2520d55dedcbe11f3e0446de16dee.jpg
Came home for lunch and my mro was waiting for me. This replaced a Vortex Strike Fire. Noticeably lighter, glass is more crisp, and the dot itself looks a lot better. The strike fire was nice, but the production quality of the mro is noticeably better. Will take it out tomorrow and zero.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Eotech is my departments issued optic for our SWAT team, I run my own Aimpoints/Elcans. Last range day 2 Eotechs went down dead batteries, have had a few that had to be sent back because they went tits up. ymmv.
This is the biggest thing that bothers me. Batteries dying from normal use is not a failure on the optic. If anything, it's a failure on the user for not checking his equipment and replacing the batteries. Obviously Aimpoints last a hell of a lot longer, but if the user doesn't change the battery on it, it's still going to die. Doesn't mean the optic failed. And I'm surprised at just how terrible the T1 is behind a magnifier, and yet everyone still thinks it's God's gift to earth. Anyways, I'my quit my rant and stop derailing the thread.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
KingsideRook
09-24-15, 11:20
My MRO should be here Saturday and I'm going shooting Sunday, so I'll take that opportunity to zero it. I'll post some photos and my initial reaction then. I'll be comparing it to an H1 4MOA Micro. No H2 to compare it to, it's out of my budget right now, hence the MRO.
Have to third/fourth the comments about the EOTechs. We sold several dozen a year out of our humble-but-busy retail/range location, over the course of almost a decade, 2004 to 2013 and mere civilians could get them to just stop working out of the blue, even when they were mostly new out of the box and shooting them on a climate controlled indoor range. Anything from 511 or 512 models up to the later 55x and XPS series, though we certainly sold more of the former, what with them having been on the market longer. L3/EOtech was not the easiest company to deal with on warranty issues, either, they often wanted money to fix their stuff because it was out of warranty - 2-3 years old. Most people loved the reticle, nice and bright with lots of options, big clear viewing area, but the product durability itself disappointed a lot of good customers.
We really never had those sorts of problems with Aimpoints, of which we sold about the same number yearly - one guy managed to drop his AR15 right on the adjustment knob of an M2 and snap it off, but for the most part the Aimpoints just kept ticking, and Aimpoint was always GTG on a repair request, including things like stripped Micro screws which were clearly operator error. This is all anecdote, of course, and I know that a stack of anecdotes is not data- but anyone who'd been there for a while could see the pattern establish itself over time. Everyone does know someone who's EOTech has taken a dive, and under the reasonably light duty to which both employees and customers put their Aimpoints, they always held up much better.
We sold some Trijicon stuff, but didn't stock more than $3-5000 worth at a time, not nearly as much as Aimpoint or EOTech, so we didn't have enough info to see a durability pattern there.
What I do not like about the Eotech is its "auto off" function, that can really bite you in the posterior at precisely the wrong moment.
I'm interested in the Trijicon but would buy the T2 because the T1 is such a proven product and the availability of mounts. I looked for mounts for the Trijicon and was disappointed.
I'm interested in the Trijicon but would buy the T2 because the T1 is such a proven product and the availability of mounts. I looked for mounts for the Trijicon and was disappointed.
Bobro
Hodge Defense
Scalarworks
ADM
LaRue
Trijicon OEM
Midwest Ind
What, exactly, would you LIKE offered for the MRO that already isn't/won't be in a month or two?
I looked for mounts for the Trijicon and was disappointed.
I purchased the ADM QD mount for mine and like it a lot.
Here is a link to ADM's lower 1/3 co-witness mount: http://www.americandefensemanufacturing.com/view/product/1060/
Bobro
Hodge Defense
Scalarworks
ADM
LaRue
Trijicon OEM
Midwest Ind
What, exactly, would you LIKE offered for the MRO that already isn't/won't be in a month or two?
So far the only mounts I've seen are the alamo and adm
If I had to chose now I would go for the Aimpoint due to all the choices in mounts.
KingsideRook
10-10-15, 18:48
Quick review of mine - Trijicon's new little MRO sight is well thought out, with easy-access, sealed adjustment dials, has a good concept with the top ambi brightness controls, very little lens tint, and it is light.
It also has a lens fisheye effect like nobody's business. The optic appears to be 1.1x or 1.25x magnification or something similar, not at all true 1.0x, and at close range, it's like rolling a magnifying glass over everything you see, with distortion in a ringed circle all around the slightly magnified center. The difference is dramatic compared to an Aimpoint Micro H1 side-by-side - the Aimpoint just shows what your other eye sees, with a dot, almost no distortion or magnification at all. If I wanted to deal with 1.1x style distortion, I'd deal with it on a 1-4x or 1-6x scope, since that at least offers an advantage of a magnification option, compared to a true 1x dot. Everything else good about the sight, couldn't overcome the warped ring around the edge of the sight picture.
The MRO is cool, but with lightly used Aimpoint H1/T1 optics for sale around $500 or less online even with high mounts, I can't recommended it. No Aimpoint killer here. I sold my MRO after 48 hours, and got another used H1 2MOA in a LaRue mount for that money.
I struggled with deciding between an MRO and a T-2 and ended up with the T-2. I chose it because of the "issues," with the MRO such as magnification, blue tint, and it's kind of ugly to me. In comparing my t-2 to t-1 I have noticed my astigmatism appears to be less noticeable with the t-2, other than that I would have no reason to purchase the T-2 instead of the T-1.
wilson1911
10-16-15, 07:41
You made a good decision. I have the MRO and would not recommend it to anyone. The tint and magnification/fisheye make it hard to shoot thru. I would describe it as not having your eyes relaxed when sweeping between targets. The MRO is going to sink a quick death like all the other sites they failed to get right.
I just ordered a primary arms red dot sight that has none of these issues for my 30-30. Maybe Trijicon should call the Chinese for advice.
KingsideRook
10-17-15, 16:14
I really wanted to like it, I gave it every chance to be even just as good as the H1 2MOA. The tint was not an issue for me, honestly. I was so excited to buy one that I went in, sight unseen, so to speak, on a group buy for them. It was not what my H1 is, let alone the T2/H2. It's just an embarrassing thing to launch in 2015 when the Generation 1 Aimpoints already are clearly less distorted and warped, and those are years old at this point.
Trijicon makes a great scope, but their reflex sight lineup is not going to break through on the back of the MRO. I'm going to keep buying used H1 Micro sights.
lifebreath
10-30-15, 11:01
Quick review of mine - Trijicon's new little MRO sight is well thought out, with easy-access, sealed adjustment dials, has a good concept with the top ambi brightness controls, very little lens tint, and it is light.
It also has a lens fisheye effect like nobody's business. The optic appears to be 1.1x or 1.25x magnification or something similar, not at all true 1.0x, and at close range, it's like rolling a magnifying glass over everything you see, with distortion in a ringed circle all around the slightly magnified center. The difference is dramatic compared to an Aimpoint Micro H1 side-by-side - the Aimpoint just shows what your other eye sees, with a dot, almost no distortion or magnification at all. If I wanted to deal with 1.1x style distortion, I'd deal with it on a 1-4x or 1-6x scope, since that at least offers an advantage of a magnification option, compared to a true 1x dot. Everything else good about the sight, couldn't overcome the warped ring around the edge of the sight picture.
The MRO is cool, but with lightly used Aimpoint H1/T1 optics for sale around $500 or less online even with high mounts, I can't recommended it. No Aimpoint killer here. I sold my MRO after 48 hours, and got another used H1 2MOA in a LaRue mount for that money.
You made a good decision. I have the MRO and would not recommend it to anyone. The tint and magnification/fisheye make it hard to shoot thru. I would describe it as not having your eyes relaxed when sweeping between targets. The MRO is going to sink a quick death like all the other sites they failed to get right.
I just ordered a primary arms red dot sight that has none of these issues for my 30-30. Maybe Trijicon should call the Chinese for advice.
This and this. These two posts sum up my experience. Sent back early unit, received a replacement - same issues. Aimpoint all the way. I've got two T1's and two Comp M variants and will stick to those for RD.
XD40Colorado
11-02-15, 13:19
I ordered one based on the fact that's in 100% made in the USA. Supposed to be here later this week. Really hoping it doesn't suck.
wilson1911
11-02-15, 15:43
If you just ordered a MRO ????, it will have the same issues as all the rest. Go over to the MRO thread, there is a post with very good pics of looking thru the optic. Remember no one has said anything negative about the ruggedness. I would buy a psa dot before one of these again.
I started a thread on tos, for people that have the MRO, and used it, many positive replies, mine should be here by Thursday.
I think the MRO is just like any optic, in that it's personal preference.
Some love the Aimpint, some hate it, same can be said for the Eotech,
Same can be said for most variable optics. You won't know if any optic is one you like until you try it.
The SRS gets a lot of bad inter web reviews, at one time or another, I had 4 SRS models.
Never had an issue from any of them, and liked them better than my Aimpoints.
I had my family look at a rifle with the SRS, another rifle with an M4s, and another rifle with a Aimpoints T1.
Everyone said they liked the SRS better. I only sold the SRS's because I went with a couple of NF 1-4's, and a Vortex 1-6.
An optic is the most personal piece of gear that you add to the rifle.
Did all the reading and video watching I could on the MRO today. Lots of good things about it. Opticsplanet (love em or hate em) has them at a special price with an additional 12% off Black Friday coupon code on all red dots expiring tonight at 2359 hrs CST. Too good of a deal to pass up. Worse case scenario it'll get side lined to a plinker if it absolutely sucks.
Settled on the T2 and very pleased with it. Our local store had zero interest for 12 months!
Jwknutson17
12-05-15, 08:28
I tried out the MRO for the first time 2 days ago. I can't say I would buy one for myself. I was not very impressed and would hands down go with an aimpoint pro for the same price. I have multiple T1s, pros, m3s. M4s', etc. And would choose any of them again over the MRO. In my opinion.
globetruck
12-06-15, 06:07
I tried out the MRO for the first time 2 days ago. I can't say I would buy one for myself. I was not very impressed and would hands down go with an aimpoint pro for the same price. I have multiple T1s, pros, m3s. M4s', etc. And would choose any of them again over the MRO. In my opinion.
What didn't you like?
Jwknutson17
12-06-15, 18:01
What didn't you like?
I don't care for the heavy blue tint to it. I don't care for the lack of dot brightness adjustments. I also don't care for the top brightness adjustment location. I felt it obstructed some of my view. And lastly the look. Those are the few things that stood out. Sure it might be an upgrade for some, and after using many other quality optics, it's just not for me.
I don't care for the heavy blue tint to it. I don't care for the lack of dot brightness adjustments. I also don't care for the top brightness adjustment location. I felt it obstructed some of my view. And lastly the look. Those are the few things that stood out. Sure it might be an upgrade for some, but I can't see it after using many quality optics.
The blue tint? Do you really notice it when running the gun or just when looking for it? Lack of brightness adjustments? Why does it need more? If it had a hundred 99 would be wrong 99% of the time. I sort of agree with you on the location of the brightness rheostat but as a RH shooter I wouldn't want it on the left and I am sure LH guys wouldn't want it on the right. I guess if I were at the bottom of a hill I wouldn't want it on the top! Looks don't count. So it might be GTG for someone that is NOT married to Aimpoints?
If you're questioning on buying Aimpoint vs. any other brand; always go with the Aimpoint.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Digital_Damage
12-06-15, 18:43
The blue tint? Do you really notice it when running the gun or just when looking for it? Lack of brightness adjustments? Why does it need more? If it had a hundred 99 would be wrong 99% of the time. I sort of agree with you on the location of the brightness rheostat but as a RH shooter I wouldn't want it on the left and I am sure LH guys wouldn't want it on the right. I guess if I were at the bottom of a hill I wouldn't want it on the top! Looks don't count. So it might be GTG for someone that is NOT married to Aimpoints?
there are a lot of things to ding the MRO about but the "blue tint" exist on all aimpoints too.
Jwknutson17
12-07-15, 00:27
The blue tint? Do you really notice it when running the gun or just when looking for it? Lack of brightness adjustments? Why does it need more? If it had a hundred 99 would be wrong 99% of the time. I sort of agree with you on the location of the brightness rheostat but as a RH shooter I wouldn't want it on the left and I am sure LH guys wouldn't want it on the right. I guess if I were at the bottom of a hill I wouldn't want it on the top! Looks don't count. So it might be GTG for someone that is NOT married to Aimpoints?
Sure. Its seems to be a quality well built optic for sure. But not what I expected exactly. I'm not married to aimpoints.. while I do feel they are the best, I own many Trijicon products. Acogs, RMRs, a SRS, etc. Along with many other eotech products. EXPS3-0, 512, 553. So I would say aimpoints are about half of the optics I own. Sure it would work well for others. Just wasn't for me. It may have not effected my performance per si, but I notice a difference from my eye as shooter. I do not notice on my T1s. I think the blue tint doesn't effect performance. Just more so then any other RDS I own. I gave my opinion. And it is just that. With the T1 only really 100 bucks more street value, it was an easy choice for me. Sure if I used it for more than a day that I did, I might get used to it. The more settings for the brightness on aimpoints is a plus, and you can have the ability to choose exactly what you need for the exact condition you need it in. I feel having less adjustment is not a plus over the aimpoints. Just an observation. I do use PVS 7's and 14's so I do like having the most possible adjustments on the low end also. I did think the dot was nice and crisp, and maybe even more so then others. That was a good thing. The price is also a plus they have going for it and let many others enjoy a quality micro RDS. That's all I got...
WatchTheWorldBern
12-08-15, 17:27
I got to look through an MRO at my last trip to the shop—really disappointed after it looked so good on paper. Optical quality was nowhere close to the T-1 I had to compare side by side.
MonsterMan1036
12-08-15, 19:53
I have both the t-1 and mro, the mro has a much better field of view and blue tint seems to be the same.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalkhttp://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/08/d523d225e9792634609b46c813968e1d.jpghttp://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/08/90b99eced6f5a341d4eb33b2e3b23fc8.jpg
Jwknutson17
12-08-15, 20:26
I have both the t-1 and mro, the mro has a much better field of view and blue tint seems to be the same.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalkhttp://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/08/d523d225e9792634609b46c813968e1d.jpghttp://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/08/90b99eced6f5a341d4eb33b2e3b23fc8.jpg
From your photo it doesn't looks nearly as bad as the one used at the range. It was a deep blue. Heavier then what the bottom of yours looks like. Or I wouldn't have even brought it up. Have you gotten out to shoot it? What's your take?
MonsterMan1036
12-08-15, 21:13
I'm very happy with it so far, the tint is a non issue for me, I feel they are the same. I have three t-1's, with that I'll be purchasing another mro before another micro t-1 or 2.
The field of view, adjustments are easier, and price under $500 with adm mount do it for me.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Trijicon laid everything on the table about the MRO and the "issues" people had with them. Worth a browse if you're on the fence or have been reading stuff about them.
https://www.trijicon.com/na_en/support/faq_MRO.php
globetruck
12-12-15, 16:16
Seems like the glass retains the bluish tint, about on par with a T1 or H1. But the MRO offers a wider field of view, and the MRO dot seems to be more crisp like the T2 and H2.
H1 < T1 < MRO < H2 < T2 from what I can tell. And the MRO seems to be priced accordingly.
I've seen several people mention "field of view". I cant help but ask what exactly you're looking at? You don't "look through" a reddot like one would a scope.
Focus on the target. Not on the reticle/dot. If you do that, "field of view" matters very little. The only time a larger lens/tube might help is with unconventional positions and seeing the red dot.
Digital_Damage
12-12-15, 20:00
I've seen several people mention "field of view". I cant help but ask what exactly you're looking at? You don't "look through" a reddot like one would a scope.
Focus on the target. Not on the reticle/dot. If you do that, "field of view" matters very little. The only time a larger lens/tube might help is with unconventional positions and seeing the red dot.
wrong...
field of view on a two lens red dot exist.
Smaller the field of view the more you see the housing and it becomes an obstruction over your subject at a certain distance.
The larger the field of view the less you see of the housing and the less it becomes an obstruction for your subject at a certain distance.
MonsterMan1036
12-12-15, 20:03
wrong...
field of view on a two lens red dot exist.
Smaller the field of view the more you see the housing and it becomes an obstruction over your subject.
The larger the field of view the less you see of the housing and the less it becomes an obstruction for your subject.
^^^This^^^
I was just going to post something similar, this is what field of view means to me on a red dot.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
wrong...
field of view on a two lens red dot exist.
Smaller the field of view the more you see the housing and it becomes an obstruction over your subject at a certain distance.
The larger the field of view the less you see of the housing and the less it becomes an obstruction for your subject at a certain distance.
Do me a favor and cover the objective lens with something solid so you cant see through the red dot.
I bet it still works....if you're using it correctly. (i.e. The dot is visible and so is your target)
The brain is an amazing thing.
Do me a favor and cover the objective lens with something solid so you cant see through the red dot.
I bet it still works....if you're using it correctly. (i.e. The dot is visible and so is your target)
The brain is an amazing thing.
Exactly, regardless if the lens is covered or not with both eyes open that makes no difference. Our brain combines both images into one.
Digital_Damage
12-12-15, 21:17
Do me a favor and cover the objective lens with something solid so you cant see through the red dot.
I bet it still works....if you're using it correctly. (i.e. The dot is visible and so is your target)
The brain is an amazing thing.
You will see a dot because that is still visible to the eye, the dot will also not be the POI.
You will also see an obstruction and an impaired depth perception unless you are severely left eye dominate, billed 390 hours last year to the .gov to test that very subject.
These are not HUDs.
You will see a dot because that is still visible to the eye, the dot will also not be the POI.
You will also see an obstruction and an impaired depth perception unless you are severely left eye dominate, billed 390 hours last year to the .gov to test that very subject.
These are not HUDs.
Thats a bit vague. Lots of things can cause a POI shift. Not saying it wasn't what you say it was in this case. Just saying without much detail, speculation is possible.
What was the POI shift at what distance?
--edit--
Also how do I bill the gov 390hrs testing guns/optics? =]
Digital_Damage
12-12-15, 22:46
Thats a bit vague. Lots of things can cause a POI shift. Not saying it wasn't what you say it was in this case. Just saying without much detail, speculation is possible.
What was the POI shift at what distance?
--edit--
Also how do I bill the gov 390hrs testing guns/optics? =]
POI shift will be at all distances.
You are viewing the subject with your left eye however you are viewing the dot with your right, but have no corresponding image of the subject with your right eye to correct the shift.
Same reason the AH-64 is getting updated with in helmet HUD and they are ditching the monocle system.
We were awarded a DO in the TALOS project. Get cleared and start browsing the .gov solicitations or contact the major contractors for subcontract work.
Singlestack Wonder
12-13-15, 09:55
No FOV with an RDS. Looking at the target with both eyes open one sees the target with a dot on it. If one is doing it correctly the RDS housing regardless of the size is imperceptible.
Digital_Damage
12-13-15, 11:58
No FOV with an RDS. Looking at the target with both eyes open one sees the target with a dot on it. If one is doing it correctly the RDS housing regardless of the size is imperceptible.
You would think after the last train wreck you had on this subject would prevent you from stating inaccurate information.
Nothing you stated in the other MRO thread or here is based on science or I suspect in the realm of reality.
Eye lens size and the required eye convergence to obtain Binocular vision directly impacts the ability to view objects closer than the subject. The object in this case is the housing.
Singlestack Wonder
12-13-15, 18:56
You would think after the last train wreck you had on this subject would prevent you from stating inaccurate information.
Nothing you stated in the other MRO thread or here is based on science or I suspect in the realm of reality.
Eye lens size and the required eye convergence to obtain Binocular vision directly impacts the ability to view objects closer than the subject. The object in this case is the housing.
Nothing inacurate... Just 20+ years of using RDS sights. It's unfortunate that the MRO failed to meet expectations as you seem to be personally affected by it. I will however continue to post my comments as I feel necessary.
Digital_Damage
12-13-15, 19:15
Nothing inacurate... Just 20+ years of using RDS sights. It's unfortunate that the MRO failed to meet expectations as you seem to be personally affected by it. I will however continue to post my comments as I feel necessary.
If I knew it only took 20+ years of dicking around with Red Dots on range toys to become an expert at biology and physics my entire team would have saved a boat load on tuition....
You know what, whatever floats your boat.
POI shift will be at all distances.
You are viewing the subject with your left eye however you are viewing the dot with your right, but have no corresponding image of the subject with your right eye to correct the shift.
Same reason the AH-64 is getting updated with in helmet HUD and they are ditching the monocle system.
We were awarded a DO in the TALOS project. Get cleared and start browsing the .gov solicitations or contact the major contractors for subcontract work.
I guess figuring out where the POI shift starts to impact effectiveness is where the big money comes in.
What you're saying makes sense. A quick test of picking an object to look at and then shutting one eye and then the other shows a slight variance in the objects location relative to the eye. Im sure its a bit more complicated than that.
As I first stated, at what point does it become an "issue". If were talking about say a 2" shift of POI at 200y, then it might still be "combat effective"
A one ragged hole at 600y is not really what the red dot sight was designed for. I am by no means an expert but I understand picking the right tool for the job.
Anywho....we have drifted a bit outside of the topic so I will say 'done'. =]
Thanks for the info.
Lot of "who's is bigger" going on at this point
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Digital_Damage
12-13-15, 20:27
I guess figuring out where the POI shift starts to impact effectiveness is where the big money comes in.
What you're saying makes sense. A quick test of picking an object to look at and then shutting one eye and then the other shows a slight variance in the objects location relative to the eye. Im sure its a bit more complicated than that.
As I first stated, at what point does it become an "issue". If were talking about say a 2" shift of POI at 200y, then it might still be "combat effective"
A one ragged hole at 600y is not really what the red dot sight was designed for. I am by no means an expert but I understand picking the right tool for the job.
Anywho....we have drifted a bit outside of the topic so I will say 'done'. =]
Thanks for the info.
You are correct, it is a point of relevancy as it relates to effectiveness.
However, just to play the devils advocate and to give some food for thought. Lets say it is 2-3 MOA at 100y. That is the same variance that has everyone dumping their Eotech's for refunds.
To give further fuel for discussion, a "failed" for mil standards is +2.5 MOA.
So is it really and issue or one that is not all it is cooked up to be? Not everything is black and white when it comes to use, but someone has to draw the line in the sand and say "this" is the threshold. After it has been established, the only way to move that threshold is through CIM.
Are existing mounts for the Micro models compatible with the MRO?
Are existing mounts for the Micro models compatible with the MRO?
No. I have Bobro mounts for my MRO's, they are good to go.
Defaultmp3
12-14-15, 09:32
Some information about POI shift using occluded eye aiming, albeit with a 3x optic and not a red dot: http://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/occluded-eye-aiming/
Honestly, this seems like a pretty easy theory to test. Just go to the range and shoot two targets at 25 yards or 50 yards or whatever, one with the optic normally and one with occluded eye aiming.
I have not had any problems with Aimpoints, other than my slight astigmatism issue.
With that being said, I have an MRO on order to try out.
Hi,
Have you been able to compare the Mro and you Aimpoint?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
TexasAggie2005
12-16-15, 09:59
Hi,
Have you been able to compare the Mro and you Aimpoint?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes. I had a couple Aimpoint H1 (2moa) over the years before the MRO. I've had the MRO for almost 3 months now, and I prefer it over the H1's I've had.
Well, I finally looked through an MRO at the VTAC NF course I attended. Typically, I avoid unnecessary profanity, but the best I can sum up the MRO is "**** that."
Well, I finally looked through an MRO at the VTAC NF course I attended. Typically, I avoid unnecessary profanity, but the best I can sum up the MRO is "**** that."
What didn't you like about it?
What didn't you like about it?
The tint was significant compared to an Aimpoint. Magnification was very noticeable. It reminded me of a shitty 1X-Nx scope. When transitioning target to target it was very notable fish-eye and warping. The Aimpoint is like looking through a flat glass lense moved around. This was like looking through the bottom of a beer mug or something. I hated it and wouldn't buy it even for $199 when $399 Aimpoints exist...
The tint was significant compared to an Aimpoint. Magnification was very noticeable. It reminded me of a shitty 1X-Nx scope. When transitioning target to target it was very notable fish-eye and warping. The Aimpoint is like looking through a flat glass lense moved around. This was like looking through the bottom of a beer mug or something. I hated it and wouldn't buy it even for $199 when $399 Aimpoints exist...
Fair enough, thanks.
Yes. I had a couple Aimpoint H1 (2moa) over the years before the MRO. I've had the MRO for almost 3 months now, and I prefer it over the H1's I've had.
What are the pros and cons? Thank you
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Singlestack Wonder
12-16-15, 22:17
The tint was significant compared to an Aimpoint. Magnification was very noticeable. It reminded me of a shitty 1X-Nx scope. When transitioning target to target it was very notable fish-eye and warping. The Aimpoint is like looking through a flat glass lense moved around. This was like looking through the bottom of a beer mug or something. I hated it and wouldn't buy it even for $199 when $399 Aimpoints exist...
My thoughts exactly.
The tint was significant compared to an Aimpoint. Magnification was very noticeable. It reminded me of a shitty 1X-Nx scope. When transitioning target to target it was very notable fish-eye and warping. The Aimpoint is like looking through a flat glass lense moved around. This was like looking through the bottom of a beer mug or something. I hated it and wouldn't buy it even for $199 when $399 Aimpoints exist...
Thanks for the review. I returned my eotech and I'm in the market for a red dot. Many of the multi viewed YouTube videos have rave reviews about the MRO. However, I do come across many complaints that mirror yours. The fish eye would really stink.
I've read a few technical reviews which determined the magnification/fish eye to be from two separate "sweet spots" which are optimal optic to eye distances, with a bad area in between.
If you can recall, what was the distance from your eye to the mro do you think?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks for the review. I returned my eotech and I'm in the market for a red dot. Many of the multi viewed YouTube videos have rave reviews about the MRO. However, I do come across many complaints that mirror yours. The fish eye would really stink.
I've read a few technical reviews which determined the magnification/fish eye to be from two separate "sweet spots" which are optimal optic to eye distances, with a bad area in between.
If you can recall, what was the distance from your eye to the mro do you think?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Numerous distances. It wasn't my rifle, and I moved my head fore and aft trying to "make the tube disappear" like the MRO is supposed to do. That didn't happen, either.
JackFanToM
12-17-15, 08:19
Yes. I had a couple Aimpoint H1 (2moa) over the years before the MRO. I've had the MRO for almost 3 months now, and I prefer it over the H1's I've had.
My experience is the same as my fellow Aggie's - Gig'em
I'll post up the link again. All the issues people had are addressed by Trijicon.
https://www.trijicon.com/na_en/support/faq_MRO.php
Ive seen faq, but seems like some people love the mro while some really hate it.
I might have to order both the T2 & MRO from a place with good/easy returns. Return the one I no likey.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Will be interesting to see what the DOD replaced Eotechs with.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Defaultmp3
12-17-15, 15:03
Will be interesting to see what the DOD replaced Eotechs with.Rumor has it they're looking at the Aimpoint T-2, Trijicon MRO, Trijicon SRS, Leupold LCO, and Leupold DeltaPoint Pro as replacement options.
Source: http://soldiersystems.net/2015/11/09/ussocom-evaulates-replacement-for-eotech-sights/
globetruck
12-17-15, 17:38
Good comparison video. http://youtu.be/OpcpGuWHtT0
I'll post up the link again. All the issues people had are addressed by Trijicon.
https://www.trijicon.com/na_en/support/faq_MRO.php
Yeah, would the late 1990's Ford Taurus have been any better of a vehicle if Ford had explained why it broke so often? Trijicon can "address" what they want. I looked through it, and thought it was shit compared to a T1 or T2 or Primary Arms $75 range toy. Although it probably is more durable than the PA, I'd rather have the "image" of the PA than the fish-eyed crap the MRO produces.
FlyingChipmunk
12-18-15, 00:40
Forgive me if this has been mentioned already, but what I love about MRO is the crisp clear reticle.
Yeah, would the late 1990's Ford Taurus have been any better of a vehicle if Ford had explained why it broke so often? Trijicon can "address" what they want. I looked through it, and thought it was shit compared to a T1 or T2 or Primary Arms $75 range toy. Although it probably is more durable than the PA, I'd rather have the "image" of the PA than the fish-eyed crap the MRO produces.
It is what it is at this point. People bitch. Trijicon answers. People still buy and bitch. Then people read the forums, FAQ, buy it and still bitch. They can't win unless they put out a Gen 2 with corrections on the issues people complain about. For my usage I don't stare into the tube long enough to get annoyed with certain aspects of the optic. Same goes with the Aimpoint T1/T2.. I don't look though it long enough to say, "oh, it's like I'm looking through a small tube."
I'm not a paper puncher so the dot isn't going to sit on one spot and I won't be staring at it for more than a second at a time. For me it's fine. Is this my primary optic? Nope. But it's not so horrible that I'm going to box it up and send it back. It's on a training carbean. My primary work rifles all have Aimpoint through personal purchase and because I get them free.
I've got 3 all with no issues, got them all for around 400, like them better than my Aimpoint T1/H1's.
It's an RDS, meant to be fast, not a scope where glass matters.
Does the T2 have better glass for another $250, probably but it's not worth it on a red dot for me.
I like the bigger fov on the MRO.
YMMV
JackFanToM
12-18-15, 17:02
The whole Ford analogy is totally off, and provides an unclear comparison for those shopping. The MRO works and Ford Tempos and Tauruses from the 90's do not.
At this point there is no long term data stating the MRO is a lemon, as there is on the cars previously mentioned.
Yes there is a blue tint, it exists in aimpoint as well, but as the FOV is larger, so the blue tint appears so as well. Yes the edges are slightly out of focus, but those edges are beyond the visible range on an aimpoint.
Thus far the optic has met or exceeded my expectations, and the minor sacrifice in size and weight opposed to the aimpoint, as well as the mushy detents in the elevation and windage knobs are acceptable. You gain clarity and FOV. The overall QC on my MRO is superior to the H1 i own (wobbly illumination knob).
To each their own, but this far the MRO has been exactly as hoped. Aimpoints are a great optic, but over time I hope the MRO gains the same fanfare, as more options are good for everyone.
JackFanToM
12-18-15, 17:04
FWIW I think aimpoint glass compared to the MRO is similar to the view finder on a camera using image optimization and not using it. The aimpoint seems softer and the MRO seems sharper
JackFanToM
12-18-15, 17:17
As to the fisheye, I think if I placed the ocular lens up to my eye I might get a slight one, but in normal use I cannot see any magnification, fisheye, blurriness, etc. all I see is clear glass (mild blue tint) and sharp crisp dot.
Digital_Damage
12-20-15, 08:24
It is what it is at this point. People bitch. Trijicon answers. People still buy and bitch. Then people read the forums, FAQ, buy it and still bitch. They can't win unless they put out a Gen 2 with corrections on the issues people complain about. For my usage I don't stare into the tube long enough to get annoyed with certain aspects of the optic. Same goes with the Aimpoint T1/T2.. I don't look though it long enough to say, "oh, it's like I'm looking through a small tube."
I'm not a paper puncher so the dot isn't going to sit on one spot and I won't be staring at it for more than a second at a time. For me it's fine. Is this my primary optic? Nope. But it's not so horrible that I'm going to box it up and send it back. It's on a training carbean. My primary work rifles all have Aimpoint through personal purchase and because I get them free.
It is just a bunch of nonsense really, all the "issues" on the FAQ is true for any red dot that uses the objective to reflect the emitter. Most of the complaints are from people that do not own one and looked through it "at the range one day". Then spout a bunch of incorrect information regardless of the science involved.
Despite the FAQ and the thorough testing results posted people will still say stupid shit... like "fish-eye" which has been thoroughly debunked IMO.
Does the MRO have "issues" (image shift, magnification) possibly from certain points of view, but those same "issues" exist on aimpoints as well.
It will be interesting to see how the MROs hold up over time. I am curious how the exposed turrets will work out on them.
Time will tell.
I purchased the ADM QD mount for mine and like it a lot.
Here is a link to ADM's lower 1/3 co-witness mount: http://www.americandefensemanufacturing.com/view/product/1060/
Bobro
Hodge Defense
Scalarworks
ADM
LaRue
Trijicon OEM
Midwest Ind
What, exactly, would you LIKE offered for the MRO that already isn't/won't be in a month or two?
So far the only mounts I've seen are the alamo and adm
When I first looked there were not any after market mounts available. That's clearly changed. The deal directly from ADM looks great to me. I'm at the range today with an MRO and OEM lower 1/3 mount. I am looking forward to sighting it in. I've read and watched several reviews. I have Aimpoint's and have been very happy with them.
It shot well. Adjustments were quick and easily made. I was on target with 9 shots. I didn't notice any issues with distortion or tint.
globetruck
01-10-16, 18:47
I bought an MRO - $493 which includes ADM QD mount. Botach was OK... Initially on back order, but no email telling me the status. I had to call them to find out, and their phone menu was a hassle. But fortunately it shipped a couple days after making my call. I can imagine that returns would be a hassle.
I've had it to the range 3 times, including outdoor. I've got it zeroed in as much as my gun and skills will allow - shot a .75 inch group at 50 yards today (stock Daniel Defense V7 LW), shooting from a table - no bench rest or sandbags, just resting the gun on a table.
Impressions:
1. Cost to benefit ratio is awesome! It might not be a T2, but for $300 savings I'm quite happy.
2. Blue tint - honestly seems about the same as the T1/H1. Perhaps it's more noticeable inn the MRO because the MRO is just bigger and there's more blue to see... I dunno. Maybe someone can do a more scientific spectral filter comparison. In any case, the blue tint doesn't bother or distract me in the least bit. I find it funny that some folks have latched onto the tint as if it's some sort of defect... wonder if those same folks refuse to shoot while wearing sunglasses or yellow tinted shooting glasses. Somehow I doubt it.
3. Magnification. I guess if I get really close and stare, I can perceive something. Maybe. In all honesty, if I didn't see reviews claiming that it's magnified, I really would not have noticed.
4. Quality of the dot. It's definitely a circle. I've got some astigmatism and sometimes I can see a ghost dot almost making it a figure 8, and some very mild starbursting. But that's my eyes and not the optic. Verified by rotating the optic: the visual distortion remains in the same orientation as my eye and not the optic. Also verified by using a camera to take a picture of the dot. It's a perfect circle.
5. Maintain zero? Initially some concern, but I tightened the mount screw just a bit and also make sure that I seat it in my rail the same way every time. It holds zero. I've taken it on/off multiple times but haven't done any torture testing.
6. Brightness controls - 3 seems to work in just about all situations. I haven't shot in bright sunlight yet. Indoors at longer distances, I actually like NVG setting 2 - it's just barely visible, but due to my astigmatism, I get an extremely clear view of the target area. I haven't done any competition shooting, but f rapid acquisition I tend to like brighter settings.
Overall I am very pleased with the quality and value.
Rayrevolver
01-10-16, 19:43
It is just a bunch of nonsense really, all the "issues" on the FAQ is true for any red dot that uses the objective to reflect the emitter. Most of the complaints are from people that do not own one and looked through it "at the range one day". Then spout a bunch of incorrect information regardless of the science involved.
Despite the FAQ and the thorough testing results posted people will still say stupid shit... like "fish-eye" which has been thoroughly debunked IMO.
Does the MRO have "issues" (image shift, magnification) possibly from certain points of view, but those same "issues" exist on aimpoints as well.
No dog in this fight, but would love to try an MRO. That said, your post in the MRO thread got me messing with a Aimpoint Micro and older RMR, trying it as far aft and also where the front BUIS would go. I did notice image shift on both optics. The reason I am posting was I found a picture of T-1 image shift in the Scalarworks thread.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?160599-Scalarworks-Micro-mount&p=2022421#post2022421
I am very happy with the Micro (and cheap ACO) but will hopefully try out an MRO down the road.
treadwisely
01-19-16, 14:59
Initially loved the MRO now I am questioning. After having it for a month and leaving it on the 2 setting, I grabbed my rifle to find that my MRO had died. Made sure it was not a battery issue. Waiting on Trijicon's response right now which I assume will be good but I hope if they replace, the next unit does not die on me.
Initially loved the MRO now I am questioning. After having it for a month and leaving it on the 2 setting, I grabbed my rifle to find that my MRO had died. Made sure it was not a battery issue. Waiting on Trijicon's response right now which I assume will be good but I hope if they replace, the next unit does not die on me.
Appx serial #? Heard of this in some of the earliest units (3xxx & 6xxx range), I'll have to keep an eye on mine (11xxx & 13xxx).
Tomac
No issues with reflections "fish eye" image?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No issues with reflections "fish eye" image?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Under controlled conditions I can see the 'fish eye' image shift (it's actually slight magnification, IIRC) and reflections if the light's just right if I'm looking for them, but I don't notice either of them when I'm actually shooting (YMMV).
Tomac
treadwisely
01-20-16, 05:49
Appx serial #? Heard of this in some of the earliest units (3xxx & 6xxx range), I'll have to keep an eye on mine (11xxx & 13xxx).
Tomac
7xxx so you might be okay.
Torquetard
01-29-16, 14:27
Alright, here's my experience. If you get a well made MRO, it's an awesome optic...but that's the problem, the QC for this thing could be a tad better.
I ordered one when it was newer, in the 2xxx range. I made the mistake of doing too much research after I bought it and as such noticed the fisheye people were talking about, so I didn't even install the battery, and sent it back for a refund. Probably wouldn't have noticed it if it weren't for the people who look through their red dot all day while posting.
Waited a few months, found a killer deal on it and decided to give it another chance. Optical clarity was great, minimal fisheye/glare... But the dot was absolute dog doo...even out in bright daylight which is usually a good fix for dots that don't look so round indoors. So I sent that one to Trij for a replacement. And replace it they did!... With what had to be a refurb. Dot was round, but the brightness knob didn't have the tight, tactile clicks, it still had the resistance but it would play a bit before clicking. Also saw the dot blink out before coming back on when I turned the brightness all the way up.
I said whatever, it looks fine and it works and the only thing was the knob which I'll rarely touch.
But if I could do it all over again I'd just get the T2. I've only bought one Aimpoint, the PRO, and that thing has been flawless.
Im happy for all the MRO owners out there with units that actually passed inspection, and I prefer looking through it a little more than the T2...but I know if I buy a T2 I'll probably get one I won't need to replace. If i were in the market for another micro, Id be hesitant to get another MRO just because of the QC right now....which is unfortunate because I have their accupower 3-9x and that thing is near perfect.
JackFanToM
01-29-16, 17:17
Odd I had similar issues with the knob on my H1. I assumed it was normal until I traded it to another forum member and he questioned it upon receiving it. I believe he was able to adjust the fit of the knob. On the other hand the MRO is good to go. Sorry you have not had the same experience. It is a new optic from a good company, so I have faith these things will get squared away.
In November, 2015, a friend bought a MRO and wanted me to test it for him. I took it to the range and did some drills. The "dot" looked a bit funny, but was entirely usable for the purpose of a red dot. Then, my friend looked at a "Soldier Systems" article with lots of critics making noise about the sight design. Here is my response to that (cut and paste from my email):
Now for the bad news: If you look at the comments below the article, you will see some of the complaints about the MRO that have surfaced. To summarize:
1. Tint
2. Fisheye
3. Backlit reflections
4. Dot crispness
5. Not a true 1x
Some of these problems seem to reveal themselves when magnified, and I leave that to people who want that (dumb) option. Here is my take:
1. Tint: Yeah, it's somewhat tinted. What is the problem? You've never seen lens coatings before? You are trying to shoot a movie through it and you want a different chromatic effect?
2. Fisheye: This should be combined with the 1x situation. It is probably an artifact of the conical shape of the optic body. Trijicon wants to take advantage of the shape to get as much light and image into the small(er) body to be viewable through the ocular lens. Unlike a true fisheye, the magnification is there, but slight. The Aimpoints appear to be true 1x RDS, but I don't think they have the same clarity. With any optic having magnification, some people can get used to it, or not, when shooting with both eyes open.
3. Backlit reflections and "big red lines": No optic operates well when bright sunlight is coming in via the ocular lens while you are trying to see light gathered from the lens. I compared an Aimpoint CompM2, and it had the same problem, maybe worse. About four comments down in the attached link, "cj" has a whale of an argument, summarized as follows: An environmental problem caused problems using the sights, we did not complete T&E. (Implication being: it was the sights' 'problem,' so we blame the sight.) There are so many irrelevancies and logical flaws here, I don't even want to begin.
4. Dot crispness: Yeah, they have a point. I wasn't sure about how circular the dot was (but I had a suspicion it was not, that I did not mention before). After all this talk about magnifying MROs, I thought I'd try it, crudely. To my eye, with 3.5x magnification, the "dot" appears to be a slash running right to left, kind of like a slash or stroke glyph. Without magnification this is hard to see. I compared this with an Aimpoint CompM2 with 4 moa dot under the same magnification, and it was, well, round, like a dot should be. This is a legit gripe, at least for people who want to magnify the optic.
5. Not true 1x: There seems to be a small amount of noticeable magnification going on. If you look at the Trijicon FAQ, it says the optic is 1.05x.
I told him to send it back to Trijicon if he wanted to put a magnifier behind it and the "dot" bothered him. Otherwise, just use it. For myself, if I was i the market for a mini-RDS, I would buy it.
I did not like the bad red glare with light behind you on the MRO . I did like the size .
Blue tint yes but that was no big deal . Sent it back and got a PRO .
sidewaysil80
02-07-16, 21:32
T&E'd the MRO as well as several RMR variants for possible selection for department duty rifle optic. Shot it back to back against a T1 and spent a lot of time looking through both.
I have no dog in this fight and am 100% neutral. Here is my answer to the common complaints...
Blue tint: Did not really notice it in overcast/rainy conditions (day 1 of T&E), but it became noticeable on day 2 in brighter weather. That being said it was on the T1 as well.
Neither optic stood out as having "more tint" then the other and I feel comfortable saying the tint (on both) is very minor and barely noticeable. I had a SPARC 1 and it was
way worse and the blue was very distracting, the MRO/T1 were nowhere near as bad.
Magnification: No bullshit, I did not really notice it until day 3 of testing (night setting) and that was when testing the reticle against a street light. I noticed the lamp and
pole were clearly magnified compared to the t1, but it was NOT by much. However, considering we shot for 2 days prior; I'd say that it's not as bad as
some make it out to be. I'm no scientist or engineer so this is my piece: the picture is clearly larger compared to the T1. I assume this is due to the
objective size, which I think masks the magnification unless you are looking for it. What I mean is when shooting this back to back against the T1, the field
of view on the MRO (which is what I noticed first and foremost) was much larger. You see more of the target with the MRO hands down; that to me masked
the magnification issue in some regard as it is what I noticed above all.
Does it SLIGHTLY magnify the target? Yes.
Is it noticeable to the point of being a distraction? No.
Will you relish in and appreciate the larger field of view before you notice the magnification? I can't speak for you, but I certainly did!
Reflections/washing out: For the folks on night shift we purposely wanted to use the MRO in a variety of lighting situations at night. This is included using in dark looking at brightly lit area, in a brightly lit area looking into dark area, low light range with dimly lit target, low light range with bright target, looking towards bright objects (headlights, street lights, etc.). We really didn't lose the dot (obviously had to adjust brightness throughout) in any situation. I feel comfortable in saying that regardless of lighting condition/situation you will always be able to pick up the dot. In reading this thread some mentioned something about reflection, I did not notice anything along those lines. Not saying its not there, but I'm no red dot enthusiast or engineer and as an end user it didn't stand out to me. My attention and eyes were always drawn to the dot/target. If some sort of glare was going on, it wasn't a distraction.
Bottom Line: We didn't torture test the T&E samples so I can't speak to their reliability. However, during my 8 years in the USMC I put ACOGS through hell and back and witnessed the same. Completely different optic, I get it. But it speaks to brand quality and reputation. The MRO does seem rugged and I like how it's brightness is setup for left/right handed shooters. The biggest benefit to other dots on the market is its larger field of view/sight picture hands down. I'm actually in the market for a red dot for my personal 10.5" SBR and this is on my short list along with a PRO and T1/H1. At this point I'm just enjoying my iron sights while I save some pennies and try to continue to get as much time with all my options. But the MRO was no where near as bad as some said to where I'd write it off or immediately get rid of it if I had one.
In short...it's different, but not necessarily worse.
Thank you for the review. Great points and nice to see that you put the MRO through an evaluation.
Sure wish I could look through one of these things. LGSs haven't even gotten any in yet.
Have PROs, H1s, EOs etc and am done with all except the PROs. I got to the point where I struggled with the H1/T1s tiny size. Call it eye fatigue or something, just couldn't do the tiny tube (gasp) anymore. The PROs were a breath of fresh air for my eyes and were/are much faster for me. This MRO seemed the perfect ticket as the PRO is a large / heavier optic and I'd like to shrink down. Pretty much the same story as everyone else.
So what's the typical return policy on these if I can't stand the thing? I like MIs new abso-co mount and combo pricing. I think I'm going to have to order and get first hand experience with one.
Brahmzy:
MI is not on my short list, but they have a decent reputation. I agree that the absolute co-witness height is the way to go (mostly because I don't run co-witnessed sights, and I like the slightly shorter height over the lower 1/3 style).
I just looked at their ad copy, and there were a couple of inaccuracies:
1. The MRO has 8 brightness settings (2 night, 6 day), not 18. When I tested it in November I generally used the 4 or 5 setting outdoors. I believe that setting 6 will be visible on a bright day with a snowy background, but we didn't have any snow last November.
2. The MRO does not have 'infinite eye relief.' Trijicon says it does, and the MRO has a very large range of eye relief (at least three to eight inches), but the small amount of magnification makes that claim a bit suspect. In my testing I found that I preferred the ocular lens at about seven inches from my eye, but your mileage WILL vary.
Like I stated above: If I were in the market for a micro red dot, I would buy it, and I would probably prefer it over the comparable Aimpoints. It appears to be a good design with lots of features I like, and I really like the wide field of view. My problem is that once I have the $500 for the MRO, I figure I am halfway to buying an ACOG TA11J, so why buy a red dot?
Just sold my comp m2 in a adm mount to a buddy and going to give the MRO a try. all you guys complaining about them wanna sell me one?
Primus Pilum
02-08-16, 11:18
I think the MRO is a much better buy. While the T1/T2 has the history, it really is nothing but a small durrable red dot. $700 is highway robbery.
The MRO has better FOV and is a few hundred cheaper. I would rather give my money to Trijicon that it be wisked away to pay for socialism in Europe.
Running all the major RDS (M4, T1/T2, MRO, Tru-dot, EXPS) I really like the MRO the best. If price was no object, I would still chose it.
Plan on buying 2 in the next couple weeks in fact as soon as my dealer gets them back in.
Primus Pilum
02-08-16, 11:21
Brahmzy:
MI is not on my short list, but they have a decent reputation. I agree that the absolute co-witness height is the way to go (mostly because I don't run co-witnessed sights, and I like the slightly shorter height over the lower 1/3 style).
I just looked at their ad copy, and there were a couple of inaccuracies:
1. The MRO has 8 brightness settings (2 night, 6 day), not 18. When I tested it in November I generally used the 4 or 5 setting outdoors. I believe that setting 6 will be visible on a bright day with a snowy background, but we didn't have any snow last November.
2. The MRO does not have 'infinite eye relief.' Trijicon says it does, and the MRO has a very large range of eye relief (at least three to eight inches), but the small amount of magnification makes that claim a bit suspect. In my testing I found that I preferred the ocular lens at about seven inches from my eye, but your mileage WILL vary.
Like I stated above: If I were in the market for a micro red dot, I would buy it, and I would probably prefer it over the comparable Aimpoints. It appears to be a good design with lots of features I like, and I really like the wide field of view. My problem is that once I have the $500 for the MRO, I figure I am halfway to buying an ACOG TA11J, so why buy a red dot?
I ran the MRO in snow/sunshine combo this last weekend. Compared to the T1/T2 I liked it better. The Tru-dot was noticeably weaker and was hard to pick up. Enough that its no longer a consideration.
If the MRO can still be used in the worst lighting combo for a red dot, then It will work anywhere. T2 crispness does edge it slightly out under a magnifier. Had to back the Mro down to reduce bloom on full power under 4x eotech mag. Still would choose the MRO.
Well just ordered the MI abso-cw mount / MRO combo. I'll give opinions on both soon.
EDIT: Oh, had a talk briefly with an MI guy about the reliability issues of the MROs.
He was pretty emphatic saying that there has absolutely been a slew of initial reliability issues with the sights when they first came out. He said anybody (vendor, manu) saying otherwise is absolutely lying. However he said that he has not seen any come back in a over a month with any issues. So he thinks it was an early, lower SN issue, "knock on wood.". Guess we'll see.
Well just ordered the MI abso-cw mount / MRO combo. I'll give opinions on both soon.
EDIT: Oh, had a talk briefly with an MI guy about the reliability issues of the MROs.
He was pretty emphatic saying that there has absolutely been a slew of initial reliability issues with the sights when they first came out. He said anybody (vendor, manu) saying otherwise is absolutely lying. However he said that he has not seen any come back in a over a month with any issues. So he thinks it was an early, lower SN issue, "knock on wood.". Guess we'll see.
Hope you can do a review after some use
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
One of you guys buy this before I do.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?180209-Trijicon-1x25-MRO-2-MOA-red-dot-sight&p=2264503#post2264503
Damn, that's a smoking deal! If I had the funds right now I'd be all over that
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
One of you guys buy this before I do.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?180209-Trijicon-1x25-MRO-2-MOA-red-dot-sight&p=2264503#post2264503
already pmd a dibs about 10 mins after he posted it. Fingers crossed one of you bastages isnt faster on the draw.
I was. MRO for me :dirol::dirol:
Damn, that's a smoking deal! If I had the funds right now I'd be all over that
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
already pmd a dibs about 10 mins after he posted it. Fingers crossed one of you bastages isnt faster on the draw.
I am glad you got it. That was a smoking deal!
Doing a little dance. Woot woot
Torquetard
02-11-16, 19:11
EDIT: Zero advertising of sales/trades outside of the Equipment Exchange.
https://www.m4carbine.net/faq.php?faq=vb_faq#faq_new_faq_item
1) Companies or individuals cannot advertise or sell products in the discussion forums (including signature lines and titles).
Primus Pilum
02-11-16, 19:14
The KYGUNCO deal for $408 is a steal too. If you want one, that's cheaper than .mil pricing from trijicon.
Nightstalker865
02-11-16, 20:29
The KYGUNCO deal for $408 is a steal too. If you want one, that's cheaper than .mil pricing from trijicon.
I'm seeing it listed for $443.99 without a mount. Can you post a link to the $408 deal?
I'm seeing it listed for $443.99 without a mount. Can you post a link to the $408 deal?
https://www.kygunco.com/trijicon-1x25-mro-miniature-rifle-optic-20-moa-adjustable-red-dot-reflex-sight-97784
Primus Pilum
02-11-16, 20:51
I'm seeing it listed for $443.99 without a mount. Can you post a link to the $408 deal?https://www.kygunco.com/mobile/products.cfm/id/97784/name/red-dot-sights
Nice. It's 450 with the 1/3 mount. Not a bad deal at all.
Now if there rmr was down to 400 I could complete my glock
Arms Unlimited has it with the Larue mount for $525
https://www.armsunlimited.com/Trijicon-MRO-2-MOA-Mini-Rifle-Optic-w-LaRue-Mount-p/2200003-lt.htm
Primus Pilum
02-12-16, 10:45
Rather spend $10 more and get bobro which is in every way shape and form a better mount.
I tried the Bobro cool-aide and went back to Larue. But if you prefer them, congratulations! I guess.
Primus Pilum
02-12-16, 13:47
I tried the Bobro cool-aide and went back to Larue. But if you prefer them, congratulations! I guess.
Yea I mean, why have a Bobro when you can have a Larue that is poorly machined compared to contemporary designs,is an inferior & dated design, requires a tool to adjust, will tear up your rails if not perfectly set, has much less clamping force, is proven to fail at high round counts and has a much worse RTZ in verified testing all while costing the same amount of money? Whats not to love? Chicken seasoning and paint mixers right?
Congratulations are certainly in order, then. But if you haven't noticed, this isn't the thread for it.
Uh oh Primus is up to his usual LaRue bashing / Bobro love again ... Watch out!
I'm not sure which is more pointless, Bobro vs Larue or Keymod vs MLOK? In any event, the force is strong with him.
Got the MRO with MI ACW Mount in last night. The Mount looks awesome. 2.0oz, and really tight lockup. Great lever design - twice the adjustments as an ADM.
Without daylight and range time, the best I could do last night was look through the MRO indoors. I am not impressed so far. I'm used to AimPoints for my RDSs. The MRO is not an AimPoint. It's form factor is perfect - better than the T1/T2, just as expected. But first impressions on the optics quality is assholes. The intense blue tint and edge clarity (or lack of), ambient light reflections etc. are not what I'm used and not what I'd expect on a $450-500 RDS, especially a Trijicon.
That said, it's either going back for a full refund or I'll play with it some more outside in the daylight and go from there.
I thought people were being anal and picky, now I can see what they're talking about. Sucks because this form factor,size,weight,controls,price are really nice. More to come.
Ok, I'm retracting some of what I said earlier. Got a chance to get it outside next to my PRO. It actually is a nice little sight. A lot of the nonsense disappears as soon as you're in full daylight, and even under-cover ambient daylight. I would say the view is actually BETTER than the PRO. Not the optics quality, but there's far less 'sight' / tunnel in my view, whether both eyes open or one eye open.
My experience seems to be mirroring a lot of others exactly. Looks like crap inside, just out of the box, but once it's out in the daylight, mounted, it's a different story.
Need some range time! I think this will be just as fast as a PRO, if not faster. The dot itself is on par with the PRO - a 2MOA mostly-round blob.
Ok, I'm retracting some of what I said earlier. Got a chance to get it outside next to my PRO. It actually is a nice little sight. A lot of the nonsense disappears as soon as you're in full daylight, and even under-cover ambient daylight. I would say the view is actually BETTER than the PRO. Not the optics quality, but there's far less 'sight' / tunnel in my view, whether both eyes open or one eye open.
My experience seems to be mirroring a lot of others exactly. Looks like crap inside, just out of the box, but once it's out in the daylight, mounted, it's a different story.
Need some range time! I think this will be just as fast as a PRO, if not faster. The dot itself is on par with the PRO - a 2MOA mostly-round blob.
I'm glad it disappears outdoors. I noticed the intense blue tint while indoors at my lgs and became a little wary. Still want to get it because it seems like a hell of a good optic for under $500
MonsterMan1036
02-13-16, 15:12
My t-1's have more blue tint in the house than my mro. Take a t-1 into a well lit room, you'll see it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Received my mro today. Love it. Much prefered to the other micro dots and full size tubes I've ran
Digital_Damage
02-15-16, 13:12
I'm not sure which is more pointless, Bobro vs Larue or Keymod vs MLOK? In any event, the force is strong with him.
Not pointless in the slightest. Larue for QDC is one of the worst, it has been independently verified and the results were admitted to by mark himself.
Just do some searches, it has been discussed to ad nauseum at this point.
No, still sounds pointless if the results were admitted by Mark and its been discussed ad nauseum doesn't it?
Digital_Damage
02-15-16, 14:23
No, still sounds pointless if the results were admitted by Mark and its been discussed ad nauseum doesn't it?
Your analogy eludes that they are close in performance, when they are not.
"I tried the Bobro cool-aide and went back to Larue. But if you prefer them, congratulations! I guess. "
Demonstrates a lack of knowledge into the two different systems.
I just ordered a mRO combo from adm, not bad for $490. Going to test it with my mepRO m5, and my micros. Really liking the mepRO so we'll see how it does.
Your analogy eludes that they are close in performance, when they are not.
"I tried the Bobro cool-aide and went back to Larue. But if you prefer them, congratulations! I guess. "
Demonstrates a lack of knowledge into the two different systems.
I can see you through the peep hole with your pamphlet but I ain't answering.
Primus Pilum
02-15-16, 23:17
I just ordered a mRO combo from adm, not bad for $490. Going to test it with my mepRO m5, and my micros. Really liking the mepRO so we'll see how it does.
It's hands down a better optic than the M5 or Tru-dot (which is really the same thing). In Snow and bright sun, the Mepro gets lost even on the brightest setting. It does have a crisper dot, but its not bright enough. It gets lost in that big window which means you loose speed. The M21 is even worse, how that is even usable in the bright ass desert is beyond me. Amber has to be the worst reticle color in the history of man.
MRO is quick, bright, precise. Anyone complaining about a blue tint or the 1.05X magnification simply doesn't shoot. They might play around in a gunstore or finger bang in their basement , but they aren't out running the products. If they were, they would be singing a different tune. Many of the complains are the exact same things present in other optics like aimpoints, but somehow that is conveniently left out. Ironic.
anyone know what size caps for an MRO?
I've used T1, T2, and Comp M4s. I looked through an MRO a few months back, and will happily never buy one. NOTHING about it impressed me. Not the fish-eye distortion. Not the blue tint. Not the magnification. I didn't notice any more FOV, no-matter how far/close I moved my face in relation to it, either. It's great competition for the Chinese RDS's out there, but it might lack in reliability compared to some of the high-end one's from Primary Arms, based on all the failures I keep hearing/reading about from people who's departments bought them.
Oh...and Bobro>LaRue, for both technical and non-technical reasons.
It's hands down a better optic than the M5 or Tru-dot (which is really the same thing). In Snow and bright sun, the Mepro gets lost even on the brightest setting. It does have a crisper dot, but its not bright enough. It gets lost in that big window which means you loose speed. The M21 is even worse, how that is even usable in the bright ass desert is beyond me. Amber has to be the worst reticle color in the history of man.
MRO is quick, bright, precise. Anyone complaining about a blue tint or the 1.05X magnification simply doesn't shoot. They might play around in a gunstore or finger bang in their basement , but they aren't out running the products. If they were, they would be singing a different tune. Many of the complains are the exact same things present in other optics like aimpoints, but somehow that is conveniently left out. Ironic.
No, they aren't. Your argument is similar to claiming that anyone who complains about a Miata compared to a Corvette on the track simply doesn't know how to drive the Miata...not necessarily. They might simply prefer a more capable vehicle with higher limits (not knocking the Miata, it's a great car, so is the Corvette, etc.).
The tint is annoying. Especially at night. It makes target recognition/precision through the MRO more challenging, especially around dawn/dusk, through gun smoke, etc. I believe the only person complaining about their WML at the last Nightfighter course was using a MRO...the only one in evidence. I looked through it, and the fish-eye was worse than any of the decent to better 1x-? variables, plus it had the tint issues I described, plus they have a reputation for breaking/arriving DOA.
Now, if you give a (functioning) MRO to a "shooter", and a T2 to a guy who only shoots 500 rounds a year...yeah, the guy with the MRO is going to get much more done...but that doesn't mean the MRO is as good as the T2, or that the shooter might not have preferred the T2.
JackFanToM
02-16-16, 07:51
No, they aren't. Your argument is similar to claiming that anyone who complains about a Miata compared to a Corvette on the track simply doesn't know how to drive the Miata...not necessarily. They might simply prefer a more capable vehicle with higher limits (not knocking the Miata, it's a great car, so is the Corvette, etc.).
The tint is annoying. Especially at night. It makes target recognition/precision through the MRO more challenging, especially around dawn/dusk, through gun smoke, etc. I believe the only person complaining about their WML at the last Nightfighter course was using a MRO...the only one in evidence. I looked through it, and the fish-eye was worse than any of the decent to better 1x-? variables, plus it had the tint issues I described, plus they have a reputation for breaking/arriving DOA.
Now, if you give a (functioning) MRO to a "shooter", and a T2 to a guy who only shoots 500 rounds a year...yeah, the guy with the MRO is going to get much more done...but that doesn't mean the MRO is as good as the T2, or that the shooter might not have preferred the T2.
This all coming from someone who has never actually "used" the MRO. Using your own analogy, what you just spouted is the same as someone stating the Miata is better on the track than the corvette, but has never driven the Corvette, but they sat in one at the showroom. Also, that nonsense about the "only guy at nightfighter....blah blah", and the "I believe" it starts with. Either you KNOW it was an MRO, and have some first hand evidence, or you are just bashing the optic cause it suits you. No real use of the item, then you have no value to add to the discussion except more ether based opinion.
This all coming from someone who has never actually "used" the MRO. Using your own analogy, what you just spouted is the same as someone stating the Miata is better on the track than the corvette, but has never driven the Corvette, but they sat in one at the showroom. Also, that nonsense about the "only guy at nightfighter....blah blah", and the "I believe" it starts with. Either you KNOW it was an MRO, and have some first hand evidence, or you are just bashing the optic cause it suits you. No real use of the item, then you have no value to add to the discussion except more ether based opinion.
Anyone who cares to compare them will tell you the MRO has fisheye and tint issues compared to the t2. You can argue all you want thay it doesn't slow the shooter down. Thats fine, and maybe it doesnt. I like nice things though, so no MRO love here.
JackFanToM
02-16-16, 08:32
Real world experience has shown me that my splits with the MRO are faster, and my hits more consistent than I was with my aimpoint. You may want pretty, but I want effective with plenty of of FOV.
Primus Pilum
02-16-16, 08:50
This all coming from someone who has never actually "used" the MRO. Using your own analogy, what you just spouted is the same as someone stating the Miata is better on the track than the corvette, but has never driven the Corvette, but they sat in one at the showroom. Also, that nonsense about the "only guy at nightfighter....blah blah", and the "I believe" it starts with. Either you KNOW it was an MRO, and have some first hand evidence, or you are just bashing the optic cause it suits you. No real use of the item, then you have no value to add to the discussion except more ether based opinion.
Yea no kidding. I think my post went way over his head and he only proved my point.
Aimpoints have magnification, Aimpoints have blue tint, Aimpoints arrive DOA and DO fail. Neither makes an difference when you actually run the optic. Sitting in your basement or looking through a gunshop not even mounted to a carbine is not first hand experience.
Trijicon has shipped over 20K MRO's in the short time they have been out, and they are sold out most places. I shoot North of 20K rounds a year through pistols, shotguns & Rifles, and a glass snob and would take the MRO anyday over the T1/T2. Owned them all, shot them all and even carried one of them into combat. The MRO is a better product IMO, and thats where I will spend my money.
Primus Pilum
02-16-16, 08:52
Anyone who cares to compare them will tell you the MRO has fisheye and tint issues compared to the t2. You can argue all you want thay it doesn't slow the shooter down. Thats fine, and maybe it doesnt. I like nice things though, so no MRO love here.
https://www.trijicon.com/na_en/support/faq_MRO.php
Neither matter at all and are negated when you run it, especially running with both eyes open like a RDS is supposed to be run.
lot of fan boy dick waving in here
It's hands down a better optic than the M5 or Tru-dot (which is really the same thing). In Snow and bright sun, the Mepro gets lost even on the brightest setting. It does have a crisper dot, but its not bright enough. It gets lost in that big window which means you loose speed. The M21 is even worse, how that is even usable in the bright ass desert is beyond me. Amber has to be the worst reticle color in the history of man.
MRO is quick, bright, precise. Anyone complaining about a blue tint or the 1.05X magnification simply doesn't shoot. They might play around in a gunstore or finger bang in their basement , but they aren't out running the products. If they were, they would be singing a different tune. Many of the complains are the exact same things present in other optics like aimpoints, but somehow that is conveniently left out. Ironic.
I actually sent my Tru-dot back because the brightness seemed a bit dim on max. It was finally confirmed when I compared it to a buddies and his was brighter on setting 3 than mine at 4...
I sent it back to Mark @ Mako and he got me a new one back asap no questions asked(which happened to be a M5) in time to run at a class. And yes they are basically the same thing(M5 and TruDot) but I've been pleased with it and the brightness since receiving the new one, and I have ran it back to back with my T1.
None the less I'm excited to try the mRO, I'm not biased with my gear and if I don't like it I'll sell it... But I doubt I will from what I've read.
JackFanToM
02-16-16, 09:18
lot of fan boy dick waving in here
Not sure I follow you on this. I have owned and used an eotech, aimpoint h1, and an MRO. FOV and split times were best with the eotech and worst with the aimpoint. MRO seems to have found a good middle ground.
So I'm a fan boy if I prefer to ignore opinions based on nothing more than handling one at the gun shop. I would say that bashing a product without any knowledge, in order to make you feel better about your purchase equals fanboy.
lets just say it wasn't directed at you and I agree with your definition.
Primus Pilum
02-16-16, 09:51
lets just say it wasn't directed at you and I agree with your definition.
What is your experience with the product?
I've no stake in trijicon or aimpoint, or anyone's wellbeing or happiness but my own. I won't be buying an MRO. Ymmv.
lot of fan boy dick waving in here
Ya, arguing over opinion
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
JackFanToM
02-16-16, 12:46
Ya, arguing over opinion
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The OP asked a question that can only prompt opinion, so i'm not sure what you were expecting. There is a difference between having an opinion, and having an opinion backed with actual experience. Thereby if gathering data from the opinions of others, you may filter the posts thusly...opinions backed with actual hands on data from the poster, opinions backed by "I know someone who had...", opinions backed by I saw, held, read about 1, opinions just based on simple like or dislike but with no real reason, and then those just posting to up their post count.
As stated before I have an MRO, and I owned an aimpoint h1 2moa (yes it is not a t2), so I have an opinion based on actual experience. Both optics had a blue tint to the glass, the tint "appears" darker at the edges of the MRO due to the distance from the dot (turn off the dot the tint is the same the entire lens). The fisheye is simple to explain...take any 2 pieces of glass with the exact same degree of curve to them, but 1 piece of glass is larger, the curve will appear to be more pronounced thus creating a mild fisheye at the edges. Now I would bet if the aimpoint glass was expanded (using the current lens curvature) the lens would have the same fisheye appearance. The reason you don't with the aimpoint is simply the FOV is smaller so you don't see the curvature. This effect requires that you look for it, so when using the optic it completely disappears (ymmv), as does the tint. I wasn't there WS6, but I would say that the MRO causing someone to have more issues than others due to the optic is highly unlikely. This could be caused by the individual's impaired night vision, you could have the optic wrong, could be to the individual's skill level, etc. Using that to demonstrate an optic's poor performance at night, and then stating it is due to the tint is utter horse manure. It is simply using an example of one, that you are unsure of, and wasn't even your personal experience to slam a product. Borrow one, shoot 1000 rounds with it, and then come relate YOUR experience, at least then you eliminate 2 of the 3 biased in your opinion.
Internet parrots is the term you are looking for.
The OP asked a question that can only prompt opinion, so i'm not sure what you were expecting. There is a difference between having an opinion, and having an opinion backed with actual experience. Thereby if gathering data from the opinions of others, you may filter the posts thusly...opinions backed with actual hands on data from the poster, opinions backed by "I know someone who had...", opinions backed by I saw, held, read about 1, opinions just based on simple like or dislike but with no real reason, and then those just posting to up their post count.
As stated before I have an MRO, and I owned an aimpoint h1 2moa (yes it is not a t2), so I have an opinion based on actual experience. Both optics had a blue tint to the glass, the tint "appears" darker at the edges of the MRO due to the distance from the dot (turn off the dot the tint is the same the entire lens). The fisheye is simple to explain...take any 2 pieces of glass with the exact same degree of curve to them, but 1 piece of glass is larger, the curve will appear to be more pronounced thus creating a mild fisheye at the edges. Now I would bet if the aimpoint glass was expanded (using the current lens curvature) the lens would have the same fisheye appearance. The reason you don't with the aimpoint is simply the FOV is smaller so you don't see the curvature. This effect requires that you look for it, so when using the optic it completely disappears (ymmv), as does the tint. I wasn't there WS6, but I would say that the MRO causing someone to have more issues than others due to the optic is highly unlikely. This could be caused by the individual's impaired night vision, you could have the optic wrong, could be to the individual's skill level, etc. Using that to demonstrate an optic's poor performance at night, and then stating it is due to the tint is utter horse manure. It is simply using an example of one, that you are unsure of, and wasn't even your personal experience to slam a product. Borrow one, shoot 1000 rounds with it, and then come relate YOUR experience, at least then you eliminate 2 of the 3 biased in your opinion.
I could probably shoot a Mueller as fast as I shoot my NXS Nightforce 1-4, up close. However, I appreciate the NF. I hated the MRO when I looked through it, did a few target transitions, etc. Hated it. Again, YMMV, but I won't buy one when Primary Arms sells a better optic for 1/3 the price, to my eyes. Especially with the 10-20% failure rate departments are having that I've read about from other verified LE. Of course, that is hearsay, but still...to my eyes, the T2 is FAR superior.
Functionally...they both project a daylight visible dot. Yes. I get that.
Primus Pilum
02-16-16, 15:11
I could probably shoot a Mueller as fast as I shoot my NXS Nightforce 1-4, up close. However, I appreciate the NF. I hated the MRO when I looked through it, did a few target transitions, etc. Hated it. Again, YMMV, but I won't buy one when Primary Arms sells a better optic for 1/3 the price, to my eyes. Especially with the 10-20% failure rate departments are having that I've read about from other verified LE. Of course, that is hearsay, but still...to my eyes, the T2 is FAR superior.
Functionally...they both project a daylight visible dot. Yes. I get that.
There is no hope for some people. So much fail in one post. SMH.
Folks stop the personal attacks. People asked for opinions and people are sharing opinions. I like the one I've shot. I like that it's American made and I like the price! I think I said it earlier. I also like standard triggers in my pistols and rifles. =) I'm a simple guy. I was concerned when I read about the reliability problems.
Primus Pilum
02-16-16, 17:15
All this hubub made me order another MRO + Bobro Mount. To show some good will here is how you get a new MRO in a cowitness Bobro mount for $512.89 shipped
Go to https://www.kygunco.com/trijicon-1x25-mro-miniature-rifle-optic-20-moa-adjustable-red-dot-reflex-sight-97784 and do the email and add to cart. Comes out to $408.99 with free shipping
Go to http://www.mountsplus.com/AR-15_Accessories/AR-15_Scope_Rings/184-BRO-B19555002.html and use coupon code MSP3000 and it comes out to 103.90 with 1st class mail shipped.
$20 more than the ADM combo and 100% better mount.
"Especially with the 10-20% failure rate departments are having that I've read about from other verified LE"
Doesn't look much like opinion to me. Please link us to or quote your sources. A few hundred years ago my great, great, great, great grand daddy read that he world was flat. Disclose your source of this information or go away.
"Especially with the 10-20% failure rate departments are having that I've read about from other verified LE"
Doesn't look much like opinion to me. Please link us to or quote your sources. A few hundred years ago my great, great, great, great grand daddy read that he world was flat. Disclose your source of this information or go away.
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?18868-MRO
Folks, I played with it on the gun and think it's trash. You like it and want to deny that it has more distortion than a mediocre lpv on 1x or that it doesn't bother you. ..that's great. OP wanted opinions. Thats mine, having played with it briefly on another person's rifle.
Above is the link you asked for.
By all means, buy away. Doesn't affect me.
Primus Pilum
02-16-16, 17:48
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?18868-MRO
"I have also heard this complaint elsewhere. There's a LEO armorer on another site (can't remember which) that's had 4 out 24(ish) agency MRO's go tits up, one of which was found DOA when replacing another broken unit. That's approaching a 20% failure rate, within their unit examples. He's working with Trijicon on the issues, and he says they've been responsive. Could be a bad run, who knows, but I'm not ready to buy one as of yet. "
So your verified source is someone from another website that is repeating 2nd hand info from someone he doesn't even remember who said it out of some astronomically small sample size?
You do know that AP's fail right? You do know they sometime arrive DOA? You do know they have a blue tint? You do know they have slight magnification as well?
Good to know your logic machine is working overtime.
"Especially with the 10-20% failure rate departments are having that I've read about from other verified LE"
Doesn't look much like opinion to me. Please link us to or quote your sources. A few hundred years ago my great, great, great, great grand daddy read that he world was flat. Disclose your source of this information or go away.
"I have also heard this complaint elsewhere. There's a LEO armorer on another site (can't remember which) that's had 4 out 24(ish) agency MRO's go tits up, one of which was found DOA when replacing another broken unit. That's approaching a 20% failure rate, within their unit examples. He's working with Trijicon on the issues, and he says they've been responsive. Could be a bad run, who knows, but I'm not ready to buy one as of yet. "
So your verified source is someone from another website that is repeating 2nd hand info from someone he doesn't even remember who said it out of some astronomically small sample size?
You do know that AP's fail right? You do know they sometime arrive DOA? You do know they have a blue tint? You do know they have slight magnification as well?
Good to know your logic machine is working overtime.
Owned multiple aimpoonts. None disappointed me like the MRO when I looked through them. If you cannot accept that someone with 20/10 vision looked through several sights back to back and found one to be vastly inferior in tint and distortion,...oh well.
Read the rest of thay thread. Every site you go to you see mro failures. Find me a bunch of t2 failures. ...? I've read of maybe 1 or 2. Guess how many t2 optics are in the wild...
This reminds me of the vcog love affair. Everyone's broke during review, the .mil unit thay deployed with them has a 10% breakage rate. People report phoria, etc....but some people just love them!
Everyone's eyes are different. Magnification and tint and edge distortion may not be as visible to others, and they may not care if they are. Like I said...I like nice things. This is why I have nightforce and kahles and not Burris and mueller. Ymmv. I can run either just as fast...but I have my preference and I stated why. Don't pretend to tell me what my own eyes see.
JackFanToM
02-16-16, 18:05
WS6, I mean absolutely no offense by this, but brother do you understand that no one doubts your opinion, as being your opinion? What I am saying, is that your opinion is based on nothing more than handling an MRO in a gunstore, and due to you hearing other people's 2nd hand bashing. Your response is to bash the product again and back it with some made up percentage of LE agencies that have had issues. Then when asked to cite the source you bash the product again, and provide yet another account from someone else's vague recollection. Not one thing you have said has any merit. Why are you expending so much energy bashing a product you have no real experience with? You looked through one at a gunstore, it wasn't for you, end of story...that is all you have worth contributing, so leave it at that.
"Especially with the 10-20% failure rate departments are having that I've read about from other verified LE"
Doesn't look much like opinion to me. Please link us to or quote your sources. A few hundred years ago my great, great, great, great grand daddy read that he world was flat. Disclose your source of this information or go away.
WS6, I mean absolutely no offense by this, but brother do you understand that no one doubts your opinion, as being your opinion? What I am saying, is that your opinion is based on nothing more than handling an MRO in a gunstore, and due to you hearing other people's 2nd hand bashing. Your response is to bash the product again and back it with some made up percentage of LE agencies that have had issues. Then when asked to cite the source you bash the product again, and provide yet another account from someone else's vague recollection. Not one thing you have said has any merit. Why are you expending so much energy bashing a product you have no real experience with? You looked through one at a gunstore, it wasn't for you, end of story...that is all you have worth contributing, so leave it at that.
I ran it on the range. True, I was not pulling the trigger as it was not appropriate at the time, but I handled it on a gun, outside, during a nightfighter course, back to back with my comp m4. What magical environmental setting will make me like it?
I'm bashing it because I didn't like it, and have read far too much about it breaking. Maybe at high noon against a Sandy background only in Utah would I like it...but seriously. Target to target transitions exposed terrible amounts of fish eye for a rds...I was disgusted. The mro is nothing but an argument for a low power variable, imo.
Also, before you ask, all I use are LPVs now. I no longer own an aimpoint. So this isn't an argument about "my rds is better...."
JackFanToM
02-16-16, 18:32
You are bashing it because you are quoting 2nd hand accounts as facts and making up percentages. No one wants to make you like it, just stop feeding me BS
"Especially with the 10-20% failure rate departments are having that I've read about from other verified LE"
Doesn't look much like opinion to me. Please link us to or quote your sources. A few hundred years ago my great, great, great, great grand daddy read that he world was flat. Disclose your source of this information or go away.
You are bashing it because you are quoting 2nd hand accounts as facts and making up percentages. No one wants to make you like it, just stop feeding me BS
Have experience with it on a rifle at the range.
Didn't like it.
Make whatever excuse suits you as to my opinion if you want to disregard. Frankly, I'd be amused to see you buy one, so I'll stop arguing against what would make me smile.
You are bashing it because you are quoting 2nd hand accounts as facts and making up percentages. No one wants to make you like it, just stop feeding me BS
If you think there haven't been a lot of failures on the launch of this optic, you're ignoring the facts. Call up MI and ask them about early serial number failures. They know. They are a distributor. They got the returns. They got to deal with Trijicon on the whole thing. What do they have to gain by lying? They personally told me "Anybody that tells you otherwise, distributor/reseller or customer is lying."
This is not new knowledge, this is well-known knowledge based on first hand experiences. The consensus is the earlier units DID have failures but the later / current units are more reliable.
What's so hard to comprehend about this? Why attack a forum member on this? Why are you taking it personally?
I'm looking at both my PRO and my MRO, right now. As I stated earlier, the optics quality of the PRO is better. There is less blue tint in the PRO and the edge clarity is better. The dots look extremely close, to me, on both. Maybe a small nod to the PRO for clarity/crispness. This changes in different lighting on both, obviously. As far as the view, fov, whatever you want to call it, the MRO wins hands down. As this is a priority to me, and partially why I don't run H1/T1s anymore, I'm keeping the MRO.
As far as Bobro vs everything else mentality, that's nonsense. Fanboi antics. "100% better than ADM". What an absolutely silly blanket statement with no factual value. My MI mount weighs 2.0oz, how much does that Bobro tank weigh? MI locks up solid. There's a definitel theme whenever certain people start posting and making broad blanket statements.
"Especially with the 10-20% failure rate departments are having that I've read about from other verified LE"
Doesn't look much like opinion to me. Please link us to or quote your sources. A few hundred years ago my great, great, great, great grand daddy read that he world was flat. Disclose your source of this information or go away.
If you think there haven't been a lot of failures on the launch of this optic, you're ignoring the facts. Call up MI and ask them about early serial number failures. They know. They are a distributor. They got the returns. They got to deal with Trijicon on the whole thing. What do they have to gain by lying? They personally told me "Anybody that tells you otherwise, distributor/reseller or customer is lying."
This is not new knowledge, this is well-known knowledge based on first hand experiences. The consensus is the earlier units DID have failures but the later / current units are more reliable.
What's so hard to comprehend about this? Why attack a forum member on this? Why are you taking it personally?
I'm cool with it. I hope he buys one. That would satisfy me more than anything else involving this thread.
The MRO is a new optic. While Trijicon is a good company, this optic has no track record yet. It hasn't been out long enough to even warrant a battery change. Theres no long term "in the wild" feedback to be had.
IMO I would hold off on one until its proven itself over the long term.
I still don't have a good feeling about their exposed turrets.
Primus Pilum
02-16-16, 19:28
If you think there haven't been a lot of failures on the launch of this optic, you're ignoring the facts. Call up MI and ask them about early serial number failures. They know. They are a distributor. They got the returns. They got to deal with Trijicon on the whole thing. What do they have to gain by lying? They personally told me "Anybody that tells you otherwise, distributor/reseller or customer is lying."
This is not new knowledge, this is well-known knowledge based on first hand experiences. The consensus is the earlier units DID have failures but the later / current units are more reliable.
What's so hard to comprehend about this? Why attack a forum member on this? Why are you taking it personally?
I'm looking at both my PRO and my MRO, right now. As I stated earlier, the optics quality of the PRO is better. There is less blue tint in the PRO and the edge clarity is better. The dots look extremely close, to me, on both. Maybe a small nod to the PRO for clarity/crispness. This changes in different lighting on both, obviously. As far as the view, fov, whatever you want to call it, the MRO wins hands down. As this is a priority to me, and partially why I don't run H1/T1s anymore, I'm keeping the MRO.
As far as Bobro vs everything else mentality, that's nonsense. Fanboi antics. "100% better than ADM". What an absolutely silly blanket statement with no factual value. My MI mount weighs 2.0oz, how much does that Bobro tank weigh? MI locks up solid. There's a definitel theme whenever certain people start posting and making broad blanket statements.
Who said anything about MI? I compared it to ADM which is clearly an inferior product to bobro on many levels. OMFG 2 oz? let me go sell all my proven gear to buy a product from a AR accessory bottom feeder who riped the design off 10 other mount manufactures who have been around for 10+ years.
If the extra 1.7oz is an issue to you for you, then maybe you should hit the weights. 3.7oz is now a tank? ROFL.
Primus Pilum
02-16-16, 19:31
The MRO is a new optic. While Trijicon is a good company, this optic has no track record yet. It hasn't been out long enough to even warrant a battery change. Theres no long term "in the wild" feedback to be had.
IMO I would hold off on one until its proven itself over the long term.
I still don't have a good feeling about their exposed turrets.
Yea, wouldn't want to slip and fall on a screwdriver while spinning my whole body , could end up with a click or 2 off zero . Meanwhile dozens of other yokells all over the Internet complaining about how they lost their adjustment caps on their scope/rds of choice and asking where they can buy new ones.
Yea, wouldn't want to slip and fall on a screwdriver while spinning my whole body , could end up with a click or 2 off zero . Meanwhile dozens of other yokells all over the Internet complaining about how they lost their adjustment caps on their scope/rds of choice and asking where they can buy new ones.
What exactly are you on about?
I am talking about stuff getting into the optic via the exposed turrets. Water. Sand. Dirt. Etc.
But now that you bring it up zero could be effected at some point.
The MRO is a new optic. While Trijicon is a good company, this optic has no track record yet. It hasn't been out long enough to even warrant a battery change. Theres no long term "in the wild" feedback to be had.
IMO I would hold off on one until its proven itself over the long term.
I still don't have a good feeling about their exposed turrets.
Well, to be fair about the turrets, Eotech has had them for some time, and other tube-optics have had them for a good while, too. My concerns are more with the breaking battery contacts and optics that just won't even turn on that I keep hearing about.
As far as Bobro vs everything else mentality, that's nonsense. Fanboi antics. "100% better than ADM". What an absolutely silly blanket statement with no factual value. My MI mount weighs 2.0oz, how much does that Bobro tank weigh? MI locks up solid. There's a definitel theme whenever certain people start posting and making broad blanket statements.
All of the testing I have seen (unofficial youTube grade stuff), and the .mil testing (not shown/seen, but told by SME's on this board, who if they posted it, would be taken at face value immediately), have confirmed that the Bobro is indeed a superior solution to any other throw-mount out there. Talking with Bobro, the cold, hard facts of the matter are that they put 6-800% more pressure on the rail than any other throw-lever out there. However, they still only put 30% of what a fixed mount, torqued to 65 inch-lb is placing on the rail. So if you want bomb-proof, I'd say Nightforce or Badger or KAC or Geissele, now. If you want "at LEAST as tough as my optic is, anyway..." then Bobro is where I'd start.
What do I like about Bobro?
-Well, for starters, Andrew is a great guy, and will build my mounts to suite (lever wherever I want it. I prefer it on the right...and I'm a no-body. You call him, and he'll probably do it for you, too!).
-technical data already mentioned
-personal experience is that they maintain, and RTZ perfectly
-weight. The mount for my K16i is only 7.5oz.
-Does not change the dimension of the rail with repeated use (*cough* LaRue *cough*)
But here is the main one, because all of the above can be argued as "My such and such has performed just fine, and I don't shoot bench-rest..."...and I wouldn't argue with you in the least over it!
However...the Bobro is truly EASY to remove. No "tight" levers required for it to hold zero. No need to throw molle under a lever. Etc. If you have a QD mount...the damn thing should be QD. Not "throw molle under it, flip multiple things, yank hard..." No. It should be a single lever "pop and drop". Bobro says their single lever is fine on a .308 gun up to nearly 30oz optic weight. I strongly prefer a single lever for a myriad of reasons, the biggest one just stated.
That is why I think Bobro is "the best". YMMV, of course, but there are documented facts and all that, too!
Well, to be fair about the turrets, Eotech has had them for some time, and other tube-optics have had them for a good while, too. My concerns are more with the breaking battery contacts and optics that just won't even turn on that I keep hearing about.
Im not sure mentioning Eotech as an example for how to do something is good. I've seen enough of them fail for things they were not recalled for. Just sayin.
Im not sure mentioning Eotech as an example for how to do something is good. I've seen enough of them fail for things they were not recalled for. Just sayin.
Leupold MK6
Trijicon MRD's
Have you EVER heard of an issue with adjustment fouling/moisture incursion via the exposed adjustments on these, or similar? I have not. Even on the internet. That doesn't mean it cannot happen, I just don't think it's the biggest hurdle in the MRO's path in the least, is all I'm saying. Kindof like complaining about a rock chip on your paint while considering how to fix the cracked block/bent rod.
Leupold MK6
Trijicon MRD's
Have you EVER heard of an issue with adjustment fouling/moisture incursion via the exposed adjustments on these, or similar? I have not. Even on the internet. That doesn't mean it cannot happen, I just don't think it's the biggest hurdle in the MRO's path in the least, is all I'm saying. Kindof like complaining about a rock chip on your paint while considering how to fix the cracked block/bent rod.
Nope. I haven't. That doesn't mean the MRO used the same materials and tolerances as what you mentioned.
We will find out in due time.
That is not my only reservation either. As I said its an unproven optic. Time will tell.
Bottom line with any optic it's a personal choice as far as what you like and what you think is best for you.
I've sold all of my Aimpoint micros and have 3 MRO's with the Bobro mount. I couldn't be happier. I've got about 1,000 rounds on each with no issues on duty and SWAT.
If I stare at a T2/H2 it looks clearer than an MRO. But it's an RDS, not a scope where glass matters.
When I run it in drills and shoot and move the MRO is better FOR ME. The better looking when stared at T2/H2 didn't matter when running the optic during drills/movement.
Again is the MRO for everyone? no, just like the Aimpoint micro isn't for everyone.My favorite Aimpoint is the M4s.
Try it if you don't like it sell it or return no harm no foul.
Do these sit the same height as micros? I prefer lower 1/3 mounts on my micros and that's what I got with my mRO, but I thought I recalled reading someone saying they are sitting a bit taller?
Adm hasn't shipped my combo yet so there's still some time to change it.
Thanks
Do these sit the same height as micros? I prefer lower 1/3 mounts on my micros and that's what I got with my mRO, but I thought I recalled reading someone saying they are sitting a bit taller?
Adm hasn't shipped my combo yet so there's still some time to change it.
Thanks
https://tacticalgunreview.com/trijicon-mro-aimpoint-killer/
JackFanToM
02-17-16, 17:43
If you think there haven't been a lot of failures on the launch of this optic, you're ignoring the facts. Call up MI and ask them about early serial number failures. They know. They are a distributor. They got the returns. They got to deal with Trijicon on the whole thing. What do they have to gain by lying? They personally told me "Anybody that tells you otherwise, distributor/reseller or customer is lying."
This is not new knowledge, this is well-known knowledge based on first hand experiences. The consensus is the earlier units DID have failures but the later / current units are more reliable.
What's so hard to comprehend about this? Why attack a forum member on this? Why are you taking it personally?
I'm looking at both my PRO and my MRO, right now. As I stated earlier, the optics quality of the PRO is better. There is less blue tint in the PRO and the edge clarity is better. The dots look extremely close, to me, on both. Maybe a small nod to the PRO for clarity/crispness. This changes in different lighting on both, obviously. As far as the view, fov, whatever you want to call it, the MRO wins hands down. As this is a priority to me, and partially why I don't run H1/T1s anymore, I'm keeping the MRO.
As far as Bobro vs everything else mentality, that's nonsense. Fanboi antics. "100% better than ADM". What an absolutely silly blanket statement with no factual value. My MI mount weighs 2.0oz, how much does that Bobro tank weigh? MI locks up solid. There's a definitel theme whenever certain people start posting and making broad blanket statements.
The problem I have is that 2nd and 3rd hand statements are being posted as fact. He never said he heard from a guy on another forum, that he heard from a LE armorer about x outta x failing. Instead he stated it in such a way that it appeared he had factual data backing up a 10-20% failure rate. That is a big deal, and it's also a fabrication.
I don't care if he doesn't like the mro, I'm aware of the issues and track record and that isn't my issue, but I'll be damned if I won't call unsubstantiated bs like that to the mat.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
Do these sit the same height as micros? I prefer lower 1/3 mounts on my micros and that's what I got with my mRO, but I thought I recalled reading someone saying they are sitting a bit taller?
Adm hasn't shipped my combo yet so there's still some time to change it.
Thanks
This is how Larue (gasp) mounts compare as another data point.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/4481604/forum-pics/Larue3rd-MROvsT1.jpg
This is how Larue (gasp) mounts compare as another data point.
Holy cow man. You better be careful. Those LaRue mounts are just going to fall off and/or self-destruct any moment now. Your rail will be permanently destroyed and your RTZ will be 2ft @ 25 yards.
Mark will laugh and publicly humiliate you.
Primus Pilum
02-17-16, 19:03
Holy cow man. You better be careful. Those LaRue mounts are just going to fall off and/or self-destruct any moment now. Your rail will be permanently destroyed and your RTZ will be 2ft @ 25 yards.
Mark will laugh and publicly humiliate you.
Ever price a new SCAR16 or SCAR17 upper?
I can't wait to destroy my SCAR 16 upper with the Larue LT120 mount for my Mark 6 1-6. :laugh:
Livefreeordie92
02-20-16, 10:33
I was in this same predicament a little bit ago. Didn't know what to get for my new BCM carbine. I looked at an MRO and while it seems like this could be Trijicons break through red dot sight, I was not convinced it was on par with Aimpoint. It does have a wierd magnifying glass type of magnification. Also it doesn't have as many brightness settings as an Aimpoint. More of an ocd issue but still. And with mixed reports of good ones and some people that have had issues that came up, well the Aimpoint H1 sounded like a much better idea. And I knew that if I bought the trijicon, that I may very well have been left wishing I'd just got the micro, but knew that if I got the micro, I probably wouldn't have had any buyers remorse or wished I'd got an MRO. When I got the H1 micro I ordered, this all proved to be true and the only thing I'm left wondering is why I didn't get one sooner.
Singlestack Wonder
02-20-16, 12:28
Moving forward, rather than the posting and re-posting of plus/minus opinions on the MRO, let's revisit next spring after they have been in use for a while by many shooters. The Trijicon SRS release generated the same discussions. After a year or so in the real world, it did not develop a following of serious users for many reasons and faded from the limelight. Based on comments here with serial # ranges posted, perhaps Trijicon has worked out some of the initial issues.
I still stand by my statement that I much prefer an American made product. Just as Aimpoint upgraded and corrected issues with their RDS units over the years, I certainly hope that Trijicon continues to improve the MRO and that eventually it will be a preferred choice on serious user/military/LEO rifles.
I see fewer brightness settings as a plus. I went to the range today and shot my old Aimpoint Comp M2. It's on my 15-22. The thing still rocks.
I shot my MRO at the range today. I had a lot of guns to zero so I didn't spend a terrible amount of time with it but I know I wish it had more brightness settings. Early this morning 3 was too dim and 4 was too bright when 8 on the T2 a few minutes later was perfect, maybe it will be less dramatic when the sun is out.
So I got mine mounted on a new faxon 11.5 mid length and Im sold so far. I brought my 11.5 bcm upper along with a h1 mounted on it and went to the range.
Shot them back to back quite a bit, and really like the mRO. The magnification people complain about isn't noticeable when at the range, the blue tint etc.. non issue... For $500 with a mount, and so long as it holds up like my aimpoints I'll definitely be grabbing more of them.
The brightness settings were fine for me as well, but I only use a couple settings on my micros anyways.
The fov is definitely an obvious plus, and I really so no downside to it when comparing it to a micro.
Also got to shoot my MRO on my freshly built 300BLK today. I can say my PROs have nothing on this MRO. Very pleased with it. Dot is super crisp, and the sight as a whole is very fast. Yeah it's blue compared to the PRO and the glass is not as clear, as I've stated before, but when you're staring at and shooting your target, all that goes away. What's nicer is the better FOV/profile of the MRO.
Also got to shoot my MRO on my freshly built 300BLK today. I can say my PROs have nothing on this MRO. Very pleased with it. Dot is super crisp, and the sight as a whole is very fast. Yeah it's blue compared to the PRO and the glass is not as clear, as I've stated before, but when you're staring at and shooting your target, all that goes away. What's nicer is the better FOV/profile of the MRO.
FOV didn't impress me, but the one thing you hit on was form factor. I never liked knows on the side. Trijicon. Did a solid, there.
[emoji106] the reviews after shooting
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Maybe I had a bad one ? Love the size.
I could not get past the red glare with light behind you.
I'll stick with the pro .
Maybe I had a bad one ? Love the size.
I could not get past the red glare with light behind you.
I'll stick with the pro .
You just didn't shoot it enough ;)
Seriously. Most of the complaints will NOT go away by using it, lol
You just didn't shoot it enough ;)
Seriously. Most of the complaints will NOT go away by using it, lol
It's a solid red dot, since I own multiple micros and now a mRO, and after spending a better half of a full Saturday running mine back to back with my micro I saw no negatives. I'll be honest and say I'm good running either or, and I don't think I'll sell my aimpoints, but the mRO from a functionality standpoint is as good (if not better with the slight fov advantage, which is noticeable) than my micro. The durability and battery life is yet to be proven.
My buddy who has spent time deployed with his comp m4 also put a solid 200+ rounds down range with the mRO, and his feelings were the same as mine.
Did you own a mRO by chance?
It's a solid red dot, since I own multiple micros and now a mRO, and after spending a better half of a full Saturday running mine back to back with my micro I saw no negatives. I'll be honest and say I'm good running either or, and I don't think I'll sell my aimpoints, but the mRO from a functionality standpoint is as good (if not better with the slight fov advantage, which is noticeable) than my micro. The durability and battery life is yet to be proven.
My buddy who has spent time deployed with his comp m4 also put a solid 200+ rounds down range with the mRO, and his feelings were the same as mine.
Did you own a mRO by chance?
No, I do not. I sampled one at a course I attended and said "No, thanks."
I'm very happy with it so far, the tint is a non issue for me, I feel they are the same. I have three t-1's, with that I'll be purchasing another mro before another micro t-1 or 2.
The field of view, adjustments are easier, and price under $500 with adm mount do it for me.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"I feel" doesn't work, here, because the human eye corrects for color VERY WELL. I personally feel that the T1 and T2 have the same amount of tint, and I've held them back to back. Yet when you take a picture... http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0731/4357/files/Aimpoint_T1-T2_Un_large.png?12530453778729847870\
*Sorry. I was Googling something else, and this exact post was a results hit, and so I responded to it along the lines of what I was Googling. thought the thread was a bit more active. Derp.
http://i.imgur.com/WSKdtFQ.png
JackFanToM
04-15-16, 21:01
As stated many times before, how does the tint affect your shooting? Considering you didn't note the tint difference in the t1 vs t2, until you photographed them, I would guess not a bit. This is a RDS, not a long range optic, if aesthetics are important to you in an an RDS, and is a driving factor, then your opinion will be discounted by that. I consider FOV far more important than glass tint, on a rds. The MRO meets that criteria better than the t2, and at a lesser cost. Things that don't matter are the near imperceptible magnification, mild distortion at the far edges of the larger FOV, and tint. Things that matter are FOV, durability, daylight brightness of the dot, cost, ability to accurately track, weight, battery life, adjustability, size and sharpness of the reticle, mounting options...those things matter, but who cares about nonsense you only notice when sitting around the house comparing it's tint or staring at objects for extended periods while looking for minute amounts of magnification or distortion.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
As stated many times before, how does the tint affect your shooting? Considering you didn't note the tint difference in the t1 vs t2, until you photographed them, I would guess not a bit. This is a RDS, not a long range optic, if aesthetics are important to you in an an RDS, and is a driving factor, then your opinion will be discounted by that. I consider FOV far more important than glass tint, on a rds. The MRO meets that criteria better than the t2, and at a lesser cost. Things that don't matter are the near imperceptible magnification, mild distortion at the far edges of the larger FOV, and tint. Things that matter are FOV, durability, daylight brightness of the dot, cost, ability to accurately track, weight, battery life, adjustability, size and sharpness of the reticle, mounting options...those things matter, but who cares about nonsense you only notice when sitting around the house comparing it's tint or staring at objects for extended periods while looking for minute amounts of magnification or distortion.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
I'd get a LPV. It's better on 1x than the mro, comparatively for me. Why deal with all the downsides of a lpv on 1x with no zoom capability? Aimpoint, or lpv. The pro kicks the mros ass for less/similar cost, and the t1 or t2 for more. Tint? Meh. But the magnification worse than an lpv on 1x is offputting.
JackFanToM
04-15-16, 21:14
How are either of those even relevant to this conversation...neither a LPV or the Pro are a T2 or an MRO, and neither are even a micro. No one that shoots the MRO even notices the .05 over true 1x magnification. The only time you notice it is when you are sitting around looking at it. I have owned an aimpoint h1 and an MRO, put a ton of rounds down range with both. I have no complaints about the H1, but the MRO's FOV hands down is better, and due to that I'm faster with it and it is easier to pick up the dot.
I have read all of your "opinions" that you have posted, and you obviously do not like the MRO, but you have also admitted to have no real range time with it, so how does your opinion carry any weight?
My opinions are tracking with plenty of people who have range time with it. So are yours. Key word: opinions.
I just know I hated it after 5 minutes of playing with it on the gun, so why would I bother wasting the money to hate it even more because I ran it long term? You don't test drive a car and say "this thing sucks. I'd better buy it so I can evaluate it longer."
JackFanToM
04-15-16, 21:43
Yeah, but how does an opinion based on no real world experience matter to those looking to make a decision to purchase? It's just noise. I happen to be one of those people that does not like mustangs, but I have never driven one, so I can state that I personally don't like the look of them. On the other hand if I state the new challenger is a better automobile than the mustang, well how does that matter to someone who is looking for a truly "better" car? I can spout off opinions about all sorts of stuff I have no "practical" knowledge of, and support my claims with "other people with practical knowledge share my opinion," but that doesn't make my opinion anything more than the noise it began as.
I have yet to see anyone that has spent time behind the optic state that the tint or mild magnification has any affect on their use of the optic. I have heard a few people state the mild distortion bothers them enough to choose another optic, but not that it affected their actual shooting. I found that using the H1 didn't bother me at all, until I put a timer on it vs my eotech and my mro, then I found I was a bit slower. Then I spent time diagnosing why...simple answer is the small FOV took me a bit longer to pick up the dot. The answer to this is to place the optic further down the rail. This intensifies the "looking through a tube affect" and for me made the optic slower to come up on the target, and less stable on the target (the dot had more movement, as it was further from my eye). I would challenge you to try this before discounting it. I now have my MRO as far to the rear as I can get it. The dot is picked up in my peripheral vision before it even gets to the target, the optic itself nearly disappears (like my Vortex Viper does but with no eye relief at all to deal with and way less weight). This has an obvious affect on speed of rounds downrange. Other pluses, are with more weight shifted to the rear, the rifle handles better, the balance is better, the dot stays more stable on the target downrange, and over extended shooting times you find you feel the weight of rifle less YMMV, but this has been true for me.
Thus far I'm pleased with the MRO, it is a newer optic, so who knows if it will stand the test of time like the aimpoint has, but at this price point I think it well worth the finding out. As a side note, I have owned the optic since December, and I have not shut it off yet...still going strong.
Here is a great review. Seems to restate everything I said months ago, and at no cost to myself. But what do I know. I didn't buy one....
https://youtu.be/NadM4zD8oJ8
JackFanToM
04-15-16, 22:01
I could handpick a review that supports the opposite argument, or 3 or 6, or more. Your opinion only matters if it is backed with actual experience - Here's another youtube video that states another opinion (cause I watch youtube too)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSShOQYUqjE
I could handpick a review that supports the opposite argument, or 3 or 6, or more. Your opinion only matters if it is backed with actual experience - Here's another youtube video that states another opinion (cause I watch youtube too)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSShOQYUqjE
Do you need to get kicked in the balls to know you don't like it? Me either. I have no need to run the mro for an extended period of time to know I don't like it, either. However, the mro is an opinion item. You stated yours. I stated mine. Then you devalued mine because I was smart enough to know what I like after just a few minutes of it...
JackFanToM
04-15-16, 22:14
No...I never devalued yours, I simply stated it has no value. Using your really off analogy, you gonna trust a guy who has never been kicked in the sack to relate the feeling of it, or someone who has? Knowing you don't "like" something vs having actually having experience to base it upon are very different. We established earlier that "you don't like it". I simply pointed out that you based it all on aesthetics which mean nothing when you are trying to get a practical comparison on "function". A good analogy would be an argument between 2 guys about their opinion of Angelina Jolie and Jenifer Aniston...they could base it on looks, but then Brad Pitt shows up and tells you which one is better in bed...who has a "functional" opinion and who has a pie in the sky opinion. You just don't know what you don't know.
No...I never devalued yours, I simply stated it has no value. Using your really off analogy, you gonna trust a guy who has never been kicked in the sack to relate the feeling of it, or someone who has? Knowing you don't "like" something vs having actually having experience to base it upon are very different. We established earlier that "you don't like it". I simply pointed out that you based it all on aesthetics which mean nothing when you are trying to get a practical comparison on "function". A good analogy would be an argument between 2 guys about their opinion of Angelina Jolie and Jenifer Aniston...they could base it on looks, but then Brad Pitt shows up and tells you which one is better in bed...who has a "functional" opinion and who has a pie in the sky opinion. You just don't know what you don't know.
I handled it on a gun, ran a few transitions, etc. I'd say that's beyond aesthetics. You make it sound like I just don't like the shape.
JackFanToM
04-15-16, 22:20
all you have mentioned as issues are aesthetics...tint being the primary, and you mentioned the magnification, neither of which are even evident when actually shooting with both eyes open.
all you have mentioned as issues are aesthetics...tint being the primary, and you mentioned the magnification, neither of which are even evident when actually shooting with both eyes open.
And what have you mentioned? More aesthetics. Such as, how much target area is viewable through the optic, etc.
Interestingly, you move your optic to the full rear with the mro, to take advantage of these aesthetics, when the only military testing on the subject that I am aware of, points to the optic being more forward as ideal. Dutch military testing, fwiw, with a rds and carbine. I dunno if the us military has specifically studied it.
JackFanToM
04-15-16, 22:59
I believe I mentioned the things that mattered - Things that matter are FOV, durability, daylight brightness of the dot, cost, ability to accurately track, weight, battery life, adjustability, size and sharpness of the reticle, mounting options.
Also, what optic did they use in their testing? I already stated that the aimpoint requires the optic to be further forward. Not sure where you are trying to go with this.
I believe I mentioned the things that mattered - Things that matter are FOV, durability, daylight brightness of the dot, cost, ability to accurately track, weight, battery life, adjustability, size and sharpness of the reticle, mounting options.
Also, what optic did they use in their testing? I already stated that the aimpoint requires the optic to be further forward. Not sure where you are trying to go with this.
To me, seeing double targets with a 1x rds matters...but maybe that's aesthetics? Kill em both! Lol
JackFanToM
04-15-16, 23:09
that doesn't happen for me, and that video is showing it through monocular video vision, with both eyes open it doesn't happen...lol, yeah you spent some time with the optic alright. I'm done...enjoy hating, but you really just don't know.
that doesn't happen for me, and that video is showing it through monocular video vision, with both eyes open it doesn't happen...lol, yeah you spent some time with the optic alright. I'm done...enjoy hating, but you really just don't know.
I'm content not having to look through one more than once.
all you have mentioned as issues are aesthetics...tint being the primary, and you mentioned the magnification, neither of which are even evident when actually shooting with both eyes open.
U and WS6 need to go to private message for the spat
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
U and WS6 need to go to private message for the spat
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm on Mobil and can't see who you are, but I'm done with it. Said my take on it and done. No mas.
JackFanToM
04-16-16, 14:36
1st, it was already over. We had agreed to disagree. 2nd, it was not a spat, we simply had differing perspectives on this subject. WS6 and I agree on a great many things, but this just doesn't happen to be one. I was not offended by WS6, nor mad at him, and if I gave offense, then by all means I apologize. I consider this forum an opportunity to give and take insight and perspectives, perhaps that is an incorrect assumption on my part.
1st, it was already over. We had agreed to disagree. 2nd, it was not a spat, we simply had differing perspectives on this subject. WS6 and I agree on a great many things, but this just doesn't happen to be one. I was not offended by WS6, nor mad at him, and if I gave offense, then by all means I apologize. I consider this forum an opportunity to give and take insight and perspectives, perhaps that is an incorrect assumption on my part.
Very well. May be a Ford vs Chev ordeal. Lets hear people's opinions after they have used each optic
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I had the Trijicon MRO for a few months, then switched to the aimpoint T1. The MRO has a bigger field of view and I like the brightness/on/off turret is on the top so you can use your off hand to adjust. I'm starting to develop an astigmatism, so the smaller T1 and fixed rear sight, absolute co-witnessed together makes the red dot crisp and clear, for me atleast.
I ran my MRO through a SWAT range day, I've had it for about 6 months and love it.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.