View Full Version : Anyone found the Aimpoint Micro too small?
I'm hoping for some feedback to prevent first world problems.
Backstory: A:I have a mid-length I built off of a 16" medium contour Sionics barrel that weighs 8.5 pounds with CompM2, X200, sling, and DD fixed sights. Its been a great gun and will probably end up with a LPV. B: I have a 16" build using the BRT Optimum barrel (sort of a tapered semi-lightweight barrel) that weighs 6.75lbs with just the DD fixed iron sights.
I'm considering putting a Scalarworks T-2 bundle on the lightweight build, which would keep the weight down, but I don't want to get stuck with something that doesn't work for me. I could certainly move the CompM2 over instead, but that's almost a 1/2 pound more I might avoid.
Question:Has anyone transitioned from a full sized Aimpoint to a Micro sized Aimpoint and found the scope too small, for lack of a better word? I'd go with folding sights to give me "more window" if I went with the T-2.
I went from a Aimpoint PRO on my 14.5" w/13"KMR ELW BCM to a T2 on a Larue mount. I still have the PRO which I used on my LE6920, but just installed a LPV on it. I had not problem going to the T2, it is so light it really makes the BCM perfect. Great field of view and light weight, win, win.
I went from EOTech's a few years ago (switched after battery issues) to Aimpoint Comps (I still have an old Comp M2 I run on a Colt 6920 and it works just fine) and now have a T1 in a Scalarworks mount on my BCM middlength and will be going the T1/T2 route from here on out. If you have a significant amount of time behind larger red dots I think it will take a little time to get used to the smaller size, but once you do I think you will prefer it. My eyes had to adjust to the smaller size at first but now the larger sights seem bulky while the T1/T2's are much less obstructive and allow me to see areas that previous sight setups did not. I say give it a shot.
Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
I just mount the micro a bit to the rear of center on the upper. It doesn't feel so small there. I still slightly prefer the full size.
I just mount the micro a bit to the rear of center on the upper. It doesn't feel so small there. I still slightly prefer the full size.
Agree. Move that Micro as far back as you can on the upper, providing just enough room for your BUIS (if applicable). It made more of a difference than I expected.
Austin1776
01-29-17, 15:03
Keep both eyes open when using a red dot...no really...do it. No reason to move it as far back as possible.
Keeping both eyes open doesn't make it any faster to find the dot in a smaller tube. Moving the tube closer to your eye does.
Austin1776
01-29-17, 15:20
that just makes no sense...a 2 MOA dot is no smaller or larger depending on "tube size." I think this is definitely a software, not a hardware, issue.
It's the tube size being discussed, not the dot size. But my issued weapons and personal weapons have always run the larger tube with good results. My curiosity is in how detrimental the smaller tube is to dot acquisition, since I'm interested in keeping the lightweight theme.
Lightweight + big = The Scalarworks MRO package
Lightweight + big = The Scalarworks MRO package
I'll look at that one, too. I just have not heard the same praise for that optic as for the T-2.
Full disclosure; I work for Aimpoint as a Pro Staff member.
Some folks find getting behind the tube a bit more difficult with the Micro sized optics. This is usually mitigated by spending time behind the optic practicing. I had a bit of a learning curve when I switched from the 30mm tubes to a micro but now I switch back and forth and don't even notice the tube size. As mentioned if you find this an issue one way to help is to mount the optic a bit further back than normal on the rifle. This may help but has the occasional downside of ending up with a fogged optic in really cold weather.
Good luck!
Eurodriver
01-29-17, 18:58
Some folks find getting behind the tube a bit more difficult with the Micro sized optics. This is usually mitigated by spending time behind the optic practicing!
Looks like most folks will continue to find it difficult getting behind the tube with micro sized optics.
Just get the t2 from Scalar. The Micros are so good I don't know why folks buy the M4. I know why Aimpoint makes them, not sure why folks spend their own money on them. They are great, but so heavy and huge compared to the Micros. Once the Micros came out, the only reason for the 30mm versions was cost-in my opinion. Only have $400? Yes get a CompM variant. The Micro is great if you have the money. I personally don't notice the tube.
I know I'm just lying or making things up to justify paying 2x more for all my Aimpoints, but the fisheye effect on the MRO is too much for me. I keep wanting to like it because I prefer buying USA made. I just can't get down with it, that thing sucks.
Just get the t2 from Scalar. The Micros are so good I don't know why folks buy the M4. I know why Aimpoint makes them, not sure why folks spend their own money on them. They are great, but so heavy and huge compared to the Micros. Once the Micros came out, the only reason for the 30mm versions was cost-in my opinion. Only have $400? Yes get a CompM variant. The Micro is great if you have the money. I personally don't notice the tube.
Agreed. If you're noticing the tube, you're thinking too hard, IMO.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
that just makes no sense...a 2 MOA dot is no smaller or larger depending on "tube size." I think this is definitely a software, not a hardware, issue.
Think about it this way. Would you mount the Micro at the very end of the forearm (like where the front sight should be)? No, because you see so little of what you're looking at actually through the tube. It would be extremely difficult to pick up the dot. Forget it under recoil or movement.
Think about it another way. Take that cardboard tube inside a roll of toilet paper. Look through the tube holding the roll as far away from your head as possible. You can absolutely see through it. But you can't see very much (field of view) through it. Now put that roll of cardboard right up against your dominant eye. You see everything through the tube, nothing around it with your dominant eye. You would never lose the dot if you could do this (not practical with the Micro though).
With the Micro, there's not that much difference between mounting it all the way forward on the upper receiver and all the way back (6-7 rail slots I believe, providing room for a rear BUIS). But all the way back is starting to get really close to your eye. So the closer it gets to your eye the more field of view you see through the tube, with the dot in it, than around the tube with your peripheral vision. Therefore, it's easier to pick up the dot, and maintain it in your field of view (especially in odd shooting positions, on the move, under recoil, etc), with the dot as far back as possible, rather than as far forward as possible. And you still shoot with both eyes open, so your non-dominant eye picks up the peripheral and helps keep you situationally aware.
You don't have to take my word for it. Do an experiment. Mount the Micro forward on your upper receiver. Find a fixed location to stand, like in your garage. Face the closed garage door, which has a bit of a grid pattern to it where the horizontal lines of the sections crisscross with the vertical lines of the support beams. Aim your Micro's dot at the + where a horizontal and vertical line meet. Now, for the purpose of the experiment you should close your non-dominant eye. Make note of how much of the garage door you're able to see through the tube and around the dot at POA looking through the tube with your dominant eye. Now move the Micro to the rear of your upper receiver, just in front of your rear BUIS (if applicable). Repeat the above experiment with the Micro in the new position. When I did this I was surprised by how much more of the garage door (field of view) I was able to see through the tube when the Micro was moved to the rear, and this was only the 6-7 slots, and this was at something like 7 yards. Now extrapolate that to how much more you could see through the tube at 50 or 100 yards. In my opinion, it's a material amount increase in field of view. Ultimately you still shoot with both eyes open, but you will only ever see the dot, your point of aim, though the tube. Moving the tube to the rear gives you much more field of view through the tube and more margin for error (acquiring the dot, moving and shooting, strange shooting positions, etc). Of course, if you need to mount a magnifier behind the Micro all bets are off.
This is usually mitigated by spending time behind the optic practicing. I had a bit of a learning curve when I switched from the 30mm tubes to a micro but now I switch back and forth and don't even notice the tube size.
I have several PROs that I had for a few years before getting a T1. I found exactly what Joe describes and found that practice/shooting the gun took care of the issue. Switching between the two is no big deal.
Yeah that's why I bought a MRO. It's cheaper, bigger fov, and made in America. Don't see the fisheye complaints at all, I don't notice any.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.