Aimpoint Comp M5 parallax compared to Trijicon MRO

[madmax_fal]

Not trying to start a "vs" thread here. I'm eyeing the Comp 5 with larue mount (https://www.larue.com/products/aimpoint-comp-m5-w-larue-tactical-qd-mount/) as a replacement for a Romeo 5. My first choice for an upgrade was an MRO, but I took a look through a newer one (supposedly after the more severe parallax issue was fixed) and it was still quite an issue. Right now I have the cash for a Comp 5, but I don't want to max out my budget and end up with the same issues as a piece almost $500 cheaper. For those of you who have both, does the higher price point of the Comp 5 reflect in less parallax?

(I searched here for an answer first, forgive me if I didn't look hard enough)

[mebiuspower]

Parallax issue on MRO is not and will not be fixed as long as they keep the large objective.

Aimpoint is worth the investment as they hold value fairly well.

[grizzlyblake]

Those two optics are kind of at both extremes of the cost spectrum. Why not an Aimpoint PRO, which has much less parallax issue than the MRO? Or a T2 for a few hundred more?

To answer you directly, my experience is that the MRO has huge parallax issues and Aimpoint PROs, T2s, and H2s are significantly better.

[Furbyballer]

Yea man, stay away from the MRO. If you need that price point grab a Pro or a hollosun. I would still recommend the aimpoint T or comp series over all of them however still.

[madmax_fal]

Thanks guys, ordering the comp 5 right now. Better buy one, cry once, eh?