Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 62

Thread: MRO Opinions?

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    8,703
    Feedback Score
    0
    I hated to give up my MRO's. I think the only reason I did is because I got hit with a $2,500 tax bill this year.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    30
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    I’m a huge mro fan, I have both the t2 and mro rifled abd got rid of the t2 to get another mro. I almost feel like the slight magnification zones me in on the target.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    5
    Feedback Score
    0
    The MRO was my first "expensive " or "" duty grade" optic..it's on an AK currently and the reliability and knowing it's always on is pretty awesome..

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,123
    Feedback Score
    0
    MRO Scout here. So far so good. I didn't like the non-QD mount it came with, so I got a BoBro.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    462
    Feedback Score
    13 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by seb5 View Post
    It's time for me to look at another optic. I've used T-1's since thy came out but when looking at adding one the high side of $800.00 with mount seems high. I'm not using it for work on a daily basis like I used to so that's hard to justify. I've been thinking about adding an MRO. I had one on an issued carbine for a time but will never put the tens of thousands of rounds through them like I did with T-1's. The downside of Admin. I've read many threads and reviews but am not really finding much, maybe that's good.

    Over the years I developed a slight astigmatism but can still use a red dot. FWIW I currently have two Nightforces on my .308's, two different Trijicons on 2 AR's, and still the two T-1's on my duty/defense carbines.

    Is the MRO a viable alternative to the T-1/2? Or do I just need to suck it up and buy a new T-2? Any advice appreciated.
    I hated the original MRO - too much fish eye and blue tint.

    The newer “Gen 2” with serial numbers greater than 89,000 is a great improvement. Much less tint, similar to an Aimpoint T1/H1 and the fish eye has been eliminated. Apparent the originals were not a true 1x. They were about 1.3 or 1.4x magnification the new ones are supposedly 1.1x - hence the elimination of the fish eye.

    The one remaining criticism of the MRO is the limited range and number of adjustments which limits refinement of your zero.

    I haven’t tried an MRO with a magnifier.
    Last edited by HCM; 05-14-19 at 13:00.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,123
    Feedback Score
    0
    Actually, the originals were 1.05x and had some edge distortion issues. The new ones are true 1x or as close to it as any Aimpoint I've owned/used.

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    928
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    The price and form factor is awesome. The unacceptable parallax is not.

    A bunch of sites had/have new T2s for $535 and some of the big boys will price match out of their inventory.
    Last edited by grizzlyblake; 08-01-19 at 19:54.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    564
    Feedback Score
    0
    Where you seeing $535 for T2’s?

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    928
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)

  10. #60
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    459
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by grizzlyblake View Post
    The price and form factor is awesome. The unacceptable parallax is not.

    A bunch of sites had/have new T2s for $535 and some of the big boys will price match out of their inventory.
    If parallax is an issue you should be using Eotech, since it is the best of all of them.

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •