Results 391 to 405 of 442
Thread: Trijicon MRO
-
30 September 2015, 12:29 #391
Ok, having spent some time this week with my MRO, I'll mirror a lot of what has already been said and griped about. The fisheye, glass clarity, are all true.
I have somewhat of an optimistic view on the optic though. This fits right between the Vortex SPARC's and Aimpoint T1/2's of the world. It's not as good as an Aimpoint and won't be replacing any of them, but for the price including mount I think this is a great deal for what the optic is.
The mount is usable, but definitely screaming for an ADM/Bobro/Scalarworks Upgrade. If the street price for a no-mount MRO gets down sub-$400, now we're talking.
-
30 September 2015, 12:39 #392
-
30 September 2015, 13:48 #393
-
30 September 2015, 15:15 #394
MRO vs Aimpoint carbine optic is a comparison I'd like to know about.
Will - Owner of Arisaka LLC - http://www.arisakadefense.com
-
30 September 2015, 16:07 #395
That's a good point slippers. Not sure why I always forget about the patrol/aco
-
30 September 2015, 16:26 #396
I mean the MRO certainly weighs less and is more compact. But the ACO is cheaper, has a bigger tube, and pedigree as a red dot.
Will - Owner of Arisaka LLC - http://www.arisakadefense.com
-
30 September 2015, 16:38 #397
I just don't see the deal with the ACO. the MSRP is too close to the PRO. With the PRO also on sale every other week from various retailers, it makes the ACO irrelevant. I think they should have just offered the ACO at the $329-$349 price point, or even offer it with no mount for $299 as I know a lot of us have extra QRP2 mounts laying around.
-
30 September 2015, 16:40 #398
OK, I can see that at current pricing. But the pro is even better, and still cheaper than the MRO, and certainly doesn't have fisheye issues.
Will - Owner of Arisaka LLC - http://www.arisakadefense.com
-
1 October 2015, 01:04 #399
-
1 October 2015, 02:01 #400
I bought an ACO, but only because i got a great deal on it ($345 shipped if i remember correctly). I find the ACO to be functionally equal to my PROs in every way (i don't have night vision, so i don't miss the NVG settings). The non-QD mount is lighter than a QRP which is a plus, and the lack of lens covers wasn't an issue for me since i had a spare set sitting around collecting dust.
To compare the MRO to the ACO/PRO might be a bit unfair since i don't have any trigger time with the MRO yet. But, i do have it mounted on an upper and have played with it a bit. The MRO is a nice optic, and definitely fills a gap in the market, price wise. Performance wise, the dot is bright and clear even in direct sunlight, the top mounted brightness control is nice, even for a righty, as it allows for easy adjustment of the brightness with ones support hand, but only time will tell if the MRO will match Aimpoint in the durability department. Overall, in my opinion, i think the Aimpoint PRO offers a better value if you can live with the larger, heavier optic. But if the MRO hold ups well in the long run, i think it'll do well to fill the gap for someone who has ruled out optics like the PRO and absolutely has to have a micro red dot from a company with some combat heritage, but doesn't quite have the coin for a T-1 or T-2."It's time to start slapping people." - George Carlin
NRA Life Member | SAF Life Member | FPC Member
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
-
1 October 2015, 08:02 #401
-
1 October 2015, 08:17 #402
If you have not put 300,000 rounds down range with it and stormed 3 Iraqi bunkers your opinion does not mean shit.
-
3 October 2015, 08:49 #403
After using the MRO a bit, I am liking the 25mm vs the 22mm objective lens. Makes me wish Aimpoint Micro's would be larger.
-
3 October 2015, 10:06 #404
-
3 October 2015, 18:42 #405Senior Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2014
- Posts
- 556
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
So is this thing worth it?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk