Trijicon SRO or MRO - MP5k

[Hickory76]

Does anyone have any experience with the Jagerwerks B.R.O.S. (Battle Ready Optics Shield) for the Trijicon SRO? My understanding is that it is supposed to provide drop protection since the SRO is primarily intended for competition use and has failed during drop tests. Seems like a worthwhile addition - some added bulk for peace of mind...

https://jagerwerks.com/b-r-o-s/

 

[outrider58]

Does anyone have any experience with the Jagerwerks B.R.O.S. (Battle Ready Optics Shield) for the Trijicon SRO? My understanding is that it is supposed to provide drop protection since the SRO is primarily intended for competition use and has failed during drop tests. Seems like a worthwhile addition - some added bulk for peace of mind...

https://jagerwerks.com/b-r-o-s/

I don't see why it wouldn't work. I don't see the need, personally, but my SRO is on a range gun that spends most of its days lying on my nightstand. I would want a slight gap between it and the sight.

 

[Brent]

Random gear plug, just put on the KES, very very nice quality.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hickory76]

I don't see why it wouldn't work. I don't see the need, personally, but my SRO is on a range gun that spends most of its days lying on my nightstand. I would want a slight gap between it and the sight.

Yep, looks like the JW B.R.O.S. has the gap - good call.

 

[MattFinals718]

I'm late to this thread, but here are my thoughts:

- I do not recommend buying the original Trijicon MRO. It's been mentioned in this thread already, but the original MRO has terrible issues with parallax and image distortion. It looks very good on paper (decent price, decent battery life, very rugged housing, etc.), but the actual shooting experience doesn't live up to the hype. When I was on the market to buy my first red dot (~5 years ago), I tried one at a local FFL. Even as a novice, I was put off by the blue tint and the way that the dot shifted. I went with an Aimpoint PRO instead, which was heavier, but a more proven design (by that point).
- I did wind up buying a Trijicon MRO HD about two years ago, to serve as the primary red dot on my BCM carbine (see attached pics). I had discovered by that point that I have astigmatism and that my Aimpoint's dot is too distorted, so I wanted an optic with a crisper dot. I will say that the MRO HD has far fewer issues with parallax and distortion, and the dot is way crisper. On the downside: It usually costs way more than the standard MRO (I paid $650 for mine while it was on sale), but has half the battery life. When I finally took mine out to shoot (this past August), I also discovered that at some brightness settings, the dot causes a reddish tint around the lens. I also really hate the reticle option, which looks awful and reflects against the objective lens when on.
- To summarize: Pass on the MRO, consider the MRO HD, but only if your budget won't let you buy an Aimpoint Micro.
- Overall, I think that while Trijicon has a greater history for magnified optics (ACOG, VCOG, etc.), they're way more mixed when it comes to reflex optics. For now, I'm keeping my MRO HD, but I will probably not buy another after I sell the one that I have now.

 

[Brent]

I'm late to this thread, but here are my thoughts:

- I do not recommend buying the original Trijicon MRO. It's been mentioned in this thread already, but the original MRO has terrible issues with parallax and image distortion. It looks very good on paper (decent price, decent battery life, very rugged housing, etc.), but the actual shooting experience doesn't live up to the hype. When I was on the market to buy my first red dot (~5 years ago), I tried one at a local FFL. Even as a novice, I was put off by the blue tint and the way that the dot shifted. I went with an Aimpoint PRO instead, which was heavier, but a more proven design (by that point).
- I did wind up buying a Trijicon MRO HD about two years ago, to serve as the primary red dot on my BCM carbine (see attached pics). I had discovered by that point that I have astigmatism and that my Aimpoint's dot is too distorted, so I wanted an optic with a crisper dot. I will say that the MRO HD has far fewer issues with parallax and distortion, and the dot is way crisper. On the downside: It usually costs way more than the standard MRO (I paid $650 for mine while it was on sale), but has half the battery life. When I finally took mine out to shoot (this past August), I also discovered that at some brightness settings, the dot causes a reddish tint around the lens. I also really hate the reticle option, which looks awful and reflects against the objective lens when on.
- To summarize: Pass on the MRO, consider the MRO HD, but only if your budget won't let you buy an Aimpoint Micro.
- Overall, I think that while Trijicon has a greater history for magnified optics (ACOG, VCOG, etc.), they're way more mixed when it comes to reflex optics. For now, I'm keeping my MRO HD, but I will probably not buy another after I sell the one that I have now.

I appreciate your writing that! Thank you!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MattFinals718]

I appreciate your writing that! Thank you!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're welcome.

One other thing I didn't mention: The bigger objective lens on the MRO series is kind of a gimmick. It really does not improve the FOV very much compared to my Aimpoint, and I'm pretty sure it's the inherent cause of the problems with distortion and parallax that the MRO series have. When a red dot's objective lens is significantly bigger than the ocular lens, there's a lot of optical trickery required to get the LED dot projection clean without introducing other optical clarity issues. With the MRO HD, Trijicon has done the best that they can to make the concept work, but I'd say the results are mixed. Really, the entire idea is just kind of flawed from the get-go.

I do like the fact that the MRO HD is as bomb-proof as anything else Trijicon makes (e.g., ACGOs, which are also almost Marine-proof), and that the dial on top is big and easy to sue compared to most Aimpoints.

 

[Brent]

You're welcome.

One other thing I didn't mention: The bigger objective lens on the MRO series is kind of a gimmick. It really does not improve the FOV very much compared to my Aimpoint, and I'm pretty sure it's the inherent cause of the problems with distortion and parallax that the MRO series have. When a red dot's objective lens is significantly bigger than the ocular lens, there's a lot of optical trickery required to get the LED dot projection clean without introducing other optical clarity issues. With the MRO HD, Trijicon has done the best that they can to make the concept work, but I'd say the results are mixed. Really, the entire idea is just kind of flawed from the get-go.

I do like the fact that the MRO HD is as bomb-proof as anything else Trijicon makes (e.g., ACGOs, which are also almost Marine-proof), and that the dial on top is big and easy to sue compared to most Aimpoints.

That’s a really good point that I never thought of, the difference in size of the lenses. Hell I liked the idea of the greater FOV. I appreciate you taking the time to chime in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Fate]

Agree wirh MattFinals718. Aiming through a red dot is doing it wrong. Both eyes open and allowing the optic housing ghost in your vision is actually easier with a small device like the Aimpoint T-1.

Besides my T-1s, I have also been happy with my Primary Arms red dots.

 

[outrider58]

I bought the current MRO and, for the money, I did not care for it, especially given the fact you are stuck using their mounts(I prefer Unity and GBRS mounts). I felt, for the money, the dots was a bit 'stary', so I sent it back.

I went with the Aimpoint Duty, which is basically the same size as the Sig Romeo5, of which I have many. It will rest atop a Unity Fast Micro mount.

 

[MattFinals718]

Agree wirh MattFinals718. Aiming through a red dot is doing it wrong. Both eyes open and allowing the optic housing ghost in your vision is actually easier with a small device like the Aimpoint T-1.

Besides my T-1s, I have also been happy with my Primary Arms red dots.

I mean, it's fine to aim if you're just at the range trying to zero the weapon with the optic mounted. But yeah, red dots are reflex optics, and reflex optics by definition are meant to take advantage of shooting reflexes that you've built up through constant drills, not be aimed like a magnified optic.

I bought the current MRO and, for the money, I did not care for it, especially given the fact you are stuck using their mounts(I prefer Unity and GBRS mounts). I felt, for the money, the dots was a bit 'stary', so I sent it back.

I went with the Aimpoint Duty, which is basically the same size as the Sig Romeo5, of which I have many. It will rest atop a Unity Fast Micro mount.

As I advised the OP: The original MRO has serious issues, mostly with tint and image distortion. Whereas an MRO HD is not a bad choice (I kinda like mine); it's just a bit expensive and has low battery life for what you get.

I don't know what you mean about stuck using their mounts, though - the MRO series also can be bought without a mount so that you can add your own (or you can get one on a ScalarWorks mount directly from ScalarWorks).

The Aimpoint Duty is not a bad choice, either, but my one concern with it is that based on what I've read, it's basically just a shrunken Aimpoint PRO in terms of its optical clarity and light transmission. Which doesn't make it a bad optic, just not that great by 2024 standards, because the PRO was already a "budget" optic when it came out (2011). I can tell you from personal experience that I find my MRO HD's dot to be much clearer and sharper than my Aimpoint PRO's (which is why I got it), so I'd expect it would prove comparable to an Aimpoint Duty.

 

[outrider58]

I mean, it's fine to aim if you're just at the range trying to zero the weapon with the optic mounted. But yeah, red dots are reflex optics, and reflex optics by definition are meant to take advantage of shooting reflexes that you've built up through constant drills, not be aimed like a magnified optic.



As I advised the OP: The original MRO has serious issues, mostly with tint and image distortion. Whereas an MRO HD is not a bad choice (I kinda like mine); it's just a bit expensive and has low battery life for what you get.

I don't know what you mean about stuck using their mounts, though - the MRO series also can be bought without a mount so that you can add your own (or you can get one on a ScalarWorks mount directly from ScalarWorks).

The Aimpoint Duty is not a bad choice, either, but my one concern with it is that based on what I've read, it's basically just a shrunken Aimpoint PRO in terms of its optical clarity and light transmission. Which doesn't make it a bad optic, just not that great by 2024 standards, because the PRO was already a "budget" optic when it came out (2011). I can tell you from personal experience that I find my MRO HD's dot to be much clearer and sharper than my Aimpoint PRO's (which is why I got it), so I'd expect it would prove comparable to an Aimpoint Duty.

Generally speaking, I'm not too concerned with notch filters and parallax. Anyone who says their red dots are parallax free are lying. They all have, to some degree, parallax. I pretty much view RDSs as close in-semi occluded devices. If you're shooting with both eyes open, none of that stuff really matters(to me). Again, optical clarity and light transmission are not a big worry to me. The dot appears on the target as needs be.

The MRO I purchased, was without a mount. As I said before, I have mounting solutions I am fond of and did not need to introduce another mount into my repertoire. I like flexibility without exclusion.

As far as the Aimpoint Duty is concerned, I will find out if it is worth its salt. It is very similar to the Romeo 5, which I am very used to, as far as sight picture is concerned. The jury is still out though.

 

[Hickory76]

I bought the current MRO and, for the money, I did not care for it, especially given the fact you are stuck using their mounts(I prefer Unity and GBRS mounts). I felt, for the money, the dots was a bit 'stary', so I sent it back.

I went with the Aimpoint Duty, which is basically the same size as the Sig Romeo5, of which I have many. It will rest atop a Unity Fast Micro mount.

Thanks for flagging that Aimpoint Duty - I had not heard of it. I have a Vortex Crossfire II on my Unity Fast Micro mount.

 

[outrider58]

Thanks for flagging that Aimpoint Duty - I had not heard of it. I have a Vortex Crossfire II on my Unity Fast Micro mount.

You're welcome!

 

[MattFinals718]

Generally speaking, I'm not too concerned with notch filters and parallax. Anyone who says their red dots are parallax free are lying. They all have, to some degree, parallax. I pretty much view RDSs as close in-semi occluded devices. If you're shooting with both eyes open, none of that stuff really matters(to me). Again, optical clarity and light transmission are not a big worry to me. The dot appears on the target as needs be.

The MRO I purchased, was without a mount. As I said before, I have mounting solutions I am fond of and did not need to introduce another mount into my repertoire. I like flexibility without exclusion.

As far as the Aimpoint Duty is concerned, I will find out if it is worth its salt. It is very similar to the Romeo 5, which I am very used to, as far as sight picture is concerned. The jury is still out though.

Oh, I know that it's impossible to have a parallax-free red dot sight. That being, the MRO's parallax was pretty egregious, to the point that I worried that I wouldn't really be able to use it for its intended purpose. It struck me as an OK optic just to take to the range and use for plinking, but not for anything more serious than that. That's acceptable on a $100 budget red dot, but not one that costs $450 and is supposedly a duty rifle optic. Agree that light transmission is generally not a huge factor for anything besides shooting under NODs, but the blue tint did worry me because I was wondering how the FOV would appear during bright outdoor daytime shooting. (I've also seen 1st person POV videos of the MRO on YouTube which seem to validate my concern.)

Point taken RE the mount - I mis-understood your post; I think I thought that you were saying that the MRO series have no aftermarket mounting options. That is a legitimate reason to decide that an optic is not a good choice.

I do think that sticking to the Romeo is probably your best bet, but I'll admit that I have no firsthand experience with them - only what I've read/seen on YouTube channels I watch.