Now that we have seen what has been announced at the NRA show, the SRO, I’m now left wondering what I should try out for my first optic, ACRO or SRO? Or, should I wait a few more months until we get some feedback on the two units?
Then I have to decide if I should just get my G45 or G17 milled or pick up an MOS version... to many decisions. Lol I should probably just have a bit more patience for a while longer and let reviews come in...
If you are uncertain, a MOS solution like the G45 offers flexibility. The SRO appears to be the better gaming optic with its large display where the Acro is a better all weather solution with its closed emitter. Concealment is TBD, but likely will swing towards the SRO, as the lens will be close to the belt line, where the Acro’s sealed emitter design has a square edge at the back of the optic.Originally Posted by CLaw
Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.
I think I'd wait a little bit, and see how they shake out with actual use..Never be an early adapter, I done that a few times in the past, and got bit every time.. Waiting costs nothing, and may possibly save you some $$$
@GJM or others, I am in a similar place as the op and didn’t know the G45 MOS was released until this thread.
Question, why recommend the 45 MOS over the 17 MOS? Before the 45 MOS I was considering then 17 MOS for and optics test platform. Background, I currently have two G19 G4 and carry in an Eidolm, but have a JMCK enroute in 17 length.
Thanks
Just ersonal preference, as the 45 interchanges with different uppers and lowers where the 17 does not. 17 is also fine.
Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.
I know a lot of folks aren’t happy with the MOS system, but is the problem mostly with the RDS’s failing to stay attached to the plates because of thread depth opposed to any issues with the plate staying attached to the gun? And, if that is the case, shouldn’t there be fewer issues with the ACRO mounted to the MOS?
The screws attaching the plate to the slide definitely get more depth and bite than the ones attaching the optic to the plate.
This is all speculative since I don’t have mine yet, but I think you’re right in that the ACRO has the best attachment method for the MOS system. That’s the big reason I ordered one fallowed closely by the enclosed emitter.
That being said my RMR/MOS set up has given me no problems so far, albeit over a low round count. I do check the screws every 500 rounds. They haven’t moved yet, but I still think the ACRO will be a better mounting system.
Edit: and I think the big failing with the MOS system is you’re pretty much on your own to make sure you have all the correct attachment screws and parts for your optic. I got everything for mine through Battlewerx and it’s been great. I was lucky enough to read about how to properly mount it here, but if I had been left to my own devices I probably would have fucked it up like a lot of other people do.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by Mitch; 05-12-2019 at 10:36 AM.
“The reliability of the 30-06 on most of the world’s non-dangerous game is so well established as to be beyond intelligent dispute.” Finn Aagaard
"Don't fuck with it" seems to prevent the vast majority of reported issues." BehindBlueI's
Another of my n=1 examples, but several months ago I bought a G19 MOS and mounted a used RMR06 Type 1 on it. Used screws recommended in enclosed literature, cleaned screws/holes with a bit of solvent, blew dry, and installed with a drop of blue Loctite. A couple of thousand of rounds later, nothing has fallen off, no flickering, zero is holding, and I'm happy to wait until some of the new offerings are vetted before considering a change.
Anyone tried the Brownell rmr slides? Seems like a cheap way to test "the dot life" if you already have gen 3 Glock(s).
Reply With Quote