Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Observations On The Effect Of Parallax Error When Shooting With an Aimpoint Comp M5,

  1. #1

    Observations On The Effect Of Parallax Error When Shooting With an Aimpoint Comp M5,

    Observations On The Effect Of Parallax Error
    When Shooting With an Aimpoint Comp M5, a Trjicon MRO and an Aimpoint T2







    Some manufacturers of red-dot sights have made claims that their red-dot sights are “parallax free“. Most of us are already aware that this is simply not true at all distances. Inherent parallax error with a red-dot sight is typically greatest at CQB distances (MOA wise) and decreases as the distance to the target increases.

    In this ballistic exercise we’ll be looking at the amount of parallax error occurring during objective, controlled, live-fire testing at the distances of 7 yards, 15 yards, 25 yards and 50 yards when shooting with an Aimpoint Comp M5 and a Trijicon MRO mounted on a precision AR-15. The Aimpoint Comp M5 has a 2 MOA red dot, as does the Trijicon MRO.

    All shooting for this exercise was conducted from my bench-rest set-up using one of my precision AR-15s. This AR-15 has a 20” Lothar Walther barrel with a 223 Wylde chamber and a 1:8” twist and it routinely produces 0.75 MOA 10-shot groups at 100 yards (with a high magnification scope). The ammunition used for this exercise was one of my match-grade hand-loads topped with the Sierra 52 grain MatchKing. Wind conditions on the range were monitored using a Wind Probe. The set-up was very similar to that pictured below.






    The barrel . . .








    10-shot group at 100 yards . . .





    The Wind Probe . . .





    The Details

    The methodology for this ballistic exercise was as follows . . .

    Shooting from the bench-rest set-up with the Aimpoint Comp M5 atop the precision AR-15 at the initial distance of 7 yards, an 8-shot control group was fired with the red-dot centered in the sight window. Next, 8-shot parallax test-groups were fired in the following manner:

    2 shots fired with the red-dot positioned in the extreme 12 o’clock position of the sight window.

    2 shots fired with the red-dot positioned in the extreme 3 o’clock position of the sight window.

    2 shots fired with the red-dot positioned in the extreme 6 o’clock position of the sight window.

    2 shots fired with the red-dot positioned in the extreme 9 o’clock position of the sight window.


    Additional 8-shot parallax test-groups were then fired sequentially at 15 yards, 25 yards and 50 yards in the manner described above. This simple methodology is illustrated in the two pics shown below. The solid black dot on the target was the point-of-aim.




    The 8-shot control group at 7 yards . . .





    The 8-shot parallax test-group at 7 yards . . .





    Aimpoint Comp M5 Results

    The 8-shot control group fired at 7 yards had an extreme spread of 0.039”, which at 7 yards is 0.53 MOA. The extreme spreads of the parallax test-groups are shown in the table below.





    Trijicon MRO Results





    I repeated the ballistic exercise described above using a 2nd-generation Trijicon MRO with a 2 MOA red-dot. The results are shown in the table below.







    I also conducted the 50 yard portion of the parallax test using an additional 2nd-generation Trijicon MRO with a 2 MOA red-dot. The results were nearly identical to that of the first MRO. The extreme spread of the 8-shot parallax test-group was 7.46”, which at 50 yards is 14.3 MOA.


    Comparisons

    The tables and graphs below show the results from both the Aimpoint Comp M5 and the Trijicon MRO, side-by-side, for comparison.


    Results in inches . . .








    Per Aimpoint, the objective lens of the Aimpoint CompM5 has a diameter of 18mm. Per Trijicon, the objective lens of the MRO has a diameter of 25mm. Therefore, the objective lens of the MRO is 1.38 times larger than the objective lens of the CompM5. The parallax error of the MRO at 50 yards (7.73”) is 8.3 times larger than the parallax error of the CompM5 (0.93”) at 50 yards.



    Results in minutes of angle . . .









    ...



    Aimpoint T2 Parallax Error At 50 Yards





    An 8-shot parallax test-group fired from 50 yards using an Aimpoint T2 had an extreme spread of 0.907", which at 50 yards equates to 1.7 MOA.


    .............


    The target shown below is the actual 50 yard parallax-test target for one of the Gen-2 Trjicon MROs that I tested. The parallax error is 7.7 inches. The target also clearly demonstrates the asymmetric parallax pattern of the MRO. I’d like to see someone do the trigonometry for those "hold-offs", on the fly, in the urban prone position.






    Now, let’s superimpose the above parallax-test target on a realistic training target at 50 yards, for both a head-shot and an upper thorax shot. Only three shots out of eight shots hit the head of the target when using the MRO. Only two shots out of eight shots hit the upper thorax of the target when using the MRO.







    Here's the 50 yard parallax-test target for an Aimpoint T2 superimposed on the realistic training target along with the MRO. Every single shot fired using the Aimpoint T2 hit the head of the target and the upper thorax of the target.








    Member of the General Population

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    out of here
    @Molon awesome work!

    Again I’m struck at the differences between brands, recently experiencing this on PMOs.

  3. #3
    Great stuff! Would love to see more red dots tested in this way, particularly wondering how the AEMS stacks up.

  4. #4
    Molon thanks for the post and the results here, really interesting.

    Gets me to thinking: I have both a T1 and a T2. The T2 was supposed to be a significant improvement on the parallax in the T1 (which I believe they still sell, and a lot of folks still use old T1's because they're so reliable).

    It'd be interesting to know how much parallax difference there is between T1/T2.

  5. #5
    I just switched from an LPVO to a MRO on my main rifle. I was shooting good groups with it while zeroing, but had heard of the parallax issues, and then saw your post on this over at arfcom literally days after I switched. So, naturally this freaked me out and I started trying to figure out what I could sell to scrounge up the pennies for another dot.

    I used a vis laser to check parallax. What I found was that when the dot is in the top of the window, or the left of the window, the dot moves high-left in contrast to the laser (which would cause the low right impacts) and the opposite for the right and low in the window. I’ve been practicing mounting the rifle, doing lots of dry-fire, and I noticed that generally, the dot is naturally centered in the window and it feels unnatural to push it to one of those edges.

    I think for the time being I’ll keep using the MRO, as it’s what I have, and realize that for a more precise shot I’ll have to be intentional about where the dot is in the window. I remember back on M4C, in the early days, one of the SMEs had suggested that he likes absolute cowitness mounts for the T1, as for precise shots he’ll use the front sight as a reference to minimize parallax.

    Besides the T2/M5, does anyone have input on some of the more wallet friendly options like the Aimpoint Duty, AEMS or Sig Romeo 4T?

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by maximus83 View Post
    Molon thanks for the post and the results here, really interesting.
    De nada.

    ...
    Member of the General Population

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by maximus83 View Post

    It'd be interesting to know how much parallax difference there is between T1/T2.
    I never did any formal parallax testing of the T1 and sold mine after getting my first T2.

    ....
    Member of the General Population

  8. #8
    Chasing the Horizon RJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Central FL
    This is cool stuff. Bookmarked to read later.

    BTW that dog looks vicious.

  9. #9
    Have you, or anyone you are aware of, done this test on the Aimpoint Comp M4 ?

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by maximus83 View Post
    Molon thanks for the post and the results here, really interesting.

    Gets me to thinking: I have both a T1 and a T2. The T2 was supposed to be a significant improvement on the parallax in the T1 (which I believe they still sell, and a lot of folks still use old T1's because they're so reliable).

    It'd be interesting to know how much parallax difference there is between T1/T2.
    It's night and day. I can be off by 6-8 inches with my T1 if my view isn't centered behind the optic and my T2 on the same weapon, mount, rifle will barley give me 2 inches of error when trying to reproduce the same errors on identical targets and distances.

    I thought my eyes had just gone to hell with age for nearly 15 years after switching from a military EOTech to an Aimpoint T1 I bought through a departmental purchase.

    The T2 marries the insane battery life, light weight and ruggedness of my T1s with the clarity and parallax free "hit from any firring position" EOTech. The only thing that could be better after seeing Molon's data would be the M5 with it's ability to use easily sourced batteries that can be found anywhere on Earth.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

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