Atibal Releases MROC – Modern Rifle Optic Component 3×32 Sight

mroc_side_close_up_521c1bf9-07b7-4370-8090-2fc01bceec75_large

Atibal, known for their inexpensive optics with a growing reputation, has announced the release of their latest optic, the MROC – Modern Rifle Optic Component. The MROC is a 3×32 prismatic optic designed to feature a large field of view, which can be uncommon with magnified optics. Per Atibal, the field of view is a large 37.7 feet at 100 yards or 7.2 degrees.

Those who served with or are familiar with the ACOG will find the reticle comforting. It is the classic top chevron with hash marks for bullet drop compensation for 300, 400, 500, 600, 700 and a long 800 yards. The BDC is calibrated for 5.56 ammunition.

mroc_reticle_3d5ac6f3-b160-4446-ab77-9fa612c7a016_large

For mounting, the optic features two common hex cap screws. Further, an accessory can be mounted on the top of the optic, a common placement for a mini red dot or similar sighting system. Adjustment is done easily in the field. All turrets are capped and hand-adjustable. All caps are leashed to ensure they are not lost in the field.

Retail is set at 379.99. Two colors are available including black and tan. 

mroc_fde_side1_be60011a-88e4-456b-9b4e-a8b1f40a37d8_large

Specs (Courtesy of Atibal):

F.O.V FT@100YDS: 37.7ft
F.O.V Angle: 7.2°
Eye Relief: 2.8″
Click Value: .5 MOA
W/E Max. Adj.: 60 MOA
Parallax Free: 100yds
Battery Type: 1x CR2
Illumination: RED
Lens Coating FMC
Waterproof YES
Shockproof YES
Fogproof YES
Length 5.11″


Nathan S.

One of TFB’s resident Jarheads, Nathan now works within the firearms industry. A consecutive Marine rifle and pistol expert, he enjoys local 3-gun, NFA, gunsmithing, MSR’s, & high-speed gear. Nathan has traveled to over 30 countries working with US DoD & foreign MoDs.

Nathan can be reached at Nathan.S@TheFirearmBlog.com

The above post is my opinion and does not reflect the views of any company or organization.


Advertisement

  • yodamiles

    It looks pretty compact for that magnification. What’s the weight?

    • Sianmink

      took some digging!
      14.4 oz with mount.

  • bmartin79

    Nice price.

  • wartzilla

    Made where?

  • Adam Bennett

    Where is it made?

    • Joshua

      China like all Atibal knockoff optics.

      • Anonymoose

        They have a couple of Japanese scopes, too.

        • Flounder

          Where did you find this info? I am genuinely curious, I haven’t been able to find any good reviews or any solid confirmable info on atibal.

          • Anonymoose

            On their sight, if you check the product pages it says some of them are made in Japan.

  • thedonn007

    $380 is not really all that inexpensive.

    • Porty1119

      I was hoping for sub-$200.

      • thedonn007

        Yes, Inwas thinking the same. Actually more like $150. There are already similar optics available at the same or lower prices

        • Ryfyle

          Reminds me of when I was a kid with a Brass Eagle red dot on my paintball gun. 15 bucks back in the day.

        • Jimmy Labita

          $150? Really? What optic are you comparing this to?

          • thedonn007

            OK, so maybe $150 is a little low. I was comparing it to the primary arms compact scope.

          • Jimmy Labita

            Yeah, the PA 3x is $250 with no lifetime warranty. When you compare apples to apples with lifetime warranties the MROC is competitively priced with Vortex and Burris but with more features.

      • Paul White

        This isn’t *cheap* but depending on quality it’s not unreasonable either. BUt yeah, certainly not what I’d call an inexpensive optic. Just less massively expensive.

    • gunsandrockets

      … not all that inexpensive, except compared to a real ACOG which is a grand more expensive. (at least according to a price I just checked at Amazon)

      • Jimmy Labita

        The price is comparable to all other 3x prism scopes on the market with more features and the largest FOV.

    • Joseph Goins

      Says the man who buys Chinese garbage.

      • thedonn007

        If it was inexpensive enough, yes I would buy it. However I have owned my fair share of trijicon, aimpoint, vortex, and eotech optics.

      • Emfourty Gasmask

        Because one certainly needs a $1000 optic to shoot paper. Not everything needs to be tacticool, man

        • Joshua Knott

          It’s not about being a mall ninja , you should have just as quality of an optic as the rifle it sits atop. That’s unless all you shoot is norinco, then by all means use the Chinese junk .

          • Gary Kirk

            Yep

        • Joseph Goins

          Did I say that anyone “needs a $1000 optic to shoot paper”? You might want to rethink your post. I was referencing to NcStar and the crappy Walmart products that will break after decent usage.

      • Harold

        Racist

        • Joseph Goins

          Only Chinese garbage is cheap. American garbage is expensive.

        • Frank Grimes

          Chinese is not a race.

          • iksnilol

            Yeah it is, they’ve got like slant eyes and slightly darker skin.

            Smh, y’all can’t even get your racism right.

          • Joseph Goins

            Correct. China is a country populated mostly by the “Han” ethnic group.

    • Frank Grimes

      Then this optic is not for you.

    • Deneris

      I just received mine. The glass is pretty comparable to the ACOG, far better than Primary Arms, and the reticle is a nice touch, considering most budget three-power scopes have pretty thick, or unusable reticles. I want to post photos I took through the scope (in low light), but it’s telling me that they’re more than 5MB, which isn’t true.

    • Deneris

      The glass is pretty comparable to an ACOG. This photo was taken today, at 6:30 PM on the east coast. It’s pretty dark out here, and the scope is as bright as my own eyes. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/81c31ce9145a15dc21832c3ce36b680e57a411c552e51d0098832c564430d688.jpg

  • Gary Kirk

    Welp.. They’ve exceeded at ripping off the acog rco reticle, without the windage hashes

    • Brian Nunes

      I believe the TA31F ACOG has that exact reticle, so they ripped that one off. I know they’ve been called out publicly for being blatant copy cats of the ACOG look and feel… their reply was that they would “innovate” more.

      • Frank Grimes

        Standard TA31F reticle yeah.

      • Jimmy Labita

        There is nothing proprietary about a chevron.

  • Flounder

    Who the heck is atibal? And where is this made? Cause it looks like it is identical to an ACOG but without the price point. You should do a review, or at least a comparison to an ACOG. I say that because people are going to buy this optic just because you have covered it.

    • Tom Currie

      No point in torture testing ONE, especially if it is made in China. The issue with Chinese products is NOT a matter of poor design, but more often a lack of Quality Control. Some (perhaps most) will be perfect, but some will be defective. Generally speaking QC is an unknown concept in Chinese manufacturing – but Chinese factories are capable of producing high quality products (for example Apple products) so long as the foreign buyer DEMANDS high quality and keeps someone on site to enforce that demand.

      If you want a real test, someone needs to test at least a dozen, bought through different channels at different times — and compare them with a similar number of whatever product you consider “the standard” (in this case ACOG) — so we are talking about a dozen of these plus at least 5-6 ACOGs, all subjected first to realistic use, followed by increasing levels of abuse. You buy the sights and I’ll be happy to help with the testing.

      • Flounder

        There have been plenty of reviews of ACOG’s that are trustworthy/documented. The reason I want to see them side by side is to compare overall quality and clarity.

        But you are probably right about needing more than one of these optics to test.

        • Gary Kirk

          Plenty of reviews of acogs that are trustworthy.. Yep, the USMC.. Hell, lock two grunts in a room and issue each a rock. Come back 30 mins later.. One rock is broken, the other is missing.. Good enough for them, good enough for me…

      • micmac80

        QC is not foreign to Chinese but are you seriusly comparing above product made by Chinese OEM named BOSMA with a 1500+$ ACOG.
        The above product has a wholesale price of cca100$ but 1:4 ratio ,is quite typical from OEM to end price.

    • Edeco

      Atibal Barca was a one-eyed Carthiaginian general who invaded Italy via the alps,with his trusty elephant Surus. Later a senator and admiral. Died by suicide. Member of one of two luminary families of Carthiage,which gunked up their social order.

      • JayHu

        Pretty sure that was Anibal Barca (Hannibal)

        • Dougscamo

          Old man Hamilcar’s boy?…

      • Flounder

        So even there name is a knock off?

        • 🐒👊

          Hahaha nice!

    • Core

      It’s a good company. All optics except the 4×32 is made outside the US. They make them out of Chinese, Japanese, European, and American components. They QC in house, here in the US. This came from Atibal rep. Hope it helps.

      • Jimmy Labita

        Yes, all QC for Atibal products are done here.

        • Core

          The MROC looks sweet, I would love to try one of your reflex sights. I heard you guys have good optics.

  • micmac80

    Considering unrealistic high price of original ACOG ,Trijicon could at least try making them better than the chinese , original cast chassis is worse than any of the higher end china prismatic scopes. I guess as long as the military is forking no quetions asked its a case like Colt seling M4 at 2x price its bought now from FN

    • Joshua

      Lol Chinese prismatic superior to an ACOG.

      Get out of here.

      • iksnilol

        Nah, he didn’t say that. He just said that the cast chassis is worse than the (I assume billet or forged) chassis of Chinese optics.

        • PK

          Some of them sure are forged, alright. I’ve seen tons of FAKOGs marked and boxed as though they were legit.

          The other production, like the Atibal, I see no problem with. They fit a much needed space for optics, and so long as they work that’s what matters.

          You mention an interesting point about forged/cast/milled. It’s odd, but it seems a regular phenomenon for a knockoff to be better in some ways than the item it’s copied from!

      • micmac80

        I think you misread it .I wrote that chinese lookalikes or clones feature better finish than the original.

        Considering the complexity of a prismatic sight vs variabiles ACOG is hugely overpriced.

    • codfilet

      “unrealistic high price”-why don’t you start a company, make an innovative product of very high quality-so high that soldiers trust their lives to it, and make this product in the US, abiding by all rules and regulations. Why are “Gun guys” the cheapest people in just about any sport or activity you can name?

      • Big Daddy

        Because they usually have a family to feed.

        • codfilet

          Uh huh…….

        • Dougscamo

          I have a lot of mouths to feed….starting with sizes that begin with .22 and ending in .452…and that doesn’t count the gauges….

    • Kyle

      Nice hot take, this might be the funniest thing I read today.

    • Frank Grimes

      First off ACOGs are forged.

      Second, tritium is not cheap.

      When this Atibal comes with tritium and still sells for the same price, let me know.

      • Jimmy Labita

        We tried but tritium is hard to import into the states. Next step is incorporate a fiber optic.

        • Frank Grimes

          For me there’s no need for tritium on Atibal optics, the fiber optics would be awesome though.

          Tritium would probably increase the price significantly and kind of defeat the purpose of buying Atibal 4x prism optics. I love the ACOG, there is one of my primary defensive rifle but I have told several people about Atibal 4x optics and how they are great options for range rifle or even hunting.

          Atibals are very tough optics and the quality is excellent and the price is even better.

          If you’re associated with Atibal, keep up the good work!

  • kingghidorah

    This company, abital, is like those guys that sell frozen meat out of their trucks. ‘Ever hear of Omaha steaks’? yep, I have. “these are JUST like them, at a better price’.

  • Tom Currie

    I assume the 800m mark on the reticle is for indirect fire with your 5.56mm mortar

    • PK

      Assuming M193 from a 16″ barrel and a 100 yard zero, 26′ of drop and a 1.6 second flight time to 800 isn’t too awful. Certainly doable with optics.

      • Gary Kirk

        Most of the bdc reticles are designed for 855..

        • Squirreltakular

          The VCOG is calibrated for M193.

  • mig1nc

    Is that a focus ring at the back? That’s the one thing I wish my ACOG had.

    • Jimmy Labita

      Sorry, no focus ring.

  • SerArthurDayne

    IMHO, the real reason we don’t have any ‘super values’ in optics- ie a whole bunch of great great options for less than say $200 and tons of optics from $400-$4000 is because people buy them all day everyday at all prices.

    If the entire ‘genre’ of black rifle owners/shooters/collectors did not buy bazillions of Aimpoints and EOTechs $4-750 and $1000 scopes and $2000 ACOGs, they’d have to reduce the price. But people eat them up like chicken chow mein.

    Sucks.

    • MeaCulpa

      Or, far more likely, precision optics are expensive to manufacture. Robust precision optics even more so. So people refusing to by aimpoints or Tricion would likely result in small drop in price for the civilian market and continued sales to the military and law enforcement, worst case they drop the civilian sales as a whole.

      • SerArthurDayne

        Or actually I’m right and you’re wrong. You do this quite a bit, attempt to pontificate on people with your holier-than-thous-answer-BS. Go eat a lemon.

        • MeaCulpa

          Quite a bit? I’ve posted like ten times on this site in total, I’ve hardly done anything “quite a bit”, but I get it, you’re poor and bitter and wish that non poor people would stop buying nice things in the hope that they by some capitalistic magic will end up in your price bracket. But that ain’t gonna happen.

        • Jimmy Labita

          MeaCulpa is right. To have quality optics manufactured cost money.

    • David Harmon

      ACOGs are built with a process that had to be invented to to build them. There is a very valid reason why those optics cost so much. It’s easy to say, oh the Chinese can build similar for XXX, so ACOG or whatever is over priced at XXXX. What isn’t easy is paying for the R&D like the expensive manufactures did, where as the Chinese guys just ripped off the companies that did all the research,

      • RocketScientist

        “ACOGs are built with a process that had to be invented to to build them. ”

        LOL, thats such a nonsense statement. Literally every object ever intentionally made by human hands was built by a process that had to be invented to build them. It’s not like some hunter-gatherer sat down some day to make a spearpoint using the method his grand-dad taught him, and accidentally built a basket. Its not like when apple designs a new iPhone, they tell the assembler at the foxconn plant “Eh, just use the same parts, machinery, tooling, and assembly procedures you used for the last one. I’m sure that’ll work”. Of course not, they go out and “invent” a build process that actually results in them building the desired object.

        Saying they had to “invent a build process” specifically for the ACOG is kind of like bragging that this new book is so revolutionary, the printing presses had to be configured specifically to print it… yes, that’s a true statement, but is true for literally every other book out there.

        • Joshua Knott

          Wow you win the idiot of the day award,nor have any inkling on process of research and development.

          • RocketScientist

            “Wow you win the idiot of the day award,nor have any inkling on process of research and development.”

            So originally wanted to knock out a snarky reply about your poor grammar, which mentioned my bona fides in R&D for a space/defense contractor. But that wouldn’t actually move things forward any would it?

            So what exactly in my comment was idiotic, or I’ll even settle for un-true? Any thing that is substantially different from another thing (different enough to be considered a different “thing”) is, by nature, going to require its own process to build. So yes, Trijicon had to “invent a process” to build the ACOG, just like any manufacturer ever has had to “invent” a new process to build any new things.

          • Joshua Knott

            CONSIDER, that your previous reply is nothing but full of inept snarky, rambling responses, i wouldnt be surprised by your a-holish type tendencies.
            here’s a snarky implausible response
            “So originally wanted to knock out a snarky reply about your poor grammar, which mentioned my bona fides in R&D for a space/defense contractor. But that wouldn’t actually move things forward any would it?” what poor grammar, leaving an oxford comma out? wow, mother must be proud of your coy “snarky” response albeit unwittingly.

            I wanted to correct your grammar by pointing out the phrase “bonafide” is technically one word, but not recognized by Websters. You sir win the idiot of the day 2 award.
            man, you give joy to my day.
            CONSIDER, that in your previous response you didnt disclaim that you are in a “research and development” team. Nor would I even believe you, for if you knew anything about the space and aeronautical industry, you would understand that the micro processor, and everything related to current form tech came from the exact research and development within NASA during the turbulent 60’s…..but i digress, you sir are just a lying idiot.

            Ohh and if you knew anything about the CCP(this is China JIC) they are professionals in stealing intellectual property…I mean you do know what the F35 is right, and how the CCP stole 174 pages worth of “research and development” for their own homegrown programs…cutting out the cost of having to develop their own.

            Save us truthful people from the fantasy in which plays throughout your head on repeat.

        • David Harmon

          Except the machine that assembles the ACOG had to be invented, along with the process. Most optics are assembled and purged piece meal. The ACOG is assembled as one whole piece all at once. The casing is literally forged into it’s shape and the internals are installed at the same time.

          So no, the statement wasn’t nonsensical, it was quite accurate and to the point. The amount of R&D involved with the ACOG is why the real ones cost so much. It’s not the feature set that you’re buying with the ACOG, it’s the manufacturing process that makes it’s so durable that you’re buying.

  • Gary Kirk

    So much for just ripping off reticles..

    • Jimmy Labita

      There is nothing proprietary about a chevron or BDC.

    • Henrik Bergdahl

      The pso-1 had chevrons way before these guys 😀

  • Gary Kirk

    Am I the only one that notices, that flip up rear sight ain’t gonna flip up …

    And looks like this things gonna need a tool to remove, and takes batteries..

    • Frank Grimes

      How do you plan on using irons through a magnified optic anyway?

      • Gary Kirk

        K, you apparently don’t completely read before judgment.. My ACOG is on a throw release, even stock their on thumb screws.. This thing has hex nuts, which “require a tool to remove”

        But, getting to the point, I have gotten into the trained habit of “popping” my back up rear on the way to ditching my optic..

        • Frank Grimes

          My my, we’re a sewious wittle operwator aren’t we?

          My ACOG is in a Super Precision mount, it has hex nuts, I’ve used every major brand QD mount on the market and none of them are any good.

          If my ACOG goes down and I need to put a bullet in something, I used the ACOG mounted BUIS or aim with my laser.

          A laser is faster to deploy than ANY flip up BUIS and, unlike most BUIS, it works great in low light.

          • Gary Kirk

            Dude.. Step one.. You need to seriously remove your tampon immediately!! Toxic shock syndrome has already set in it seems.. This is for your health my friend.. PULL THE STRING

          • Gary Kirk

            Oh, and judging by your reply, you’re either joking, or have never had the pleasure of owning an ACOG..

          • Frank Grimes

            You needed two comments in a row to sum up your “point”, really?

            That’s some “Jerk Store” level timing right there, little man.

            You’re saying I don’t own an ACOG, but I specifically address the tritium lit BUIS on top of MY ACOG? Yeah, that makes sense.

            That’s kind of funny coming from the guy who thinks that a plain red chevron reticle without the windage reference marks is an “RCO rip off” without knowing the plain red chevron with no windage marks is simply the reticle of the TA31 ACOG.

            Maybe that’s a little bit of projection on your end? I mean how could you NOT know the reticle configuration of one of, if not THE most, popular 4×32 ACOGs on the market?

    • mig1nc

      I use angled irons with my ACOG. Works beautifully.

      I’d recommend anybody give it a try.

  • n0truscotsman

    I was considering one of these to just test out, but now I wont.

    That is blatant IP theft and I wont have anything to do with that.

    • Joseph Goins

      “That is blatant IP theft and I wont have anything to do with that.”

      They didn’t steal anything. Everything is public domain.

    • Jimmy Labita

      It’s not theft. All ACOG patents have expired. That is why you see many prismatic scopes on the market today. This forces TRIJICON to come up with new and innovative optics.

  • Possibly—-

  • kingghidorah

    Looks like all of their ‘reviews’ were done by the same guy. Best sight, better than xxx ect. just like the lame paid reviews clogging up Amazon these days.

    • Jimmy Labita

      Look harder.