Dragonfly
Member
Note: I originally wrote this review last year for the Meprolight M5 (I think it's known as the Tru-Dot RDS in the USA) and thought it might be helpful for members here.
I’d heard about the M5 but didn’t know much about them until recently—they’re designed specially for the Tavor so I knew it’d fit good from a height perspective.
Overview
The sight is similar is shape to Eotechs, but with a more angular profile. It’s a bit shorter front-to back that an Aimpoint PRO, and around the same weight—the specs say the M5 is 1/2 ounce lighter. There’s a QD mount, which is nice, too.
The sight takes one regular AA battery that inserts from the front:
There is a brightness adjustment dial at the rear left, with four settings including one night vision setting.
Windage and adjustment dials are on the front left and the top. The hood over the glass is plastic, I think. Military models have an aluminum hood. Although I don’t treat my rifles roughly I’d still prefer the aluminum version.
Initial Impressions
The red dot is 1.8 MOA so it looks more or less the same as the PRO’s 2 MOA dot. Side-by-side there is, for me, slightly less astigmatism flaring on the M5 than on the PRO, although the Trijicon reflex sights I’ve tried are better than both in this regard.
The PRO has a brighter highest brightness setting than the M5, although the M5’s dot was still easily picked up when looked at bright sunlit snow at its brightest level. There is a big difference between the night vision brightness and the lowest regular brightness—it probably wouldn't cause an issue in actual use but the lowest regular brightness seems to me to be wee bit too bright.
The sight has an auto shut-off feature if it’s left immobile for 10 minutes. In impromptu testing I found that very little movement was needed to cause the dot to re-appear…maybe less than a centimetre or so.
I really, really like the wide field of view. The glass has no tint at all, unlike the greenish or bluish tint of the Aimpoints or RMRs. There’s also no lens-effect like the RMRs have. Here’s the field of view comparison between the M5 and the PRO.
Here’s how it looks on an IWI CTAR:
At the Range
I tried at ten rounds at standing at 25m first to make sure I was on paper.
[ (believe it or not this was April 2015—we had a lot of snow that winter!)
I then moved back to the 100m mark to do a final sight-in
Just for fun I tried some impromptu accuracy bench testing—no sandbags or anything, just resting the rifle on the bench. The best group was four rounds into 2” and a fifth opening it up to about 3.5”. I was pleased, but of course the CTAR is not a benchrest rifle!
Here’s what the dot looks like at 100m (it’s in between the two targets between the “7” and “8” target markers. It was hard to hold everything steady for this shot!
Lastly we tried a two relays of 10 rounds, with five simulating standing snap shooting and five rapid barricade standing.
[media][/media]
Here are the results...not earth-shattering but I'm OK with it, especially since it was might first time out with the rifle and sight, and and the time it was my first time shooting at all in almost five months. Be kind!
I like the sight a lot—the wide field of view made it very quick to pick up the dot, and the perfectly clear, distortion-free window meant had a surprising effect I hadn’t considered. When you look at a target, then bring the sight up, there’s no change at all in what the target looks like—no colour change, no distortion to work through. What I found was that I could focus on the target “easier”, if you will…it’s like my brain didn’t have to re-correct what my eyes were seeing pre- and post-sighting. It was an unexpected benefit.
I was using the sight on its brightest setting—it was fine, but I always like to have a setting that’s one brighter or one dimmer than what you’re using, just so you know your setting is optimal.
Overall—I really like it!
I’d heard about the M5 but didn’t know much about them until recently—they’re designed specially for the Tavor so I knew it’d fit good from a height perspective.
Overview
The sight is similar is shape to Eotechs, but with a more angular profile. It’s a bit shorter front-to back that an Aimpoint PRO, and around the same weight—the specs say the M5 is 1/2 ounce lighter. There’s a QD mount, which is nice, too.
The sight takes one regular AA battery that inserts from the front:
There is a brightness adjustment dial at the rear left, with four settings including one night vision setting.
Windage and adjustment dials are on the front left and the top. The hood over the glass is plastic, I think. Military models have an aluminum hood. Although I don’t treat my rifles roughly I’d still prefer the aluminum version.
Initial Impressions
The red dot is 1.8 MOA so it looks more or less the same as the PRO’s 2 MOA dot. Side-by-side there is, for me, slightly less astigmatism flaring on the M5 than on the PRO, although the Trijicon reflex sights I’ve tried are better than both in this regard.
The PRO has a brighter highest brightness setting than the M5, although the M5’s dot was still easily picked up when looked at bright sunlit snow at its brightest level. There is a big difference between the night vision brightness and the lowest regular brightness—it probably wouldn't cause an issue in actual use but the lowest regular brightness seems to me to be wee bit too bright.
The sight has an auto shut-off feature if it’s left immobile for 10 minutes. In impromptu testing I found that very little movement was needed to cause the dot to re-appear…maybe less than a centimetre or so.
I really, really like the wide field of view. The glass has no tint at all, unlike the greenish or bluish tint of the Aimpoints or RMRs. There’s also no lens-effect like the RMRs have. Here’s the field of view comparison between the M5 and the PRO.
Here’s how it looks on an IWI CTAR:
At the Range
I tried at ten rounds at standing at 25m first to make sure I was on paper.
[ (believe it or not this was April 2015—we had a lot of snow that winter!)
I then moved back to the 100m mark to do a final sight-in
Just for fun I tried some impromptu accuracy bench testing—no sandbags or anything, just resting the rifle on the bench. The best group was four rounds into 2” and a fifth opening it up to about 3.5”. I was pleased, but of course the CTAR is not a benchrest rifle!
Here’s what the dot looks like at 100m (it’s in between the two targets between the “7” and “8” target markers. It was hard to hold everything steady for this shot!
Lastly we tried a two relays of 10 rounds, with five simulating standing snap shooting and five rapid barricade standing.
[media][/media]
Here are the results...not earth-shattering but I'm OK with it, especially since it was might first time out with the rifle and sight, and and the time it was my first time shooting at all in almost five months. Be kind!
I like the sight a lot—the wide field of view made it very quick to pick up the dot, and the perfectly clear, distortion-free window meant had a surprising effect I hadn’t considered. When you look at a target, then bring the sight up, there’s no change at all in what the target looks like—no colour change, no distortion to work through. What I found was that I could focus on the target “easier”, if you will…it’s like my brain didn’t have to re-correct what my eyes were seeing pre- and post-sighting. It was an unexpected benefit.
I was using the sight on its brightest setting—it was fine, but I always like to have a setting that’s one brighter or one dimmer than what you’re using, just so you know your setting is optimal.
Overall—I really like it!
