Aimpoint vs. EO Tech

[Mad Ryan]

I'm thinking about the whole red dot thing, and am curious about what ya-all think about the options. I don't know if I want an Aimpoint or an EO Tech, or for that matter I don't know if there's some other option that is good.

I have a Rock River Arms Carbine with a Troy midlength rail, and front and rear Troy flip up sights.

[e1harris]

Speed, Speed, Speed....


Get the EOtech. It's the fastest sight acquisition around!

[Daynja]

Both are very good and closely matched. I don't believe one is significantly better than the other. I would say that there isn't much of a 3rd option besides different models of the big 2 red dots. Do some research on here and on ar15.com

The biggies are...

what kind of "reticle" do you want? (dot or dot with circle around it)

battery life?

type of battery?

just ignore all the hype about what the US military uses and pick the best option for you.

[MrMurphy]

Aimpoints have a battery life of 10,000-50,000 hours, you just roll the dial and it's on. Easy to use. 4 MOA dot is good for all-around use, not quite as good at longer ranges but usable. Very tough. I use one myself, issued as an M68 CCO. They require a Tenebraex Killflash on the front of they kind of glint red from the front.


Eotechs have a shorter battery life (1,100 or so hours?), have a pushbutton up/down/off setup and a 65moa circle around a 1 moa dot. Nice arrangement as the big circle is for close range the small for long. Eotechs have been known to suddenly die in combat, which is why you have backup iron sights. Eotechs don't show anything to the front (holographic).

[hankhan]

I tried both - I'd suggest you do the same. I found them very different when using them. I went with the Eotech.

Here's a comparison I got from John Bailey at Eotech.

Hello Sir,



Thank you for your interest in EOTech and our HOLOgraphic Weapon Sight. I have attached a quick comparison, but the following are some additional points to think about that will show you that EOTech offers some additional benefits. The comparison is based on the Comp M2, the Aimpoint sight that is commonly used by the US Army and identified by them as the M68.



1. Target Acquisition: EOTech offers the fastest target acquisition in the industry. Our circle/dot reticle is very easy to see, even on moving targets, or while the operator is moving. The single dot that Aimpoint uses can often get lost in their tube design and is harder to maintain while moving.



2. Perimeter shooting: Both sights are not magnified, so long range shooting is not the best scenario. But, the EOTech sight is better suited for perimeter shooting and even some long range shooting because of our dot size. Our dot is a 1MOA dot. Aimpoint most common model, the same model the Army deploys, uses a 4MOA dot. This means at 100 yards, our dot is 1" in diameter. The Aimpoint is 4". So at 200 yards our dot is only 2", still offering quite a bit of accuracy. The Aimpoint would be 8" wide. Military snipers could not consider head shots with a dot size this big.



3. Technology: EOTech uses holographic technology in our sights. The reticle design is recorded in every cell of the glass, much like film in a camera. We then use a laser to illuminate the glass, thus casting the reticle out on the target plane. It is hard to comprehend, but the reticle is actually out there on your target. There is no light or laser signature emitting from the front glass, so enemies even using night vision devices cannot detect our sight. The Aimpoint uses a reflex method to create their dot. A laser shoots off of the front glass, and back to the users eye, thus reflecting. This method is common, but offers some drawbacks.



A. A kill flash adaptor is necessary to eliminate light signature. To be undetectable to night vision, this adaptor is necessary.



B. If the front glass of the Aimpoint is broken or covered with mud or snow, the sight is unusable. When using that reflex method, the front glass is critical for performance. With the EOTech, as long as a small portion of the window is visible, you can acquire a target. (see obstructed window attachment)



Aimpoint does have us on one issue. Their battery life is incredible. They can continuously run for over some 8000 hours. No other military used device even comes close. EOTech is the closest (over 1100 hours in lithium) We do combat this feature with two of our own. We offer an auto-shut off feature after either 4 or 8 hours. We also offer a low battery indicator. As you turn on our sight, our reticle brightness will pulse, telling the user that they have 20% or less battery life, allowing the operator the chance to change batteries. Aimpoint does not offer these options, so if you accidentally leave the sight on, it will run until the batteries fail.



I am attaching some additional data for you to review. Please consider visiting our website for information as well. You may contact me with any additional questions, or concerns. I hope this helps in your decision making.



Best regards,



John Bailey

[El Duderino]

You know there is only one answer to any gun related "which one" question....




GET BOTH!
<img src=http://glocktalk.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=6395992>

[Veritas]

I just asked asked that same question a few weeks back. Good info at http://www.glocktalk.com/showthread.php?threadid=545454&highlight=eotech+aimpoint

[Seabee]

I looked at both and ultimatly went with the Aimpoint. It just worked better for me. The EOTech was a little to busy for me. It's a fine sight, and I'll probably get one for my 2nd AR, but at that time, the Aimpoint gave me a warm fuzzy so I went with it.

[Panzerfaust]

If you can try them both out, I would strongly suggest you do so, regardless of what is typed in these pages. My experience with these sights was somewhat different.

1. Target Acquisition: EOTech offers the fastest target acquisition in the industry. Our circle/dot reticle is very easy to see, even on moving targets, or while the operator is moving. The single dot that Aimpoint uses can often get lost in their tube design and is harder to maintain while moving.

Both did quite well in this area from my experience. I have a scout mounted Aimpoint, and it didn't seem to possess this same characteristic of being "lost". Mount it closer to the eye, and that might start happening.

2. Perimeter shooting: Both sights are not magnified, so long range shooting is not the best scenario. But, the EOTech sight is better suited for perimeter shooting and even some long range shooting because of our dot size. Our dot is a 1MOA dot. Aimpoint most common model, the same model the Army deploys, uses a 4MOA dot. This means at 100 yards, our dot is 1" in diameter. The Aimpoint is 4". So at 200 yards our dot is only 2", still offering quite a bit of accuracy. The Aimpoint would be 8" wide. Military snipers could not consider head shots with a dot size this big.

I agree. These optics were not meant for longer range use. In all seriousness, the 65MOA circle was too busy for my likings, but not to the point that I would never want to use or consider buying one in the future. My belief is that a military sniper will be using a .30 rifle with much more powerful scopes, but people wanting to hit longer range targets may well want to consider the ACOG.

3. Technology: EOTech uses holographic technology in our sights. The reticle design is recorded in every cell of the glass, much like film in a camera. We then use a laser to illuminate the glass, thus casting the reticle out on the target plane. It is hard to comprehend, but the reticle is actually out there on your target. There is no light or laser signature emitting from the front glass, so enemies even using night vision devices cannot detect our sight. The Aimpoint uses a reflex method to create their dot. A laser shoots off of the front glass, and back to the users eye, thus reflecting. This method is common, but offers some drawbacks.

Nothing really to add to this.

A. A kill flash adaptor is necessary to eliminate light signature. To be undetectable to night vision, this adaptor is necessary.

Good call!!!

B. If the front glass of the Aimpoint is broken or covered with mud or snow, the sight is unusable. When using that reflex method, the front glass is critical for performance. With the EOTech, as long as a small portion of the window is visible, you can acquire a target. (see obstructed window attachment)

No doubt all of these optic choices have this particular vulnerability, to some degree.

Either choice is rugged and dependable. It should be noted that the platform you intend on mounting it to should also be considered. If using a flat top, the first natural choice I would think should be an EOTech. If you're running a carry handle, as I am, an Aimpoint may make more sense to your wallet.

[Bonk]

I tried both, but ultimately the reticle of the EoTech won over the battery life and controls of the Aimpoint, so I bought a EoTech 512 for my M4gery. That said, the 9mm AR I am building is probably going to get an Aimpoint, just because as an inside-50-meters weapon, the precision of the EoTech's reticle (1 moa dot) is much less of an issue.

[dbrowne1]

I have my doubts about the EOTech's reliability. I know that they have worked to improve, but they're not there yet. I saw 3 of them - all Rev. F models - go down at a carbine class last month. One had wandering zero (it was in a LaRue mount, so the mount wasn't the issue, and the shooter was shooting very tight groups - that wandered. A lot.), another would turn itself off after every shot, and another just flat out stopped working.

None of the Aimpoints had issues.

I actually like the EOTech's reticle and design overall, I just can't get over both these observations and those of instructors who have seen the same things over the last couple years.

As for precision, the Aimpoint is available with a 2MOA dot now, and frankly, given the unmagnified optic and role of a carbine, and given that I could consistently hit steel at 200m with my 4MOA Aimpoint (and I'm not even that great a shot)...I just don't think the reticle size is a real world issue. If you need more precision than that, you should consider a powered optic and probably something with more mechanical precision than an M4-type carbine.

[thetoastmaster]

I understand that Eotech's also have problems with heat. I've read this on a few forums. Can anyone confirm this? I am kind of turned off by the size of the Aimpoint reticle, but better to have a 2MOA dot, than a dead optic when your rifle heats up. And besides, 2 MOA is still almost four times narrower than a military front sight (at 7 1/2 MOA). Hell, 2 MOA would allow one to make a 500 shot, without covering up a 20 inch dog. Am I wrong here?

[RMTactical]

I like the Aimpoints personally but the Eotechs are not all that bad.

[switch625]

Originally posted by MrMurphy
Eotechs have been known to suddenly die in combat It's been on Arfcom more than once that instructors at popular firearms school have seen both Aimpoint and Eotechs go **** up. I don't think one is more prone than the other. Socom even bought a crapload of them, I bet they know what they're doing.

[RM]

There is a ton of Eo-Techs in use with the Marine Corps right now, I know of several battalions who went out and used O&M funds to buy hundreds of them, this is despite the RCO being a system push item and available at no cost to the unit.

[El Duderino]

This pic says it all...

<img src=http://www4.army.mil/OCPA/uploads/large/CSA-2005-06-27-150946.jpg>

[lastevolution]

Another vote for EoTech.

[lastevolution]

Originally posted by El Duderino
This pic says it all...

>

Get both? :supergrin: :clown:

[GackMan]

Personally - I like the EOTech.

I like the 1 min dot. I can hit 8" steel plates at 300 yards all day long. I'd used the 4 min aimpoint in the past and it wasn't precise enough at longer ranges. I haven't tried the 2 min version compared to the EOTech.

On the other hand - for closer-in work inside 25 yards, the 65min outer ring on the EO works great. Much faster than the Aimpoint.

The aimpoint has the longer battery life but the EOTech is 'good enough'. I use the AA model with lithium batteries - I just replace them every 6 months whether they need it or not and I've never had them die on me.

I have replaced the EOTech mount w/ the GGGAZ accucam mount.

I've used the EOTech in countless matches and classes and it hasn't failed. I think I probably have close to 10,000 rounds through the rifle that has the EOTech mounted.

[ColoradoPacker]

I did the EOTech mounted directly to my A3 rail, so my BUIS give absolute cowitness when I flip it up, and the 65MOA circle is helpful to estimate range - i.e. if a person takes up half the circle they are a little over 200 yards away if they are average height.

[Exile]

Got to try them for yourself. My Dept. has just gone for ACOG's, with a top-mounted J-point on our .223's and Eotechs on our 9mm PDW's.

There are lots of weird and wonderful reticle patterns out there, but I always come back to just a plain dot. I shoot one in competition, and the only feature I require is a variable dot size, depending on whether targets are near or far.

[jonathon]

I've tried both.. wouldn't hesitate to use both..

But I find it easier to use the Aimpoint, less distracted by the plain dot. That is just me though.

[thetoastmaster]

I still don't understand the fuss about a four MOA dot being "imprecise" on a non magnifying optic. The iron front sight on an M1/M14 is seven MOA, plenty narrow enough to hit a twenty inch dog (head and shoulders silhouette) target at 500 meters. A four MOA dot is plenty good enough to do that, which is better than many rifle owners are capable of).

[GackMan]

Originally posted by thetoastmaster
I still don't understand the fuss about a four MOA dot being "imprecise" on a non magnifying optic. The iron front sight on an M1/M14 is seven MOA, plenty narrow enough to hit a twenty inch dog (head and shoulders silhouette) target at 500 meters. A four MOA dot is plenty good enough to do that, which is better than many rifle owners are capable of).

with the front sight post your are splitting COM so no matter how wide it is, you can still see 50% of your target. With a dot you are zeroed to the center of the dot - So with a 4 MOA at 500M you are obscuring a 20" circle that contains your Point of Impact somewhere inside along with your target.

[thetoastmaster]

A seven MOA wide front sight is wider than a twenty inch target at five hundred yards. Is it possible to make the top of the dot equal point of impact? The dot is adjustable for windage and elevation, correct? I would sight the dot in so the top of the 4 MOA dot is POA/POI at 250 meters (BSZ).

[USMC03Grunt]

Yeah, we were using out M-4s with the M-68 (M2 aimpoint sight) up at Camp Bulis about a week or so ago and at the longer ranges, there is a problem with them covering up a bit of the target. My solution (and it works quite well) was to turn my M-68 off, flip up the Matech BUIS sights we have on our M-4s, adjust the range and engage at the longer range targets. Had no problem. Right now I have a Trijicon reflex sight on my personal M-4gery but I think I will be going with an Aimpoint M2 simply because I can train in my off time with the same sights that I use at work.

[dport]

I may be wrong, but I thought CCO stood for Close Combat Optic. This is where the Aimpoint excels IMO. I like the uncluttered sight picture. It does fine out to any range for a civilian defense situation. My preference is for the Aimpoint.

I have toyed with EOTechs, and I have a Bushnell Holosight here at the house that I play with off and on, so I have experience with the EOTech.

My personal preference is for the Aimpoint. If you have a chance, as with everything else in the firearms industry, test out what's out there and then get what works FOR YOU.

Remember, an Aimpoint is just A sight. An EOTech is just A sight. An ACOG is just A sight. None of them are THE sight.

[GackMan]

Originally posted by thetoastmaster
A seven MOA wide front sight is wider than a twenty inch target at five hundred yards. Is it possible to make the top of the dot equal point of impact? The dot is adjustable for windage and elevation, correct? I would sight the dot in so the top of the 4 MOA dot is POA/POI at 250 meters (BSZ).

Hmmmm... good question.

I dont' think it would work since the top of the dot isn't precise enough. If you turn the brightness up it flares and fuzzes a little so it would move yout POI around.

With my EOTech and the 1 MOA dot I am good to go out to 300 yards with it. I haven't tried it farther than that - the 600 yard range is only open once a month at the range where I am a member.