Aimpoint vs Eotech vs Trijicon

[sprint]

Many good close combat optics are being manufactured today. While some users have a preference top use irons at close range, and a magnified scope for longer range shooting, this poll is really about which scope most often gets selected.

Indirectly, it is also about WHY scopes get selected.


What is your personal preference for a cco sight and why?

 

[cpt. canuck]

I own both the Aimpoint and the Eotech and I like the Eotech better as I find the larger outer ring to be a much faster than the smaller Aimpoint dot.

 

[Musky Hunter]

for CQB get the Eotech...past 100-200 yards get a Trijicon...

 

[Jamie]

for CQB get the Eotech...past 100-200 yards get a Trijicon...

Ditto X1


I am running the 552 on my 11.5" AR and it kicks ass


I really like the ML-2 but its a tad more them the Eotech

the Trijicon ACOG is a awesome battle/field use(longer range)

the Trijicon Reflex I used one and...well...its not as good as the others..


YMMV

Jamie Barkwell

 

[cpt. canuck]

Plus the older reflex's had problems with wash out and light from the tritium bleeding out from it's fiber optics at night, so if you go that route make sure it's the new version that they corrected the problems with.

 

[foxbat]

I have several of both..552 X 2, as well as a ML2 and a Comp 3.....
I prefer the reticle on the Holosights to the dots, but could live with either...
I keep hearing, and ask Gadget as he's got more trigger time behind both, that the Eotech's seem to be more fragile than the Aimpoints...
I have personally found that both are 'drop proof'...(Ahem, don't ask!), but I have heard from more than one source that the Eotechs seem to 'give up the ghost' when subjected to high volume, full auto fire...something which for me is somewhat of a 'theoretical' issue!

 

[jaycee]

I don't think you can go wrong with either a ML2 or a 552, as long as the latter is a rev F - don't get anything older.

I've owned both Aimpoints and Eotechs, and have since settled on an ML3/2moa.

We have some reflex's at work (with the plain dot), but they seem a little "fuzzier" than either the Aimpoint or Eotech.

 

[koalorka]

I think that the ML2 is ideal at ranges up to 250 m (yards). The 65 MOA outer ring of the HWS is just too much of a distraction for me. I wouldn't mind a Trijicon though, if only it wasn't more than rent....sigh....

 

[Chris7_62]

EOTech fan here, although I would switch to an ACOG in a heartbeat if I could get one for less than a new USP.

 

[Hungry]

ACOG, lots more robust, no batteries, can be bounced around a great deal more in battle conds. TA31 series, I mean... with the fiber optic band on top.

Then, again, whatever works for you and your budget and your game is what is the best.

Cheers,
Barney

 

[redleg]

Often it depends on the firearm it is to be used on. I think the EOTechs are good sights, but they are relatively bit and heavy. You cannot mount them low enough to coindex irons on some types of guns.
Personally I find the Aimpoint to be more robust and a little more compact.

 

[dangertree]

I'm curious why civ shooters pay the extra $ for the 552 over the 512. Is there any diff other than the night vision capability?

 

[Stevo]

I haven't used the Trijicon, but I prefer my Comp M2 to the Eotech. Like someone said already, I find the 65moa ring on the Eotech distracting.

 

[Chris7_62]

I'm curious why civ shooters pay the extra $ for the 552 over the 512. Is there any diff other than the night vision capability?

Nope, NVG is all it is. I bought the 512 for exactly that reason. Cheaper, and I have no use for NVG or the need to buy a thousand dollar unit for the odd night shoot.

 

[canucklehead]

I find the 65moa ring on the Eotech distracting.

I used to have a holosight (not EOTech, but good enough for me!) with a single 1 MOA dot. No circle reticle... makes it much better for 'precision' work.

 

[sprint]

I've always used Aimpoint.

I have owned 3 Comp M2/ML2 sights. They were rugged as hell and the batteries last longer than Ham Omlette IMPs in a fat bastard's cookie cabinet


Though I've never owned an Eotech, my brother has a 552. To me, the sight seemed "fuzzy" inside the house (never made it to the range to see it in use outside).

I asked a friend of mine on the boards who owns one. he's a fellow that I've done a fair bit of shooting with in the past, and he commented that the reticle clarity seems to depend on the lighting, that it is crystal outdoors but a bit fuzzy inside.

Anyone have a similar or vastly different experience with them? Is there a version issue at work here?

 

[Chris7_62]

I asked a friend of mine on the boards who owns one. he's a fellow that I've done a fair bit of shooting with in the past, and he commented that the reticle clarity seems to depend on the lighting, that it is crystal outdoors but a bit fuzzy inside.

Anyone have a similar or vastly different experience with them? Is there a version issue at work here?

Don't look at the reticle, superimpose it on a target and it becomes clear. Brightness determines 'fuzziness' - A power '5' will look less bright outdoors in the sun than indoors. You don't want the sight glaring at you, the less power the crisper it seems. YMMV.

 

[sprint]

I just bid on another Aimpoint M2.

They've worked real well for me to date, and I'm a bit centric towards reliability. While the Eotech looks and sounds pretty whiz-bang, you cant really go wrong with going with what you know.

This summer I plan on meeting up with Oppy and trying his Eotech. Having said that, at $500 odd dollars or so its tough for me to make a leap of faith for an online purchase until I've tried one.

 

[knuckleduster]

Compact ACOG ta45 on my LE6920 is the cats ass. No adjustments, no batteries, super rugged. Sits on the carry handle and I can still use the stock iron sights, and the 1.5 magnifications means CQB is no problem, and dropping man size targets between 200m and 300m is a breeze with the trangle of death.