Thread could end with this comment right here ^ coming from the man himself.
Trying to decide between Aimpoint and Eotech
- Thread starter fellers88
- Start date
Thread could end with this comment right here ^ coming from the man himself.
Gunnerlove
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Vancouver Island
I have a Comp M4 turned on, sitting on my loading bench. It has never been turned off since 2009 when I received it so I believe their battery life claims. On and off the rifle it has held zero going on 5 years.
I have no doubt that I could drop it in a sock, beat someone to death with it and it would still hold zero.
I have been issued Eotrashes that did not survive being mounted on a rifle, ate batteries like a fat kid with smarties, and turned off when ever you fired the gun it was mounted on. Now they say quality control has improved, and they have fixed the issues but they also said there were no problems.
I guess what I am saying is that L3 makes electronic sights for people who like using their backup sights.
I have no doubt that I could drop it in a sock, beat someone to death with it and it would still hold zero.
I have been issued Eotrashes that did not survive being mounted on a rifle, ate batteries like a fat kid with smarties, and turned off when ever you fired the gun it was mounted on. Now they say quality control has improved, and they have fixed the issues but they also said there were no problems.
I guess what I am saying is that L3 makes electronic sights for people who like using their backup sights.
I have both & love both.
Eotech is the better optic as the target acquisition is much faster.
Aimpoint is smaller, lighter and gets way better battery life
Both are excellent quality
I put the Eotech on my AR-15 and the Aimpoint on the heavier XCR-L
Eotech is the better optic as the target acquisition is much faster.
Aimpoint is smaller, lighter and gets way better battery life
Both are excellent quality
I put the Eotech on my AR-15 and the Aimpoint on the heavier XCR-L
Last edited:
HEY!
no need to shout, it's Sunday afternoon afterall
I think Lav has a tad bit more experience than 99% of us, so I'm sure he has enough experience to warrant a recommendation towards the Aimpoint...wouldn't you say?
No, I think if he has so much experience he should share a little rather than just saying "this is best because I say so".
I don't care who he is, I want to know some reasons why he would choose one over the other.
Last edited:
I have an Eotech XPS 2. It's a very good optic with the advantages posted above. I have the single small dot in the circle that most if not all Eotechs sport except those with two dots. For me, the sight is great for fast shooting with OK accuracy requirements as in Steel Challenge. However because I have mild astigmatism, it breaks down for precise longer distance shots because the reticle blurs or distorts. Sadly I don't think there's a cure as it's a problem with all holographic sights and some dots.
I am making the same decision, and I really love the idea of faster acquisition of targets and wider view of the Eotech while not having to look through the tube to see the dot. But the claims for Aimpoint make me want to lean that way since almost everyone says they are better.
redddogg69
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Burlington/ON
I think this is a personal experience type of deal. I own both an aimpoint PRO and an eotech 512. The aimpoint is on my most used AR and I really like it, but I also really like my eotech. The aimpoint has a nice crisp dot as opposed to the blurred reticle of the eotech. The aimpoint for me is not great both eyes open and is hard to target this way, the eotech is easy and intuitive this way. They both have their plus and minus's. Try out both or better yet get both.
I shot a Steel Challenge match today with a tube style 1x optic. Big mistake as I would have been MUCH faster with the Eotech. As with most things, end use makes all the difference and the choice more obvious. The Aimpoints would be pathetic in Steel Challenge.
hey there is some good information! thanks mate, this may have just tipped my decision towards an XPS-2
I shoot in hard rain after dragging the rifle through the mud, -40 below after dragging the rifle through a few snow banks, have dropped rifles on to rocks, and do shoot in mitts sometimes.
They're about the same thing if you're primarily shooting at a range, but the differences reveal themselves quickly in sub optimal conditions, especially while hunting.
I liked the eotech more at first due to the big window. After a while you notice the guard around the HUD actually obscures more than the t1 housing does, and the recessed window design traps foreign debris and dust.
The push buttons seem okay at first until you're wearing gloves, it's dark out, or you need to dial up or down on the reticle brightness quickly.
The battery life doesn't seem like an issue, until the battery croaks at a bad time. Or you forget to turn it on, or off.
Through use, I came to appreciate the t1's strengths and work around the eotech's weaknesses. As mentioned earlier the eotech isn't a bad optic by any means, but as good as the t1 ? No.
What kind of "tube style 1x optic" are you referring to ?
I know my times are identical with an eotech or aim point t1...
I like 2MOA much better. If I want a bigger dot, I crank up the volume...
I've owned both a 2 MOA CompM4S and a 4 MOA H1 (back when they only came in 4 MOA) and didn't find any advantage to the 4MOA. I found the 2 MOA just as quick to pick up...and until you actually sighted on a target the dots looked more or less the same to me. I shot the 2 MOA out to 300m with no issues.
For comparison, here's what a 3.5MOA Trijicon RMR dot looks like at 25m, 50m and 100m.
I've switched to RMRs (3.5 MOA on my M&P15 and a 7 MOA on my Kriss Vector) since I found the dot to be better defined with my astigmatism.
HEY!
no need to shout, it's Sunday afternoon afterall
I think Lav has a tad bit more experience than 99% of us, so I'm sure he has enough experience to warrant a recommendation towards the Aimpoint...wouldn't you say?
Although in general I don't think anyone should ever be considered "beyond questioning", this guy in particular likely has better things to do than recite his resume and justify his decisions to a bunch of Canadian hobbyists.
I started out using Eotechs. I don't own any anymore. I own Aimpoint micros. Same speed, greater durability, radically greater longevity.
Anyone who thinks they'd be "pathetic" in steel challenge either hasn't used one and is guessing, foolishly, or just generally doesn't have a clue what they're talking about.
It must be considered, and with all due respect to Mr. Vickers who's opinions are often paid for, he is a professional who could likely acquire targets with any optic or iron sites much quicker than most or all of us amatures & rookies (hobby shooters). His opinion may not apply in every case & every situation. Like any skill, equipment that's "best" for one, may not be "best" for another. As someone with many years of experience "playing" with guns, I can acquire targets exponentially faster with the Eotech over the Aimpoint. I'm certain that with his vast experience, Mr. Vickers would not necessarily experience the same results as I. This holds true with the sport I'm best at. I have the "best" ski equipment for my very high skill level. Most people could not perform well with my equipment.
Frankly I wasn't thinking about the Micros but rather the larger tubes including the Pro. This is particularly so with the 2 MOA reticle. Of all the SC shooters I've seen down here, not one is using a full-sized Aimpoint. Now that you bring it up, I may have seen one or two micros if that and I'm not sure of that as they could have been compact RDS's. Larger RDS's (the dot) in and around 7 MOA are far more popular. With shots being between 20 and 60/70 feet, there's no need for precision. Good shooters here sweep through five plates in under 3 seconds. Quick target acquisition the key and getting the dot anywhere on the plate will do. Perhaps I should have said that the Aimpoint would have been "pathetic" for me as it would be similar in function to the Leupold Prismatic I used today. My Eotech doesn't demand the consistent shouldering of my AR as does the prismatic even with its fairly large bright tube.
Beyond the exterior shape, the Aimpoint is not much like the Leupold you describe.
I understand that but they are both "tubes" requiring better alignment that the larger "screen" of the Eotech which I can pick up faster without shouldering the rifle as precisely. Also both put a lot of bulk on the barrel which blocks the direct view of the plates. Actually in a moment of madness I sold possibly the best solution for SC which was an Eotech RMR with a 7 MOA dot. After a while with that thing, I would more or less focus on the plate and the dot would superimpose without much effort on my part. I'll likely put an RMR or similar on my .22 pistol as I often shoot both a pistol and the AR in a SC match. The really good carbine shooters are building very light weight rigs using a Ruger 10-22 receiver, a carbon fibre wrapped aluminum barrel and a minimalist plastic stock like an ATI or similar. The entire rifle comes in at about 3.5 pounds. Most guys like that use an RDS of some sort like a Cmore or a reflex. They can come close to two seconds on the five plates depending on the setup. I'm usually between four and five seconds which keeps me happy.
