Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 5/12/2003 10:08:57 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/12/2003 10:09:29 AM EDT by rhatland]
I have an EO Tech on my colt M4. I love it. I have a second M4 looking for something else. I would like to hear from those who have experienced both of the above sight systems and which one they like and why. Thanks in advance.
Ralph

PS - Special thanks to Chen Lee for his help in getting me my EO Tech.
Link Posted: 5/12/2003 11:10:54 AM EDT
I am getting an Aimpoint for a trunk gun that has to be left on at all times. The Aimpoint is faster to get into action and tougher overall. The Eotech is heavier and too bulky for my taste as a trunk gun. Neither optic is perfect but I prefer the Eotech for CQB work when its on your terms and the Aimpoint when its general work and it may or may not be on your terms.
Link Posted: 5/12/2003 11:40:13 AM EDT
FWIW, I own both and their on 2 different M4s. Ones my plinker (w/ the EOTech 511.65A) and the other M4 is a S.I.R. equipped Colt chrome chambered and lined 16" w/ A2 FS, (my SHTF rifle, w/ ML2). Agree w/ Devl, the Aimpoint is easier/faster to operate and less obtrusive. Of-course it (ML2) also requires the ARMS #22M68 to mount it, the EOTech doesn't need a mount and then there's the battery life. The ML2/M2 will need a 1/3"N" about once a year, (even w/ heavy use). My EOTech, ("AA" model) needs 2 AAs every month, so far. Other than the bulk and lack of battery life I like the EoTech, but no question the ML2/M2 is the better choice and I'd swap my EOTech for another ML2 in a NY minute. Till that happens though, it is rugged and hasn't lost the zero, even w/ rough handling. YMMV, but those are my impressions of both, Mike
Link Posted: 5/12/2003 6:14:14 PM EDT
I just put an ML2 on an Armalite M4 today. The front handguards were replaced by a set with 4 full length rails. I'm not certain what model it is but it's about a $130 retail set. I chose the ML2 because it was available today and reasonably priced. I also have the carry handle and front sight and plan to sight both in at 50 using the Santose IBZ procedure. I've got a case of S&B to work with so I should be able to get close to zero'd before I run out of ammo.
Link Posted: 5/12/2003 6:22:35 PM EDT
MSTN was out of ML2s, so my M2 will be here tomorrow. I can't wait.
Link Posted: 5/12/2003 7:08:50 PM EDT
I'm considering an optic for my Bushy LW project gun. I'm familiar with the EOTech, but not the Aimpoint. Can someone post a pic or link? Thanks.
Link Posted: 5/12/2003 8:12:32 PM EDT
The EOTECH has been redesigned recently with better controls(for use w/ gloves etc..) I have both M2 and EOtech 511. I wasnt in love the the EO at first but now think it is far better for CQB. I like both sights alot and it is hard to choose. I'd say if you have one on a certain weapon get the other for the other M4. Thats what I ended up doing and am very glad I did. For all that money there is no reason to have two of the same sight IMHO. I dont see the EO being more bulky really. More stream lined IMO and since it doesnt need a mount base the weight is negligable. Also, I dont see the OE being less rugged...though I hear people say this. Certain army units are going to be switching to the EOTECH as well. Good luck out there!
Link Posted: 5/12/2003 8:29:28 PM EDT
[img]http://www.thermaldynamics.com/pictures/SIR/3.jpg[/img] Picture of an EOTech 551 vs. an Aimpoint M-XD. bulky?? I don't think so, less obtrusive, obtrusive in FOV is a short coming fo the tube design such as Aimpoint. Durable, I think both sights are just as durable as the other. I agree with DevL, Aimpoint iwth the long battery lifge is great for long duration patrol, but EOTech is the fastest available CQB sight on the market. I like my EOTech and I like my Aimpoint, I would not have a problem with either, and what ever choice you decide, you will end up with a superior opticv to anything out there except for a BAC equipped ACOG.
Top Top