Other than battery life, no reason whatsoever to get an Aimpoint ML2 over the Eotech 552...  Seems that: field of view, dot size/configuration, control arrangment, mount,  blows away the the aimpoint -  objections?

Send me a 552 and I'll give you my opinion.[:D]

CHRIS

My feeling exactly.

Please everyone, let's control ourselves and not let this thread blossom into an Aimpoint vs. EO Tech thread. I've seen too many AR15.com brethren engage in senseless feuding over this seemingly never-ending battle.

itsallgood, I'm glad you like your EO Tech. It's a excellent red dot. I'm sure you will find many people that would agree with you. I would even be one of them. You will also find just as many, possibly even more, that feel the Aimpoint ML2/M2 is the superior red dot.

But judging by the number of post beneath your handle, you are not a veteran of the great Aimpoint vs. EO Tech battles. You would be best served to not fan the flames of battle in this case.

And besides, no one likes a [:K] [:)]

(edited to add a smiley after the troll to show I wasn't try to be a complete a-hole)

Matt,

Would I be qualified to make that statement with my post count??  [:D]

How much expierence with the Aimpoint does "itsallgood" have? Its also been my expierence that a high post count doesn't make you a subject matter expert at anything. Althougth plenty of members seem to think it does.

Blows it away??? Surely you jest. I like aimpoints better myself, but I wouldnt say they blow EoTechs away. Thats just foolish. To say the opposite is just as foolish in my view.

There was a thread about using them with NVGs. It seemed EoTech was better since it provided more vision, but I still prefer Aimpoint's ruggedness and very long battery life.

[:D]

It's in the review for eotech on the Maryland AR15 shooters site.

I have to agree the battery life is not up to the Aimpoint sniff, but I fell the advantage offer by the EOTech out weights the Aimpoint battery advantages.


552 has up to 500 to 800 hours of battery life, compare to the old Aimpoint XD, it is about half to two third.  Like I have said, Aimpoint battery life are measured under the best lab conditions. Laser projection in reality needs more battery to keep it running, and techs at EOTech are working hard to improve the battery life. still, I have give Aimpoint the thumbs up on battery life..This is reason why some of my guns have Aimpoint.


Come on Wes, thumb screw mount, the allen screw is not for mount but just shipping.


It is programmable, but as soon as you adjust the button the shut off time resets again.

The new rubberized buttons are pretty darn fast and easy to use.


The reticel is created b y laser projection, it is a bit grainy, but you should know not to focus on the the reticle but the target.  

This picture don't seem to grainy
[img]http://www.thermaldynamics.com/pictures/guns/reticle.jpg[/img]


Don't get upset Wes, the 65 MOA reticle is great for CQB stuff, it is all about trainning, you just use the 65MOA for 50 yards, and the 1MOA for all the precision shooting.


ERIM the parent company developed the Huey HUD for the US army. EOTech been in the HUD business for various weapons applications.



I like the Aimpoint second best, but a close second.

different stroke for different folks.  but I still love you, Wes.  [:)]

I like both and I had a chance to test both units for two weeks straight at the club.  It was a hard choice but the ML2 won.  Why?  MY eyes just liked the red dot more.  I personally liked the 511's reticle but no matter what I tried to do to catch it I was not as quick.  I have to say with both eyes open both the 511 and ML2 are awesome.  I think I was trying to force myself to like the EOTech since the majority of the guys at the club have them.  I thought they looked cool and I liked the reticle pattern (circle dot).  

But maybe its the actual "red" dot that makes MY eyes catch it quick.  Who knows its all a matter of preference.  I feel both units are good, its just a matter of taste.  I love my ML2 and have proven on the range that I am super fast to engage targets with it.  So I'm sticking by it.

No, but the fact that I know you own and use both the Aimpoint and EO Tech and the fact that you have participated in discussions of this nature does qualify you in my book (for whatever that's worth)[:)]. But, it seems that everyone is missing the point I was trying to make.



The point I was making is that many of us have already seen this "Aimpoint vs. EO Tech" debate done to death and, based upon itsallgood's post count (and after searching through the posts he has contributed to), he has not actually participated in any of the "Aimpoint vs. EO Tech" threads. Perhaps this person has read these threads in which case my comment was off base and if that is the case, I apologize as I should have been more clear about what I was using as the basis for that statement. I was not insinuating that the # of posts for itsallgoods has anything to do with this person's knowledge. I feel that if you re-read my post, you will come to this conclusion as well.

"Vs." threads can, IMHO, provide the basis for a good discussion "to-a-point". But, in many cases, we end up spinning our wheels after a while going over and over the same points. This thread is already going down that slippery slope. I guess I don't see what more can be gained from another "Aimpoint vs. EO Tech" thread. In hindsight, perhaps I should have just ignored this post and moved on but it seemed to me that post was just an accident looking to happen and it appears that I didn't help the situation.

Well said, Matt and I absolutely agree with you.  I too should have left it alone.  

No offense taken by me and I did not mean to start a flame war or re-live an old battle -- I just wanted to stimulate a discussion.  Sometimes a strong early statment stimulates  strong response(s) -- oftentimes the truth will thereafter emerge...

Which model is this?

That's either a 551 or 552, pre-Rev E (old style buttons)

Both are available with the "A65" reticle. 1MOA dot with a 65MOA ring. You'll see them listed as a 552.A65 for example.