Would you rather have the EOTECH or the Trijicon ACOG TA01NSN?

What Ya Think?

It depends on what you want to use it for; the ACOG would be better for precision, while the Eotech would be best for speed. I've owned an Eotech, and I currently own an NSN model ACOG, and either one is a great choice (when used within their design capabilities).

EoTech for me, as all my AR shootin' is 200 yards and under.  I can make awesome groups with my EoTech.

Even if they cost the same amount of $$$$ I'd still choose the EoTech...

On my carbine.

Like the man says, it depends what you want it for.  If I needed to ever touch 300+ yards I'll detach the EoTech and mount my mounted 10X scope.

Neither, give me an Aimpoint anytime. ACOG reflex washes out, and the Eotech has a terrible built in mounting abortion, and is too high for some weapon set up's.
Jack

I forgot to include that it is like comparing apples and oranges if it is Eotech vs ACOG, in that one is magnified and one isn't. Two dif. purposes of design and general use.
Good shootin, Jack

if you would include ACOGs with the BAC, an ACOG 100% every time. The TAO1nsn is a nice sight but is limited in its short range capabilities. EoTech is nice as well, but is limited on its longer range capabilities. ACOGs with BAC do well at both short and longer ranges. They are just generally more useful for more kinds of shooting.

Aimpoints and Acogs.

Yup.

+1 for this suggestion.....have just sold an EoTech...wasn't my thing....nice optic, but just not it...

I love my compact ACOG with the BAC, I love using AR's with Aimpoints.  I have one on order as we browse...[:D]

I have Leupold Tactical scopes on everything else.

For busting doors down (CQB)a dot.For street to street fighting,hill to hill,either.

I would take an EOTech over an Aimpoint.  But hand me an ACOG TA31a anyday.

depends whether you have a specific use (door kicker/precision).  having been in combat and encountered both.....TA31 without hesitation.

SMGLee,

Obviously, the ACOG will rule at longer distances!

At least for me, there's no doubt that the EOTech is the fastest for CQB but how close is the ACOG TA31 w/BAC?  

I owned a TA11 for a spell.  I sold it for an EoTech cause I shoot 200 yards and under - which is completely within the abilities of the EoTech.  No problems whatsoever.  Standing up firing from the shoulder at 200 yards I get 12" groups without trying.

I think the ACOG is an excellent CQB sight too.  But it takes a little getting used to.  I guess with practice the ACOG is the #1 choice cause it's versatile beyond anything else on the market.  But for specific ranges (IMHO 0-200yards and 100+) I think an ACOG w/BAC is better.

Back to the topic though, if he's picking between an EoTech and a TAO1, my vote is with the EoTech.  It's like using iron sights, with some balls.[:D]

ACOG with DR optic Backup sight. It costs more but it's a jack of all trades.

MOUT
0-150M
150-600M

Ahhh, ACOG.
Send me one so I can make sure I like it.

Alot of folks talk about MOA and sub MOA grouping and that's great if you can do it. There is not a person alive that can do that in combat situations shooting off hand though. IF there is, I hope he or she is on my side! [:D]

A 12" group offhand at 200 yards is phenomenal shooting and it's a dead bad guy every time. I measured and my chest is 15" across. 1 .223 to the chest MAY not kill me, but you can bet that I'm not going to be thinking about ANYTHING other than getting to a hospital as quickly as possible.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

Good combat/CQB shooting is all that really matters for MOST AR's. That is what the weapon is designed to do. If you want to do something else find a weapon that was designed to do the job at hand.

I have an Eotech 511 on my 16" Bushy AR and I love it. Both eyes open, I can see my target area as well as my corners. I love the 65 MOA outer ring for speed and the 1 MOA inner dot for accuracy. I can print smiley faces on 6" "shoot n see" targets at 50 yds with ease.

It's a matter of choice and taste, Aimpoints and ACOG's are fine optics. Thank God we live in a country that offers us such a wide variety of choice.

ACOG TA-11 or TA-31.

not to burst your bubble, but i command a whole infantry company full of expert marksman that will disagree with your theory.  I have personally seen men take 6-7+ rounds of well aimed 5.56 (from both M4/M16 and SAW) in the chest at anywhere from 75 meters to 200 meters and keep coming like it was a snowball hitting them.  Granted there is something to be said for adrenaline, but the last thing on these guys minds was running off to the hospital after a few rounds of 5.56 went through them.   On the other hand, I have seen it go the other way (usually when the shot was to the head).  I know this sort of got off subject, but did not want anyone to get beguilled into thinking that one round from a 5.56 is necessarily going to take someone out of the fight...whether in combat or while defending yourself/family.  

I stand corrected.

The human body is pretty incredible in what level of abuse it can take and keep on ticking.

Maybe that's why I insist on 30 round magazines. [:D]

Your post does bring something else into light though. Yes, the human body can be a big target. But from what I understand, its not all that often that you get a full human body to shoot at. I think stats show its usually just a very small portion of the overall body most times. Even at closer ranges, say 50 yards or more, that magnification of the ACOGs really help you put the rounds where you want them. As the ranges increase, the more usefull the magnification becomes.

Good point there newarguy...

Not to turn this into a ballistics and anatomy thread, but I would think location of impact is everything.  IE an artery vs a bone vs a muscle vs an organ.  Certain points of impact will certainly affect your behavior more than others right?  In the end, no matter where you got hit, you're bummin'.

I think the ACOG is the #1 sight if you've got the practice, and I say that because you need to train your eye to work with the BAC...someone can explain that better.  That's why the EoTech is great...zero magnification.  Again, it's like iron sights with balls.  In my world, that's all I need.

50% of why I say that though is cause I don't have a TA31F[;D]

Hahaha, no doubt, the EoTechs and Aimpoins are much easier to use and are in no way inferior optics in the [u]overall[/u] picture. Almost anyone can pick up a Aimpoint or EoTech and within reason, get the hits they want. Definately not true with the ACOGs. You need to learn and work the optic so the optic works for you. If you dont, it will actually work against you.

Would you Rather have the EOTECH or ACOG?

I asked my self the same question.

The answer for me was a 552 Rev.E attatched with the thumb screw.

And a TA-31F mounted on the Arms# 19S.I keep the EOtech on rifle at all times and the Acog in my Starlight Case for longer ranges or when I want some magnification.

My .02

Jm03  

Compact ACOG works best for me.
Best part about Compacts? You still get BAC!

I have tinkered with and tried the Aimpoint, EOtech, one other I can't remember, and several flavors of ACOG. I chose the 3X ACOG for best all-around for 50m to 300m, and yet still not busting my budget.
No trouble at all acclimating to the much feared BAC. Point and shoot from the get go.
Mounting to CH, sighting-in and using was very easy--so easy I thought I was doing something wrong.

If--and when--I want a red dot sight, I most certainly will go with Aimpoint. A great, quality product, IMO.

For me the choices look like this (nice and simple):

[b]Optic w/  magnification:  ACOG[/b]
[b]Optic w/o magnification:  Aimpoint[/b]

here's some more of MHO.  I have used Aimpoints every since it was issued to me in the 101st as a FORCEMOD item in 96-97.  Great sight, the army alone has proven that soldiers in basic training tend to shoot better with the Aimpoint on qualification ranges than with irons.  That same success has been taken to CGM/CGB ranges and fights and proven as well.  I have never had any issues with the Aimpoint, it serves its purpose well and I have seen them severely beaten up and still function.  
I have heard/read/talked about ACOGs for quite a while, but never purchased one.  I borrowed one from a close friend before deploying to OIF (he said "take it with you"....talk about a good friend).  Since I had not used the ACOG much I went in with my Aimpoint set on my rifle (M4 w/: AN/PEQ-2, RAS, ARMS#40, homemade 3-point sling).  The lack of magnification on the Aimpoint severely hindered target/threat identification.  A major part of a soldiers bout with Rules of Engagement.  I quickly switched to the ACOG and the problem was solved.  One of the major lessons learned from my standpoint and that of the soldiers was the need for an optic that has the magnification to id the target, and as newarguy point out, make that less that perfect shot on a target who is trying not to get hit.  
We did have some ELCANs (very few) or as the Army calls them Machine Gun Optics (MGOs; designed as a day sight for SAW/M240B, but mount and work extremely well on the M4/M16) that we put to good use with success.  The sight is bulky and does not have the benefit of Tritium to power it at night.  A lot of my guys found the reticle would wash out against dark backgrounds (not so with the Tritium powered ACOG).  
Not everyone will be put in that situation, but it is a combat lesson learned that I will not soon forget, and if I had the money I would buy every soldier in my company a ACOG.  I probably sound like a sales guy for Trijicon, but thats not my intent.  Just wanted to put my two cents in on why I think anyone who puts up the money for a ACOG will not be disappointed.  And just for the record, I own an Aimpoint that still gets a lot of use at home.  

I have a EOTech on my 14.5", a ReflexII on my 16". The compact was taken off for target acquisition speed improvenment/washout issues.

I find the Reflex to be better at group size, and BAC is a major plus.

I find the EOTech to be better at fast traget acquisition, but for me the group size suffers.

If I could only have one, I would go Reflex. No batteries means it [b]ALWAYS[/b] works, and better results. I solved my washout with a killflash.

Im confused Cav... The Reflex doesnt have the BAC, only magnified ACOGs can have BAC. Also, the compact what was taken off your rifle? It is actually the Reflex that has the most problems with washout.

I misunderstood BAC until I read your post adn did more reading. I [i]ass[/i]umed BAC meant to shoot with both eyes open. I know think* it is a little different. I do know, and SWFA info confirms this, my ReflexII was designed to be shot with both eyes open, which is what I do.




I lose the triangle in my Compact (TA50-2) a LOT, only under some light conditions. I was losing the (RX08) it in the wrong lighting until I put the killflash on it.

Note- My ass (and eyes) are geting old, and I am having trouble sometimes I didnt used to have. Transition is a bitch sometimes!

Between the 2 I would pick the EO.  But then again I do not need magnification at 200 yards due to my perfect vision! (FishEye) LOL!