Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 1/3/2006 6:07:18 PM EDT
I will be buying either one of these optics for my bushy, I need to know which one is the fastest to get on target, any info will help.

Thanks
kenner
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 6:16:28 PM EDT
I have Aimpoint M and M2 and 2 Eotech 551/552, I would say Eotech is faster thanks to its bigger window and the 65 MOA ring but YMMV.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 6:20:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By kenner:
I will be buying either one of these optics for my bushy, I need to know which one is the fastest to get on target, any info will help.

Thanks
kenner



I think the simplicity of the Aimpoint dot makes it faster...at least that has been my experience. In all honesty, you just need to try them both. Everyone sees things differently.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 6:27:43 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 7:06:00 PM EDT
I have a Comp M (3MOA dot) and an EOTech 512 Rev. F and I think the EOTech is faster.

That's just me, anyways.

WIZZO
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 7:12:16 PM EDT
I've shot with both, and I like the Tripower best of all. Don't rule it out. The chevron is my favorite reticle.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 1:47:34 AM EDT
On pistols, I've timed both and find myself faster with the aimpoint. The tube helps me find the dot faster than the tubeless eotech even though the eotech has the wider field of view. On rifles, I find them equally quick but prefer the fov of the eotech.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 3:12:32 AM EDT
The Eothingy's batteries die faster
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 3:34:58 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/4/2006 3:35:31 AM EDT by Hokie]
Speed depends how much you practice and how fast you shoulder your weapon.

Personally, I'd buy an OKO. I'm kidding.

<­BR>Aimpoint.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 4:37:08 AM EDT

Originally Posted By bjwar10:
I think the simplicity of the Aimpoint dot makes it faster...at least that has been my experience. In all honesty, you just need to try them both. Everyone sees things differently.



+1

EOTech FOV was too busy for me.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 4:40:52 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 4:49:44 AM EDT

Originally Posted By QUIB:


+1

EOTech FOV was too busy for me.



+1 on the busy FOV, over



Z

(Returned mine)
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:47:10 AM EDT

Originally Posted By kenner:
I will be buying either one of these optics for my bushy, I need to know which one is the fastest to get on target, any info will help.

Thanks
kenner



You are asking the wrong question. What you really want to know is wich is faster for you. You can only determin this by shooting them both and comparing the results.

As another poster said, you should also try the Trijicon Tri-Power.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 9:32:29 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 9:46:24 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/4/2006 9:47:05 AM EDT by photoman]
All depends on the shooter. Honestly try and find some to play around with first before buying one or the other. I'm faster on target with my 1-4 leupold then I am with an Aimpoint or EoTech. A lot depends on the person looking through the optic and how familiar they are with thier gun and the set up they use. I'm not one to buy the whole this one is always fast then that one shit because it's just not true the person looking through it is the biggest variable.

I like the EoTech better because it's easier to get shit wiped off the lens if you get mud/snow gunk on it, and it does happen.

Now that being said, I have an AImpoint only because I got it for under $200 new(thanks Zitti!)
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 9:53:28 AM EDT

Originally Posted By VA-gunnut:
I prefer the EOTech, but I agree with the others when they say you should try both first.



+1

The EOTech is better for me, but may not be for you.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 1:41:00 PM EDT
I've used both and am looking to sell my Aimpoint and buy an Eotech.

Link Posted: 1/4/2006 1:42:34 PM EDT
Optics are not fast. It is the shooter that is fast. Whether or not you are fast with an EO Tech or an Aimpoint is completely dependant upon you, the shooter. Great gear does not make a great shooter. Someone who is fast with an Aimpoint or EO Tech should be and probably will be fast with either optic. Don't get caught up in the gear like some of us (myself included) are.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 1:50:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Matt_B:
Optics are not fast. It is the shooter that is fast. Whether or not you are fast with an EO Tech or an Aimpoint is completely dependant upon you, the shooter. Great gear does not make a great shooter.



This is becoming a somewhat tiresome viewpoint. If the red-dot sights weren't faster, why would the military and competion shooters be using them?

To answer the original poster, I find the Aimpoint to be the better sight because you never know when the Eotech's battery is going to shit the bed. That is no small thing.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 1:58:56 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/4/2006 2:13:24 PM EDT by Matt_B]

Originally Posted By in_burrito:

Originally Posted By Matt_B:
Optics are not fast. It is the shooter that is fast. Whether or not you are fast with an EO Tech or an Aimpoint is completely dependant upon you, the shooter. Great gear does not make a great shooter.

This is becoming a somewhat tiresome viewpoint. If the red-dot sights weren't faster, why would the military and competion shooters be using them?

I'm sorry but you're misunderstanding me. I completely agree that red dot sights are faster for almost every shooter. My point was merely that if someone wants to know which optic will be faster for them then they need to try both because the fastest optic is dependant upon the individual.

To answer the original poster, I find the Aimpoint to be the better sight because you never know when the Eotech's battery is going to shit the bed. That is no small thing.
To stay on topic, the OP specifically asked which sight is the fastest on target which has nothing to do with battery life though I wholeheartedly agree with you on this point.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 2:12:54 PM EDT
Good advice above - what is faster for me (Aimpoint) may not be faster for you.

Try both!

Link Posted: 1/4/2006 5:30:05 PM EDT
I vote ACOG Clone all the way!!
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 5:37:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JosephR:
I vote ACOG Clone all the way!!

You're in the wrong thread Joe!!!
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 5:48:25 PM EDT
I have used both, but I own 2 EOTechs. It works for me but I could see how the Aimpoint could work for someone else.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 7:07:29 PM EDT
I've seen operators that were faster and more accurate with iron sights that I ever was with an Acog, Eotech or Aimpoint. These aren't cars.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 7:26:56 PM EDT
www.signaturegrade.com There is a good discussion on the Forums
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:55:17 PM EDT
looks like the vast majority in here are suggesting the eotech . . . I'm like you; tryng to decide which one to get. I WAS planning on getting one of the EO thingys that uses AA batteries, but changed my mind because the battery life on the Aimpoints is SOOOO much better. Now, I dunno. It always seemed to me the EOtech's reticle would be faster on target, AND because it has a smaller MOA dot, you could, time permitting, line up a more accurate shot. BLAHBLAHBLAH
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 9:35:33 PM EDT
my buddies have aimpoint, thought dot covered too much at 200 yds.

I prefer my 551 eotech, the ring/dot is great for IPSC close up, but still bust clays at 200 yds.

also new dot for me is JPoint, put 8 moa on girlfriend's glock 24c, it's kick ass, I'm gonna get slide milled for it

just got another JPoint in, this time 4 moa for Carbon 15 to be used in conjunction w/4x scope w/high see through QD rings, haven't tested this at range yet

got it only because so light weight compared to eotech

also love Kobra on AK

Link Posted: 1/4/2006 11:26:21 PM EDT
I have a PD issue aimpoint available to me, which I used for years. I didn't think much about the EO until I tried one. Now, I've bought one, and am smitten with it. I am much faster up close with it, and the reticle makes longer shots easier for me also. I don't mind changing batteries every few months, since I don't pay for them and we replace batteries in our equipment all the time anyway. I like being able to throw in the AA's real quick. To each his own, I guess.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 12:07:14 AM EDT
Unless you are deployed or planning on never having any money ever again after buying this optic, the battery life shouldn't be the most important thing.

1100 hours is a lot of use (AA Version), and how broke do you have to be to not be able to have an extra set of batteries in your bag?

Link Posted: 1/5/2006 8:59:58 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Kisara:
I've seen operators that were faster and more accurate with iron sights that I ever was with an Acog, Eotech or Aimpoint. These aren't cars.

Thank you for reinforcing my point Kisara.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 12:47:41 PM EDT
I like the EOTech myself.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 1:13:52 PM EDT
It goes without saying that somebody, somewhere, is faster than you. That's not even remotely the point, but I guess repeating the obvious makes some folks feel smarter.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 1:35:16 PM EDT
I think the EoTech is faster, but I also don't think that there is enough of a difference to warrent selling any optic at a loss just to have the latest and greatest -- given the marginal differences between the two.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 5:25:52 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Hokie:
Speed depends how much you practice and how fast you shoulder your weapon.




Bingo! It's a software issue - not a hardware issue!
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 7:28:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By chp5:

Originally Posted By Hokie:
Speed depends how much you practice and how fast you shoulder your weapon.




Bingo! It's a software issue - not a hardware issue!




Not really

Using an electric drill is faster and more efficient that using a hand drill. Using a cordless drill changed the construction industry because it is faster and more efficient that the standard corded drill.

Face the music, technology truly does make things easier and faster. IPSC shooters beat themselves when using a dot.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 3:33:06 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2006 3:36:10 AM EDT by Hokie]

Originally Posted By MudBug:

Originally Posted By chp5:

Originally Posted By Hokie:
Speed depends how much you practice and how fast you shoulder your weapon.




Bingo! It's a software issue - not a hardware issue!




Not really

Using an electric drill is faster and more efficient that using a hand drill. Using a cordless drill changed the construction industry because it is faster and more efficient that the standard corded drill.

Face the music, technology truly does make things easier and faster. IPSC shooters beat themselves when using a dot.



Are you on drugs?

If using an electric is your metaphor of choice you still have to align it with the screw head. There is no substitute for practice. Sight alignment is the beginning and end of a well placed shot. Besides....if you really on your red dot too often, your time switching to irons ala BUIS will be much slower than if you practice using both (cowitness). For this reason I run my drills with my ML2 cowitnessing in the lower 1/3. The 4MOA dot simply supplements my irons. When need for 'speed' arrises I may put the dot on target.....but it's ME putting the gun in alignment....not the dot.

A tool will make it easier,

but not really
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 5:08:51 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2006 5:12:14 AM EDT by Yojimbo]
I can only speak for myself but I moved from the Aimpoint to the EOTech because the EOTech was faster for me for CQB ranges and the 1 MOA dot lets me place my shots more precisely at longer ranges.

When shooting at closer ranges I find that the 65 MOA outer ring is big advantage and really helps to speed up aquiring an acceptable sight picture. Basically it's faster for me to see what I need to see to get the hits.

I agree that a big part of how fast you are is a training issue but I also believe the right hardware will help you shoot to your potential.

With that being said, everyone is different and the right hardware for me may be the wrong hardware for you. IMHO, you can't go wrong with either sight...
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 9:07:10 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Hokie:

Originally Posted By MudBug:

Originally Posted By chp5:

Originally Posted By Hokie:
Speed depends how much you practice and how fast you shoulder your weapon.




Bingo! It's a software issue - not a hardware issue!




Not really

Using an electric drill is faster and more efficient that using a hand drill. Using a cordless drill changed the construction industry because it is faster and more efficient that the standard corded drill.

Face the music, technology truly does make things easier and faster. IPSC shooters beat themselves when using a dot.



Are you on drugs?

If using an electric is your metaphor of choice you still have to align it with the screw head. There is no substitute for practice. Sight alignment is the beginning and end of a well placed shot. Besides....if you really on your red dot too often, your time switching to irons ala BUIS will be much slower than if you practice using both (cowitness). For this reason I run my drills with my ML2 cowitnessing in the lower 1/3. The 4MOA dot simply supplements my irons. When need for 'speed' arrises I may put the dot on target.....but it's ME putting the gun in alignment....not the dot.

A tool will make it easier,

but not really




I didn't say to drop the use of, or training with irons, just pointed out that for all but maybe a few uber riflemen, red dots sights are faster.

Consider this;

Red Dot:

Line up 2 points; Target and Dot.

Irons:

Line up 3 points; Target, Front Sight, Rear Sight.

And now let me see if I get what you are saying:

Line up 4 points; Target, Front Sight, Rear Sight, and Dot.


Seriously, can you give me some kind of scientific explanation of how it could even be possible to line up 3 or 4 items faster than just lining up 2 items?
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 9:28:19 AM EDT
moron, you missed the point all together

not sure I can talk you through this one....so I'll concede & move on.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 9:44:07 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Hokie:
moron, you missed the point all together

not sure I can talk you through this one....so I'll concede & move on.




Translation.

"I can't explain this because it's bullshit, so I'll just call you names and disappear."


Link Posted: 1/6/2006 10:10:20 AM EDT

Originally Posted By MudBug:

Originally Posted By Hokie:
moron, you missed the point all together

not sure I can talk you through this one....so I'll concede & move on.




Translation.

"I can't explain this because it's bullshit, so I'll just call you names and disappear."





yeah that's it, see ya
Link Posted: 1/8/2006 1:44:12 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/8/2006 1:22:39 PM EDT
The eotech is more streamlined, so if oyu throw your rifle it will probably go faster than a Aimpoint due to air friction and drag.
Link Posted: 1/8/2006 1:38:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By nf9648:
The eotech is more streamlined, so if oyu throw your rifle it will probably go faster than a Aimpoint due to air friction and drag.


Link Posted: 1/8/2006 1:40:28 PM EDT

Originally Posted By KevinB:
Both of you have some valid point but neither is 100% correct (and really no need for name calling)

Muscle memory from training (perfect practice makes perfect) will make any shooter faster since he/she will naturally bring the weapon to bear in the proper manner.

However the red dot will make a much more clearly defined aiming refrence to superimpose on the tgt, and you will get better hits quicker than without - all else being equal, there however is no substitute for training and practise.




This is pretty much what I said.


I didn't say to drop the use of, or training with irons, just pointed out that for all but maybe a few uber riflemen, red dots sights are faster.



Take pretty much anyone and time them on a course of fire with irons, then time them with a red-dot and they will beat their own time.

I guess there may be people that it won't work for, but I would bet a weeks pay that they are by a large number the exception and not the rule.
Link Posted: 1/8/2006 5:59:15 PM EDT
Ive electronicly timed it, and my Aimpoint only makes me faster when the irons get hard to see.
Link Posted: 1/8/2006 6:07:06 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Lumpy196:
Ive electronicly timed it, and my Aimpoint only makes me faster when the irons get hard to see.




So you're odd, we already new that.

Link Posted: 1/8/2006 6:20:20 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Lumpy196:
Ive electronicly timed it, and my Aimpoint only makes me faster when the irons get hard to see.



Hey lumpy, do you use the big or small ap for close up work? I had a weird thing happen to me. I always used the small aperture. Then I wanted to learn how to use the big for close up and low light because it seems like it'd be better. But when I was zeroing my new upper the other day, the targets were so obscured at 50 yards with the LARGE aperture that it was mind boggling. And even the front post was kind of hard to get sharp. Then I used the small one and all was well. Have you ever had this experience?

Sorry for interrupting but I really wanted to get someones opinion that knows irons well.
Link Posted: 1/8/2006 6:26:05 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JJREA:

Originally Posted By Lumpy196:
Ive electronicly timed it, and my Aimpoint only makes me faster when the irons get hard to see.



Hey lumpy, do you use the big or small ap for close up work? I had a weird thing happen to me. I always used the small aperture. Then I wanted to learn how to use the big for close up and low light because it seems like it'd be better. But when I was zeroing my new upper the other day, the targets were so obscured at 50 yards with the LARGE aperture that it was mind boggling. And even the front post was kind of hard to get sharp. Then I used the small one and all was well. Have you ever had this experience?

Sorry for interrupting but I really wanted to get someones opinion that knows irons well.




My eyes work pretty much the same as yours do then. I have an Ashley rear on my A1 carbine and find Im consistantly more accurate (duh) AND faster with the small ap for the same reasons.
Link Posted: 1/8/2006 6:30:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Lumpy196:

Originally Posted By JJREA:

Originally Posted By Lumpy196:
Ive electronicly timed it, and my Aimpoint only makes me faster when the irons get hard to see.



Hey lumpy, do you use the big or small ap for close up work? I had a weird thing happen to me. I always used the small aperture. Then I wanted to learn how to use the big for close up and low light because it seems like it'd be better. But when I was zeroing my new upper the other day, the targets were so obscured at 50 yards with the LARGE aperture that it was mind boggling. And even the front post was kind of hard to get sharp. Then I used the small one and all was well. Have you ever had this experience?

Sorry for interrupting but I really wanted to get someones opinion that knows irons well.




My eyes work pretty much the same as yours do then. I have an Ashley rear on my A1 carbine and find Im consistantly more accurate (duh) AND faster with the small ap for the same reasons.



Thank God, I thought I was getting old or something. Which I am. But I'm glad to know I'm not alone. Well, small ap it is. Do you ever just look over the top of the ap and hold the post low at close range? I suppose you wouldn't have to unless the light is real low.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top