User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/3/2006 6:16:28 PM EDT
[#1]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2006 6:20:47 PM EDT
[#2]
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. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2006 6:27:43 PM EDT
[#3]
I have both. I perfer the Aimpoint but the EO is faster for CQC and long range shots.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2006 7:06:00 PM EDT
[#4]
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 |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2006 7:12:16 PM EDT
[#5]
I've shot with both, and I like the Tripower best of all. Don't rule it out. The chevron is my favorite reticle.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 1:47:34 AM EDT
[#6]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 3:12:32 AM EDT
[#7]
The Eothingy's batteries die faster
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 3:34:58 AM EDT
[#8]
Speed depends how much you practice and how fast you shoulder your weapon.
Personally, I'd buy an OKO. I'm kidding. Aimpoint. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 4:37:08 AM EDT
[#9]
+1 EOTech FOV was too busy for me. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 4:40:52 AM EDT
[#10]
I prefer the EOTech, but I agree with the others when they say you should try both first.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 4:49:44 AM EDT
[#11]
+1 on the busy FOV, over Z (Returned mine) |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 8:47:10 AM EDT
[#12]
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. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 9:32:29 AM EDT
[#13]
I am faster with the EOTECH - and in looking at guys I've trained with most are faster and more accurate with the EOTECH (shot clocked) - but try it yourself
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 9:46:24 AM EDT
[#14]
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!) |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 9:53:28 AM EDT
[#15]
+1 The EOTech is better for me, but may not be for you. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 1:41:00 PM EDT
[#16]
I've used both and am looking to sell my Aimpoint and buy an Eotech.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 1:42:34 PM EDT
[#17]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 1:50:43 PM EDT
[#18]
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. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 1:58:56 PM EDT
[#19]
|
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 2:12:54 PM EDT
[#20]
Good advice above - what is faster for me (Aimpoint) may not be faster for you.
Try both!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 5:30:05 PM EDT
[#21]
I vote ACOG Clone all the way!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 5:37:16 PM EDT
[#22]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 5:48:25 PM EDT
[#23]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 7:07:29 PM EDT
[#24]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 7:26:56 PM EDT
[#25]
www.signaturegrade.com There is a good discussion on the Forums
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 8:55:17 PM EDT
[#26]
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
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 9:35:33 PM EDT
[#27]
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 |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 11:26:21 PM EDT
[#28]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/5/2006 12:07:14 AM EDT
[#29]
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? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/5/2006 8:59:58 AM EDT
[#30]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/5/2006 12:47:41 PM EDT
[#31]
I like the EOTech myself.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/5/2006 1:13:52 PM EDT
[#32]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/5/2006 1:35:16 PM EDT
[#33]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/5/2006 5:25:52 PM EDT
[#34]
Bingo! It's a software issue - not a hardware issue! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/5/2006 7:28:27 PM EDT
[#35]
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. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2006 3:33:06 AM EDT
[#36]
 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
|
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2006 5:08:51 AM EDT
[#37]
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... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2006 9:07:10 AM EDT
[#38]
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? |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2006 9:28:19 AM EDT
[#39]
moron, you missed the point all together
 not sure I can talk you through this one....so I'll concede & move on. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2006 9:44:07 AM EDT
[#40]
Translation. "I can't explain this because it's bullshit, so I'll just call you names and disappear." |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2006 10:10:20 AM EDT
[#41]
yeah that's it, see ya |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2006 1:44:12 AM EDT
[#42]
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. The Fixed BIS concept obscures part of the optical aiming window and your FOV -- So unless one is bouncing around RIB's and immersing your weapon system in salt water with regularity - the flip down BIS are a better idea for the majority of professional users and the casual recreational shooter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2006 1:22:39 PM EDT
[#43]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2006 1:38:13 PM EDT
[#44]
 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2006 1:40:28 PM EDT
[#45]
This is pretty much what I said.
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. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2006 5:59:15 PM EDT
[#46]
Ive electronicly timed it, and my Aimpoint only makes me faster when the irons get hard to see.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2006 6:07:06 PM EDT
[#47]
So you're odd, we already new that. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2006 6:20:20 PM EDT
[#48]
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. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2006 6:26:05 PM EDT
[#49]
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. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2006 6:30:31 PM EDT
[#50]
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.
|
|||
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
