AR Sponsor
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Aimpoint vs. EO Tech vs ACOG (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 10/2/2006 7:25:41 AM EDT
|
Which of these do you guys like, and why? What are the advantages/disadvantges of each? Which one would you consider to be more durablity? Which is more useful for a 16in carbine? thanks fellas |
While Aimpoint/EOTechs are similar in function & use - the ACOGs are a different class altogether (magnified optic).
Aimpoint - battery Life, most reliable of the electronic sights EOTech - readily available AAs & rechargeables, holographic lens is damage tolorant. ACOG - durable, no batteries, magnified
They are all very durable, but I'd give the nod to the ACOG for toughness.
Depends on your intended use & buld. For a 16" Recce type (precision/mid-range) I'd go with an ACOG of some kind. For a general purpose carbine the Aimpoints and EOTechs are a better option IMHO. |
|
I like magnified optics, I'd always choose an ACOG for my general range purposes. If I was ever wanting to do some short range, fast acquisition stuff, I'd use the Aimpoint or Eotech. When I first started looking into ARs I loved the Aimpoint and couldn't stand the Eotech. Now it's the other way around for me. I guess these things change. I'd still take an ACOG though - if I could afford one. |
That pretty much sums it up. Which one you should go with depends on your intended use. If you're going to clear rooms, definitely go with the aimpoint or eotech. Anything longer, and I prefer the ACOG. If it's for more recreational shooting, I have a lot more fun at the range with the ACOG because of its magnification, so I'd say ACOG for general purpose use. |
It would be for general use, range gun, SHTF, rifle. Definitely wont be clearing any houses with it. Besides thats what my 870 would be used for  . Probably going to mount it on a Stag, or maybe a LMT with a Stag lower. I most likey wont be shooting anything within 20-25 yards or so.
|
|
Depends on how long the ACOG's warranty is.Tritium does fade away some quicker than the others. Have sold a zillion tritium nightsights Meps,Trij,and Ameriglo.....seen lots of dimmer ones verses bright ones.Again....seen them fade kinda quick also even though most of the manufactures carry a 10-15 HALF LIFE year warranty. 
|
|
I have both Aimpoint and EOTech. My EOTech is used indoors and close ranges and my Aimpoint outdoors at medium ranges. In your case I would recommend the EOTech, it will cost less than the other two choices because you don't have to get a mount for it now, but you might want to get a mount later on for better field of view. Pic link of my Aimpoint and Troy BUIS Pic link of my EOTech and KAC BUIS |
I wouldn't really agree on the Aimpoint being more reliable, I've never had a problem with my Eotech and would guess it could take more of a beating than my old aimpoint, but maybe you know something I don't. Battery life isn't nearly as impressive with the Eotech though. Agree on the ACOG for a Recce type. Very solid, and no batteries to worry about. YMMV |
Well, the US military chose aimpoint in large part for reliability under adverse conditions, after significant testing, so I think that's a good indicator of their reliability over the other brands. Or so I've read... |
|
ACOG is probably my favorite, its tough and sturdy, but you will pay out of your ass for it and I think it's un-neccessary at close ranges, unless you get the USMC one with the red-dot on top of it. Eotech, I can't say much about because I've never owned one. I'm not too comfortable with the reticule. Aimpoint, I love, I have a Comp M3 that was on my M1a, and now on my A4gery. I've dropped it, fired it in heavy Florida rain, bumped it into walls and it has yet to fail on me. Oh and the 50,000 hours of use is a huge + for me. |
|
I surely wasn't referring to anyone in our military who was issued an Aimpoint. I'm talking about a lot of the guys here who buy one just because they've seen them in pictures and movies (you still don't see too many Eotechs in fictional TV or movies but you do see Eotechs on SWAT shows- like the reality one in TX.) It's your preference. I have had all three and don't see the added expense of an Aimpoint with just the dot. The Eotech reticle, although busy, does so much more. I can ensure I get a consistent cheekweld by holding the 3 and 9 tics at the top of the ears of my Front sight while I center the 6 o'clock on the FS post. This is with a LaRue riser. I don't consider the reticle busy, just helpful. Battery life is not an issue for me. I change them before I go to the range if I have to. |
|
I used an Aimpoint in Iraq - it is a great optic. Yes, the battery life is superior in a general sense, but in my experience, the Aimpoint is extremely prone to turning itself on due the knob configuration, which brushes on easily - nice for quick activation, but has a tendency to run down the batteries faster due to frequent accidental activations - I got in the habit of constantly fingering the knob to check if it was on, and often it was without my intent. I did have to replace the batteries several times in 15 months, and the Aimpoint batteries were sometimes short on supply, due to the fact that every soldier in my infantry unit was issued an Aimpoint, and every soldier had the same frequent problem. Our unit still uses the Aimpoint, but many soldiers buy their own EoTechs... I now use an EoTech exclusively for a reflex sight. It only turns on when I tell it to, it turns off automatically after 4 or 8 hours (depending on which button you activate it with), it is durable as all hell, the double AAs in the 552 are almost always on hand, the AAs are also used with NVGs, IR laser, some radios, GPS, and other personal items, and the EoTech (so I only have to carry AAs - but I also carry spare 123s for my Surefires [both more readily available than Aimpoint batteries]). I also find the EoTech faster on target at close range, due to the larger outer circle, and slightly more precise at medium to longer range, due to the 1 MOA center dot (compared to the larger Aimpoint dot). Still, either optic is great with respect to quick aiming. Interestingly, the new SOPMOD is going away from the Aimpoint, now, and going with the EoTech 553, so as far as quality and durability are concerned, it's a toss-up in my experience and the opinions of others, apparently. The ACOGs are wonderful sights for medium and longer ranges, and are used by several members in my unit. They are not so hot for CQB and closer range applications, but are very nice to have for longer range. They are enough of a disadvantage in CQB to be remarkable, but definitely have their merits and are VERY useful for many situations outside. They are great for positive target identification and greater accuracy at distant targets, but, in my experience targets from 0 to 200 meters (and even more) can be easily handled with a reflex optic like Aimpoint or EoTech. Even the ACOGs are being reconsidered on the SOPMOD now, but that's not to say they are obsolete in any sense. So, it's all relative, but EoTech is my preference these days, after much experience with the Aimpoint. I, personally, haven't used the ACOG on my issue weapon, but not because they're not good optics - just in my experience, close to medium range encounters are more common. I'm no super-secret squirrel, I'm just a doc with ten+ years in the infantry. So, take that for whatever it's worth. Good luck. |
|
For guys that don't like the EOTech's busy reticle they also have one dot models. L3-EOTech has released the new model 552.D1 HWS (AAs battery - NV) with a single, 1MOA dot reticle. Many want the HWS technology and features, but are more comfortable with a single dot reticle but this model will also simplify the transition to an EOTech from an Aimpoint. They also have the 511.D1 model that is non-NV and uses N batteries. It's great that L3-EOTech listens to its customers and provides high quality products from their suggestions. Ask your EOTech dealers at the Equipment Exchange for more details and prices. |
Yeah - that's what the big smiley face usually means. Maybe someone needs to take themsleves less seriously, and take their own advice. 
|
|
Picture taken in Salah Ad Din Province, Iraq. Picture of ACOG, Aimpoint, & Eotech. Looks to me like the military is issued, and uses, all three. Try them all out if you can, and go with your personal preference. |
|
I don't think any of the three are going to be right for everyone, try them all then decide which one you like. That said, I've had 3 eo-techs on 2 different guns and now have gone to aimpoint ML3's on 2 of my guns, the third has a 3.5-10 Leupold scope. All carbines, M4, Lightweight and an HBAR. Why? The eo-tech's dot tends to blur to my eyes worse than the aimpoint. The circle is too busy for me, aligning hash marks doesn't go with being fast, (fast, being one of their selling points) and if they're parrallex free why do you need to have consistant cheekweld? I use the LaRue mount and like the aimpoint raised above the sight plane so even with the eo-tech I'd use a raised mount which raises the price up to about the same as aimpoint with a mount. Battery life is a non issue with the aimpoint, as for finding a battery vs. AA's, there's a spare in each of my LaRue mounts so that gives me what close to 11 years to come up with a third battery? But the most important reason I like aimpoints better is I just shoot tighter groups with them vs. the eo-techs. Of course, ymmv and either one is a great sight. As for the ACOG the short eye relief killed it for me. I never bought one but I did try one for a few days and nights. Personally I like my Leupold's for a magnified optic and I don't need a glowing reticle. If I can see my target, I can see my reticle just fine and yes I have and do shoot at night. |
But our world is not absolute nor is it only Black and white. There are varying degrees to which these optics are issued and the aimpoints have been issued longer and in larger quantities than the others. ACOGs coming in second and Eotechs really only being issued to specialized troops. |
If that's the case, you'll probably have more fun with the acog. |
|
For your stated purposes the ACOG would be your best bet because of its magnification. I do not own an Aimpoint so I can't really comment on it. I do own an EOTech and have found it to be a great CQB sight as well as very good out to 300 yards. I know that if I do my part, wherever the dot is in the center will be more or less where the bullet lands within 250 yards. I've used it in tactical training and really felt it made my life a lot easier than guys who ran iron sights or even ACOGs (for the close range stuff). I have used an ACOG once and was not used to BAC. I suppose I could adjust to it with enough practice, but most of my shooting is within 0-150 yards. |
 it is nice for longer range though
|
What are you talking about? You don't have to align any hash marks.
Again where are you getting this from - who says you need to have a consistant cheekweld? |
I was basicly replying to this. Maybe I should have said tics instead of hash marks but at the time I was typing I couldn't remember what he called them but I've also heard you can align them to keep you from canting the gun. Again not for me. |
There is a difference between what one person does under a set of specific circumstances and what you need to do. |
|
I've had the Aimpoint and ACOG (TA31A -triangle ret) 2005 model. The advantage of the Aimpoint over the EOTech is that; 1. its stronger/more durable - there was a story of a guy with an EOTech that became useless when an IED took out the relatively unprotected lens of the EOTech. 2. you can get a killflash for it 3. the batteries are smaller and last 10,000 to 50,000 hours 4. you can carry an extra battery in the cap 5. the big red dot is more distracting where as a red dot is more simple The AimPoint is much quicker for CQB then the ACOG. I was disappointed with the brightness of the ACOG indoors which is where CQB and quick target accusition is most needed. Outside the reticle was bright, but inside it sucked. This can be overcome by adding a doctor optic to the ACOG. I'm sticking with the Aimpoint on my AR because its a 10inch barrel and I dont plan to use it past 300 yards. Plus, I run it with my night vision mono. For longer ranges I'll use a 4x on my Para FAL or M1A for further distances. With all this in mind I'm using my Para FAL for CQB and distance shooting but thats a different story. just my .02 |
I do. Regardless of the sight's lack of parallax, a consistent cheek weld is required by the RIFLE if you want to have any hope of having two shots land relatively close to each other. I guess if all you want is to hose a silhouette 25 yards away it doesn't make much difference. But some stretch the capabilities of their weapons. |
 I've run the tests (results have been posted in the optics forum numerous times). The EOtech will hit to the same point of aim providing you can see the entire reticule.Optics are not irons. Consistant cheekweld is required of irons and some extant by magnified optics, it's NICE to have with EOTech, but it's not required. |
You're kidding right? An IED takes out the lens of an optic and you don't think an Aimpoint in the same situation with it's thinner leses wouldn't suffer the same fate? |
What I am talking about has nothing to do with what kind of sights are on a rifle. It has to do with a rifle's behavior under recoil, which changes with changes in your cheekweld. You need to be a precision shooter to see the effect. 4" groups at 50 yards don't cut it. Step back to 300 to 500 yards and move your head around on every shot of your EOTech equipped whatever. Let me know how it goes. |
"Precision shooters" don't use EOTechs or Aimpoints (or even ACOGs for that matter). |
 Somebody tell that to the Army SDMs. Besides, the fact that an EOTech was not designed to be a 500 yard gunsight does not change the fact that consistent cheekweld is not important. Classic strawman argument. |
An SDM is not a 'precision' rifle, it's a squad level designated markmans. Precision rifles would be the SASS or M-24 type, something for a sniper.
Talk about straw man - nobody is talking about 500y shots (except you). But I'd point out the EOTech could still hit a 18"x40" target at 500y if you don't have the 'correct cheekweld' providing you have the right sight picture (dot on center mass of target), good breathing and trigger control. At least out to 300y on steel it's worked for me. |
1. If an IDE took out an EOTech optic glass, which are a multiple layer laminated glass, then the single layer Aimpoint would be useless, since the EOTech laminated glass are like a safety glass, even if the optic is damaged, the glass will stay somewhat intacted. there for, the sight could still be used. I have demo my EOTech at a carbine class by running a broken window EOtech all weekend. 2. Whjy wopuld you need a kill flash for the EOtech, that is just someone not understanding the product. EOTech does NOT use a reflective technology, like the Aimpoint, where Aimpoint has coat the front lens in order for the technology to work, the coating act as a reflector to light and it will send flash signature to enemies that is why Aimpoint will require kill flash. EOTech by using the laser projection technology, it does not need a coated lens, so any light emission will just shot right through the lens instead of reflecting it like a mirror. 3. yes, Aimpoint has a great advantage on the battery life... 10,000 under operational condition is amazing... my hats is off to that. But.. a 552 when used with lithium batteries will deliver 1000-1500 hours of continuous use. This is more then enough for any one operating beyond the normal SOP. 1000 hours is like 41 days. and when a wannabe like me, that is like changing batteries every 6 months. 4. I can carry extra battery in the TangoDown pistol grip. it is cheaper then the double battery module and it also upgrade my pistol grip with better feel and a gaper. 5. that is non-sense.. the 1MOA dot in the center is more precise then Aimpoint and the big 65MOA circle makes the fastest CQB reticle on the market.. just print the big circle on target at CQB distance and shoot. can't get any faster then that.
I disagree with you on the fster CQB optic, it is really a very fast reticle with that huge ring, you can pick up the target just that much faster. I have done testing, once the shooter get used to the reticle, they are just that much faster... However I do give Aimpoint some advantage.. 1. It is low profile so with low mount, it can be mounted to differeent weapon systems.. but if you are shooting an AR, the build in mount on the EOtech are solid and save you some cash by building it into the body. 2. Fast rotatory knob, it is faster 6to crank on the Aimpoint then the more complex buttons of the EOtech, but I have seen on several occusions that the rotatory knob fall off the Aimpoint. 3. Longer Battery life.. that is a killer... With the EOTech laser technology, the laser require a lot of power to run, so the battery life are much shorter then the Aimpoint and the laser won't run under low battery power so most of the time, when you battery are running low in the EOTech(low battery indicator) you still have approximately 20% juice left.. I usually run the battery in my toothbrush, TV remote and what ever house hold appliance that require liitle output from a AA battery. a CQB FAL.. that is another story....:) |
I second that..... Cheek weld are non-existing with thge EOTech or Aimpoint sight. just print the dot on target and shoot. that much easier. |
Have you shot anything at 500 yards? Or is 300 it? If all you want to do is hit an 18 x 40 target *somewhere*, then cheek weld doesn't matter much with irons either. |
From JER
You need to step away from the yellow eye class wearing, highpower rifle shooting kool-aid pitcher....  Aimpoints and EOTechs are designed from the ground up to be CQB sights that a shooter of reasonably good skill can also employ at medium ranges. Cheek weld is not mandatory on either one. If your using either one past 300 meters..... guess what....you picked the wrong tool to use. Unsling your Turner, zip up your KOWA and take of the hard back shooting jacket once in awhile..... And as for ACOG's, I put them in a different class as they are trying to do two different things. |
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Aimpoint vs. EO Tech vs ACOG (Page 1 of 2)
AR Sponsor