AR Sponsor
Posted: 9/10/2011 9:41:10 PM EDT
|
so rogue's topic got me wondering, why exactly do so many seem to run eotechs in the .mil, i mean crane seems to like them, but why?
it seems like alot of internet forums say eotechs are horrible optic systems, but if thats the case why are they chosen please lets not start a aimpoint v eotech war, im wanting an actual discussion on why its chosen over other optic choices for teams like the seals and such |
|
I think there's a lot of speculation on the subject. As with anything military, cost comes in to play for sure. Other than that, personal preference of the user. I find it hard to believe that SEALs or anyone else who puts their life on the line on a regular basis wouldn't buck up $600 for their own optic if they thought the one they were issued was inferior or a liability. I know I would.
I will continue to use my EOTech 512 until it fails me. I am no brand loyalist. |
|
Quoted: so rogue's topic got me wondering, why exactly do so many seem to run eotechs in the .mil, i mean crane seems to like them, but why? it seems like alot of internet forums say eotechs are horrible optic systems, but if thats the case why are they chosen please lets not start a aimpoint v eotech war, im wanting an actual discussion on why its chosen over other optic choices for teams like the seals and such green =/= red.... I ran a 552F - had 0 problems - kept my issue ACOG for times on post or overwatch..... I prefer an EOTech over an Aimpoint though they are great optics also... personal preference |
|
My buddy spent 10 years working for SOCOM. He carried a EOTECH. He went through three of them but each one lasted longer than the one before. He thought the EOTECH was faster. I don't believe he actually put a timer on it running Aimpoint vs. EOTECH. Going from a low port slung arms to raising the firearm and getting one shot on a man size target at 100 meters I would suspect the EOTECH is faster for many people. You can argue that more training will negate difference but the simple fact is that more training with the EOTECH would make you faster as well. I personally have not shot the EOTECH but have shot the following: 1-4 DMS Iron Sights Micro red dot T1 copy/Burris Fastfire/30mm Red Dot, ATN digital (Halo sight looks like Cmore but doesn't co-witness as well) 42mm red dot 50mm red dot The list above is ordered by how fast they shot slowest to fastest. I was shooting at 25 meters using a 22 upper and a 3 point sling. I did use a Pact timer and was shooting at a 4x6 inch swinging plate target. Without having hand on grip going from relaxed position to hitting target with first shot the 50mm red dot was a full .5 second faster. I suspect the EOTECH might give the same advantage because of it’s layout and sight picture and the fact you aren’t looking through a can in quite the same way as a red dot. (The 42mm sight was barely better than the next slowest one. Around 1-2/10 seconds on average.) I called Aimpoint and emailed them a year ago. They still haven’t come out with a M4s in a 50mm lens version damn it. Even with durability issues/battery runtimes etc. I would consider the EOTECH over the Aimpoint if Uncle Sam is providing it and I can get a replacement unit immediately if it went down. I would also have Trijicon night sights on my Irons as back up. |
| Having shot both, with no real training, for me the Eotech is faster, noticeably. One of our members here and a friend of mine was issued an Aimpoint and carried it on quite a few deployments with Bco 2/504 82nd. After coming home on leave he came to my house and tried out the Eotech. His first reaction was " Damn that's fast." While he didn't have a timer on it, he could feel a difference in the speed of how fast his eyes could pick up the reticle and get it on target. No tube, a more eye friendly reticle that is easier to pick up on versus a single dot, plus it is holographic making it "float" so that the optic doesn't have to really be lined up to use it. Any tube optic will require that you get it lined up to a greater extent. Look down a toilet paper tube, if you don't have an Aimpoint and move your head around and watch the hole in it get narrower and then close up completely. Cut another one down to less than two inches in length and notice the difference. Getting it to that view from shouldering or otherwise carrying the weapon when not already looking through it takes more time, not a lot, but enough in a life and death game to make one hell of a difference. |
|
I have both an Aimpoint Comp M3 and an Eotech EXPS3-2 on my rifles.
When I was in the Corps, only Snipers had optics, the rest of us used iron sights. As a cop, I prefer the aimpoint's battery life,(leave it on, tell the guys not to mess with it, hope they listen). The Eotech reticle is significantly easier and faster to use to get rounds on target in a hurry. Most agencies here who have red dot optics use the Eotechs. In fact, I'm honestly not aware of any agency here in the St Louis area using optics other than Eotechs. |
|
I don't see the battery life as an issue. The battery life is more than sufficient to last much longer than any patrol or engagement. No one should be so stupid as to not check the function of a life or death system such as their optic every time they deploy, or patrol the streets. It should be done every day whether your a soldier or a cop. The issue of the battery draining is entirely different. That issue would, had it not been corrected, forced me to quite possibly go with the Aimpoint. I have a habit of turning my optics on before I go to the range, or if there is a situation with criminal activity in my area, or any time I might be using the weapon. I change batteries every season and toss the old ones, and I keep spares on hand and four ( I use the N battery ), in the grip core of my weapon at all times. I have an older model, but have had the CR123 models, and the AA battery powered ones, and I plan to move up to the newer transverse mounted battery model as funds become available. Well, I have thought about it. The AA battery availability in a SHTF thing makes for a good argument for it,and Lithium batteries hold up well in the sort of cold we have in the south.
I think continuous use life was shorter on the old ones, but the AA models show 1000 hours, and the XPS CR123 models show 600. I haven't had an issue with any of mine as far as battery life, even with the B cell that I have now. I have had, between the ex wife and I, two 511s, two 512s, one 556XR308, and now another 512. One of the 511s was stolen, one 512 went with the ex when she left, the others were sold with the firearms they were on. |
|
Yes, you should check your gear everyday. Unfortunately we have pool rifles and alot of "meh" attitude towards stuff like that. Until the dept higher ups move from administrators to leaders, we will continue to have that attitude.
I mentioned the battery life as it pertained to my needs/requirements and I perceive it to be a short coming under thos circumstances. Battery life may or may not be something for the OP to consider. |
| True, and looking at it from a purely civilian perspective, I do not have the problems associated with being issued something that someone else may have fubared ignored when they had it. I have heard some really stupid things in regards to issued gear being "fixed" or "adjusted" in the field by one soldier and then turned in. The next guy get's it and it doesn't operate correctly, or worse. As a civilian, I would not hesitate to go Eotech, and actually prefer it, or even as an LEO that uses the same weapon every day so that it is in his control. If the weapon is to be used by others and not under your control, that is a strong argument for the Aimpoint. |
|
The Eotechs get a lot of crap at arfcom, but it seems like––these days––the more specialized the unit, the more I see Eotechs outnumbering anything else––except a lot of acogs too (in Afghanistan for sure).
But then, they change the batteries out every time they clean the gun. I have a few gun-nut friends in SF and Civil Affairs, and the consensus among them is the Eotechs are faster... But for every Kyle Defoor and Kyle Lamb with their Eotechs, you see a Vickers and a Pat Rogers running the AP Micros. I like them both, but for different reasons. The XPS is great and fast, but it's awfully convenient to leave an optic on 24/7 and change out on leap years. |
|
IMHO, the EOTech has the superior reticule and layout, not having a tube, but rather the holographic window.
Part of it is a difference in TTPs, many civilians love the Aimpoint because of the battery life- they can turn it on, and leave it on. They don't have to think about it, they just pick up the rifle and shoot. For law enforcement, this might be good as well, as the rifle will spend a significant amount of time riding in a rack, not being carried around and continually checked. For the military, the battery life thing isn't as much of an issue, batteries are plentiful and free, optics are turned off once inside the wire, and batteries replaced regularly, whether needed or not. Given those conditions, the EOTech's supposed "shortfalls" of battery drain and battery life don't become very apparent and don't have a significant influence on optics choice. The reticule is fast, and the FOV is large, and the optic (not the electronics) is no less rugged than an Aimpoint. The mount is included, and the cost per unit is less, making them a natural choice- even for the units with large operating budgets. The question is which performs better on objective, many end-users seem to feel that it's the EOTech. Furthermore, many of these end-users were among the very earliest Aimpoint users, and have a great deal of experience on the CompM, and still refer to Aimpoints in general as "CompM"s, not "Aimpoints." The CompM was not as rugged, and the battery life was not as good as it is now, and many were relatively long-in-tooth by the time the current cohort of end-users started using them. ~Augee |
|
Quoted:
IMHO, the EOTech has the superior reticule and layout, not having a tube, but rather the holographic window. Part of it is a difference in TTPs, many civilians love the Aimpoint because of the battery life- they can turn it on, and leave it on. They don't have to think about it, they just pick up the rifle and shoot. For law enforcement, this might be good as well, as the rifle will spend a significant amount of time riding in a rack, not being carried around and continually checked. For the military, the battery life thing isn't as much of an issue, batteries are plentiful and free, optics are turned off once inside the wire, and batteries replaced regularly, whether needed or not. Given those conditions, the EOTech's supposed "shortfalls" of battery drain and battery life don't become very apparent and don't have a significant influence on optics choice. The reticule is fast, and the FOV is large, and the optic (not the electronics) is no less rugged than an Aimpoint. The mount is included, and the cost per unit is less, making them a natural choice- even for the units with large operating budgets. The question is which performs better on objective, many end-users seem to feel that it's the EOTech. Furthermore, many of these end-users were among the very earliest Aimpoint users, and have a great deal of experience on the CompM, and still refer to Aimpoints in general as "CompM"s, not "Aimpoints." The CompM was not as rugged, and the battery life was not as good as it is now, and many were relatively long-in-tooth by the time the current cohort of end-users started using them. ~Augee Excellent post as always augee, what do you think about the durability of eotechs, that seems to be a big issue in the civilian market |
|
I'm a former infantry Marine with combat experiance and currently a cop in St Louis. Admittedly I dont compete in 3 gun competitions,(although I'd like to...time and money currently prevent me from playing as I'd like to)...
BUT.... I'd seriously doubt that normal civilian wear and tear would even remotely constitute abuse. I honestly feel that the Eotech's are more than durable enough for just about anything you're likely to throw at it. |
|
Quoted: I'm a former infantry Marine with combat experiance and currently a cop in St Louis. Admittedly I dont compete in 3 gun competitions,(although I'd like to...time and money currently prevent me from playing as I'd like to)... BUT.... I'd seriously doubt that normal civilian wear and tear would even remotely constitute abuse. I honestly feel that the Eotech's are more than durable enough for just about anything you're likely to throw at it. let me see if I can get a good pic of my 2 deployment EOTech she's still going strong with 0 problems    |
| One other thing to consider is that the Eotech, even with the glass damaged pretty badly, will still have the reticle visible and will be usable. It will be usable even it dirt and mud, or other obstructions cover a good portion of the glass. The reticle will just be presented in the remaining good portion of the window, but it will still be on target and accurate. In the same situation, the aimpoint will be out of business. |
|
Quoted: How often did/do you guys go through batteries with those? Did y'all have a set replacement schedule or did you just carry spare batteries and leave it up to the individual user? Just curious. wasn't an issue item for us - we were all issued ACOGs The way I did it was, every month no matter what - if I was going out on a patrol I always had extras on me anyway and for raids I changed batteries so if I had no raids for a month, and they lasted the month they got changed if I had no raids for a month and it flashed - they got changed and if I had raids every night for a week, I went through 14 batteries |
|
Quoted:
One other thing to consider is that the Eotech, even with the glass damaged pretty badly, will still have the reticle visible and will be usable. It will be usable even it dirt and mud, or other obstructions cover a good portion of the glass. The reticle will just be presented in the remaining good portion of the window, but it will still be on target and accurate. In the same situation, the aimpoint will be out of business. I dont know for certain about the aimpoint being out of action due to broken glass. I'm not willing to break mine to find out, but I do know from experiance that the front cover does NOT need to up/open on the aimpoint for it to work. I've tried it and it worked fine and I had no issues acquiring and hitting the target with the front cover down. I have heard from a few different sources though that the Eotech will work with the screen damaged. |
|
Thanks for the info. I'm guessing if you were issued the ACOG and carried the Eotech, you preferred it to the ACOG?
Quoted:
Quoted:
How often did/do you guys go through batteries with those? Did y'all have a set replacement schedule or did you just carry spare batteries and leave it up to the individual user? Just curious. wasn't an issue item for us - we were all issued ACOGs The way I did it was, every month no matter what - if I was going out on a patrol I always had extras on me anyway and for raids I changed batteries so if I had no raids for a month, and they lasted the month they got changed if I had no raids for a month and it flashed - they got changed and if I had raids every night for a week, I went through 14 batteries |
|
Quoted: Thanks for the info. I'm guessing if you were issued the ACOG and carried the Eotech, you preferred it to the ACOG? Quoted: Quoted: How often did/do you guys go through batteries with those? Did y'all have a set replacement schedule or did you just carry spare batteries and leave it up to the individual user? Just curious. wasn't an issue item for us - we were all issued ACOGs The way I did it was, every month no matter what - if I was going out on a patrol I always had extras on me anyway and for raids I changed batteries so if I had no raids for a month, and they lasted the month they got changed if I had no raids for a month and it flashed - they got changed and if I had raids every night for a week, I went through 14 batteries my Gunner pulled me up in front of the company one day and bitched that it was "the exact wrong sight for the fight we were in" I asked him how many times he kicked in a door at 0300 and needed a 4x sight the ACOG is a great combat optic - and, if I were over in Afghanistan right now I'd probably have them the other way around (ACOG on 90% of the time) but, for patrolling in Iraq I was more comfortable with the EOTech. I can make solid hits out as far as my rifle will shoot with it - the ACOG, while very helpful at range and great on post or over watch, wasn't needed inside houses or around towns. I kept both on me though - have a pouch that will hold both my PVS-14 and my ACOG/EOTech.... swapped to La Rue mounts on both and zero was never a problem. |
|
ive been issued and used ACOGs Aimpoints and EOtechs.
i prefer EOtechs, you cant beat that field of view and when youre in a stupid/wrong/uncomfortable position while shooting the reticle does not washout, parallax, shadow or otherwise disapear. the battery life was an issue my first tour as i had a defective 512 but i just ended up changing batteries a lot. now with my issued Aimpoint comp4 i still turn it on and off before and after a mission so its really not an issue i suppose if batteries all just died tomorrow the aimpoints would rule but i dont see that happening. also that EOtechs 1 MOA dot is dead accurate and the new models with multiple dots for range look sweet. i have an EXP and its money, if you expect to run and gun in a close up fight you wont go wrong. oh and its true they work even if the glass is cracked |
|
The NSW guys told me that it's the fastest at acquiring targets, so that's why they like them.
They usually go on pretty damn short missions, and they have a never-ending supply of batteries. They do admit that the 553 is damn heavy and big optic for not having any magnification. Those MK18's get heavy with the 553, sopmod, rail, vfg, NT4, peq-15, light... |
|
Quoted:
it seems like alot of internet forums say 
There's so much weird crap that's gospel on AR forums it boggles the mind. The .mil way is gospel when it comes to staking a castle nut. The .mil way that says you're not authorized to touch a trigger assembly? Eh.......we'll ignore that one. If you don't have a .mil tested, 100% MP inspected bolt forged by Colt Elves you have crap. The .mil flash suppressors? Eh......this one by YHM is better. Plastic MBUS? Hell no, plastic sights on a fighting carbine are crazy. A plastic flashlight mount? Hell yes, praise Kyle Lamb I'll take mine in tan...er, flat dark earth. The government is all-wise and all-knowing; you shall not deviate. Sometimes. The ATF, though, sucks and is run by clueless bureaucrats. The inconsistency is bizarre and comical. As for the Eotechs, aside from the group-think, there is actually a logic to it. If you'll accept these general truths as, well, true: -Eotechs are faster on target than an Aimpoint -Eotechs are less reliable than Aimpoints (but still pretty reliable) then factor in that the military shooter doesn't have budget concerns, it doesn't surprise me at all that they're more prevalent. It's not a $500 investment for PFC Doorkicker, it's a piece of gear that gets replaced if it breaks. And even if he buys his own, If it offers him an extra few tenths of a second, who cares about batteries or replacement cost? It's reliable enough, and a few tenths might be the difference between a beer, a purple heart or someone in dress uniform knocking on your mom's front door. But to most people who will never get shot at, $500 is a decent chunk of change, and the odds of ever actually needing those tenths of a second are way down there. With an Aimpoint you get the battery life, you get more (by most accounts) dependability, you get "the military uses them" cache, and you get a good fast sight. Now throw in the "I bought product A, so I must bash product B" that affects a significant amount of posters, and you have your answer. I'd happy with either if I had my 24 yr old eyes instead of my 44 yr old eyes, but I'd probably buy an Eotech. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
it seems like alot of internet forums say
There's so much weird crap that's gospel on AR forums it boggles the mind. The .mil way is gospel when it comes to staking a castle nut. The .mil way that says you're not authorized to touch a trigger assembly? Eh.......we'll ignore that one. If you don't have a .mil tested, 100% MP inspected bolt forged by Colt Elves you have crap. The .mil flash suppressors? Eh......this one by YHM is better. Plastic MBUS? Hell no, plastic sights on a fighting carbine are crazy. A plastic flashlight mount? Hell yes, praise Kyle Lamb I'll take mine in tan...er, flat dark earth. The government is all-wise and all-knowing; you shall not deviate. Sometimes. The ATF, though, sucks and is run by clueless bureaucrats. The inconsistency is bizarre and comical. As for the Eotechs, aside from the group-think, there is actually a logic to it. If you'll accept these general truths as, well, true: -Eotechs are faster on target than an Aimpoint -Eotechs are less reliable than Aimpoints (but still pretty reliable) then factor in that the military shooter doesn't have budget concerns, it doesn't surprise me at all that they're more prevalent. It's not a $500 investment for PFC Doorkicker, it's a piece of gear that gets replaced if it breaks. And even if he buys his own, If it offers him an extra few tenths of a second, who cares about batteries or replacement cost? It's reliable enough, and a few tenths might be the difference between a beer, a purple heart or someone in dress uniform knocking on your mom's front door. But to most people who will never get shot at, $500 is a decent chunk of change, and the odds of ever actually needing those tenths of a second are way down there. With an Aimpoint you get the battery life, you get more (by most accounts) dependability, you get "the military uses them" cache, and you get a good fast sight. Now throw in the "I bought product A, so I must bash product B" that affects a significant amount of posters, and you have your answer. I'd happy with either if I had my 24 yr old eyes instead of my 44 yr old eyes, but I'd probably buy an Eotech. I agree that a lot of folks simply have to bash what they didn't buy, and defend what they did buy. It's just like kids with xbox vs ps3. If the same guy had gotten an eotech, they would be bashing aimpoint. People have a strange need to defend their purchase and cherry pick facts. |
|
Here's the thing most folks don't get... There are over 1.5million Aimpoints out there.. and counting..... how many EO's???
No where close... other then the SOCOM contract...(which was suspended once) who uses EO's the Most... SOCOM... So everyone else (just like the Internet) thinks there all that.. and uses them... but the truth is they are a less then stellar reputation for reliability... I can't tell you how many folks I have run into who swore by the EO, until it failed... Cops especially fall prey to them... They will tell you how reliable it's BEEN... and then proceed to pull out there duty carbine out of the trunk and find out the battery is dead.... That right there should be a clue for most... Should guys check them???? sure they should.. but then there is always Murphy.. and lets face it, the majority of users of this stuff.... Have never heard of ARFCOM..... Yet year after year after year.. I read AAR's from various instructors... you guys know them... they see hundreds of guns and witness hundreds of thousands of rds fired each year... and they tell you about the failures... the lost zeroes, the dead battery's, the corroded battery boxes... the bad springs and the ghetto do it yourself fix and the flashing reticules and the loose mounts... and yet that's not enough... it's like your buddy telling you your girlfriend is a lying cheating whore, but you just can't believe him.... until the one night you come home late and find her with another guy.... 
Are the XPS models with the side mounted CR123's the fix??? I don't know.. because there not that many of them out their.. but I can tell you that batteries are not well suited to take recoil from the sides... attempting to fix the spring compression problem may very well have caused another inadvertently... time will tell... As to the whole faster or better reticle... None of that matters if I have to keep using my irons or the optic as a ghost ring cause it's won't turn on... and much like running a red light.. you can get away with it quite a few times before something bad happens... not exactly the most prudent course of action to continually take... the data has been out their for years... but just like that lying cheating whore of a girlfriend.... it's hard to convince others.... they just have to come home late some night and find out for themselves..... |
|
Quoted:
Here's the thing most folks don't get... There are over 1.5million Aimpoints out there.. and counting..... how many EO's??? No where close... other then the SOCOM contract...(which was suspended once) who uses EO's the Most... SOCOM... So everyone else (just like the Internet) thinks there all that.. and uses them... but the truth is they are a less then stellar reputation for reliability... I can't tell you how many folks I have run into who swore by the EO, until it failed... Cops especially fall prey to them... They will tell you how reliable it's BEEN... and then proceed to pull out there duty carbine out of the trunk and find out the battery is dead.... That right there should be a clue for most... Should guys check them???? sure they should.. but then there is always Murphy.. and lets face it, the majority of users of this stuff.... Have never heard of ARFCOM..... Yet year after year after year.. I read AAR's from various instructors... you guys know them... they see hundreds of guns and witness hundreds of thousands of rds fired each year... and they tell you about the failures... the lost zeroes, the dead battery's, the corroded battery boxes... the bad springs and the ghetto do it yourself fix and the flashing reticules and the loose mounts... and yet that's not enough... it's like your buddy telling you your girlfriend is a lying cheating whore, but you just can't believe him.... until the one night you come home late and find her with another guy....
Are the XPS models with the side mounted CR123's the fix??? I don't know.. because there not that many of them out their.. but I can tell you that batteries are not well suited to take recoil from the sides... attempting to fix the spring compression problem may very well have caused another inadvertently... time will tell... As to the whole faster or better reticle... None of that matters if I have to keep using my irons or the optic as a ghost ring cause it's won't turn on... and much like running a red light.. you can get away with it quite a few times before something bad happens... not exactly the most prudent course of action to continually take... the data has been out their for years... but just like that lying cheating whore of a girlfriend.... it's hard to convince others.... they just have to come home late some night and find out for themselves..... well said i had the lying whore gf screw me a time or two and it sucks lol |
| I can't believe that you used "SOCOM is the only group that uses EOs" as a portion of your argument. Yes the vast majority of issue optics in the US military are AIMPOINTS, but let's look at this honestly and objectively... what are most of those 1.5 million aimpoints doing the vast majority of the time? They are sitting somewhere on a FOB or in an armory seeing little to no use. The Eotechs on SOCOM weapons (and the weapons of of other various members of the armed forces who have been issued or chosen to use them) are getting beat to hell in combat conditions on a regular basis. I will grant that Eotechs have reliability issues you don't see in aimpoints but the technology of an eotech is lightyears beyond that of an aimpoint. You also site people who teach various classes, a lot of the "big names" in the tactical training community have sponsorships, some openly, some not so openly, so I take everything I hear from that community with a grain(sometimes spoon) of salt. The thing that really gets me about the whole Aimpoint vs Eotech debate is the fact that those in the aimpoint camp generally refuse to acknowledge that the vast majority of eotech stories are of successful,functional,reliable,dead on balls accurate optics, and that what issues eotech has had in the past have been addressed, as well as the fact that many "eotech issues" are attributable to the HUGE flood of chinese clones purchased by the inexperienced and then bashed as though they were the real thing (because the user believes they are) when they (no surprise here) fail to function. I like aimpoints, I like eotechs. I have to purchase an optic for my new carbine, I'm going with an XPS, my next purchase is gonna get a T-1. I don't understand why the aimpoint camp is so indignant about this topic, as though using anything other than an aimpoint is some sort of personal afront. You don't see this in the eotech crowd, they are generally willing to acknowledge that they are both fine optics. Let people use what they wish and let their personal experience decide. That is far better than shaming/insulting/fear mongering someone into purchasing an optic that is not what they want. |
|
Quoted:
Here's the thing most folks don't get... There are over 1.5million Aimpoints out there.. and counting..... how many EO's??? No where close... other then the SOCOM contract...(which was suspended once) who uses EO's the Most... SOCOM... So everyone else (just like the Internet) thinks there all that.. and uses them... but the truth is they are a less then stellar reputation for reliability... I can't tell you how many folks I have run into who swore by the EO, until it failed... Cops especially fall prey to them... They will tell you how reliable it's BEEN... and then proceed to pull out there duty carbine out of the trunk and find out the battery is dead.... That right there should be a clue for most... Should guys check them???? sure they should.. but then there is always Murphy.. and lets face it, the majority of users of this stuff.... Have never heard of ARFCOM..... Yet year after year after year.. I read AAR's from various instructors... you guys know them... they see hundreds of guns and witness hundreds of thousands of rds fired each year... and they tell you about the failures... the lost zeroes, the dead battery's, the corroded battery boxes... the bad springs and the ghetto do it yourself fix and the flashing reticules and the loose mounts... and yet that's not enough... it's like your buddy telling you your girlfriend is a lying cheating whore, but you just can't believe him.... until the one night you come home late and find her with another guy....
Are the XPS models with the side mounted CR123's the fix??? I don't know.. because there not that many of them out their.. but I can tell you that batteries are not well suited to take recoil from the sides... attempting to fix the spring compression problem may very well have caused another inadvertently... time will tell... As to the whole faster or better reticle... None of that matters if I have to keep using my irons or the optic as a ghost ring cause it's won't turn on... and much like running a red light.. you can get away with it quite a few times before something bad happens... not exactly the most prudent course of action to continually take... the data has been out their for years... but just like that lying cheating whore of a girlfriend.... it's hard to convince others.... they just have to come home late some night and find out for themselves..... And how many of these failures have been in the last 2-3 years? That's the problem I see. Everyone knows Eotechs had issues with everything you mentioned. However Eotech claimed to have fixed these problems 3 years go. Yet everyone who comes on here & totes Eotech as unreliable POS's that fail when you need them can not give recent accounts. Just the same stores of the past. And if someone does say a Eotech failed in a recent class, it's not because the optic failed, it's because someone didn't tighten a mount, or someone didn't check the batteries before hand, or someone didn't use lithium's & they leaked & cause it to not work. See where I'm going? "Internet facts" can be very misleading. In my Eotech experience they have never failed on me yet. And I do have a AP as well. But for me the Eotech works better for my eyes then the AP does so I use what works for me. |
|
It's an age old question. Our moderator actually did an online poll here of problems with both EoTechs and Aimpoints and got a lot of response. The surprising thing was there was very few complaints against Aimpoints (read almost none), but I think a pretty significant (~20 odd percent who wrote in ) reporting problems with EoTechs that they have own. I can't find it since it was more than 30 days ago, perhaps someone know how to find it. |
|
Quoted:
It's an age old question. Our moderator actually did an online poll here of problems with both EoTechs and Aimpoints and got a lot of response. The surprising thing was there was very few complaints against Aimpoints (read almost none), but I think a pretty significant (~20 odd percent who wrote in ) reporting problems with EoTechs that they have own. I can't find it since it was more than 30 days ago, perhaps someone know how to find it. I don't think anybody is questioning that Aimpoints are, by almost all accounts, more reliable. But nothing is 100% reliable, and Eotech obviously meets some sort of minimum standard so that people who are a)subject matter experts, b)can have any optic they want, choose to use Eotech with their lives on the line. They're not running around an empty lot with one of the AR Gods telling them how to hold a weapon; they're using a combat carbine with a combat optic in combat, and it works. That would tend to render moot the popular opinion here that an Eotech is slightly more reliable than a Yugo. I completely understand that for $400-$500, people want the most reliable optic they can buy. I understand that people like the Aimpoint better, don't want to fool with batteries, whatever. I don't understand the over-the-top, "you're a fool if you trust an Eotech" fanboy nonsense, aside from the fact that it's the internet and fanboy nonsense is a given. |
|
The surprising thing was there was very few complaints against Aimpoints (read almost none
It's a simple optic with low battery needs. It should have less complaints. But again that poll did not say what year models people had that had problems. Some had 5 or 6 have battery problems all the same time. They could haven't had the fixes. Or someone may have got a model they thought was fixed & it wasn't & passed it off as a fixed one had this problem. And if you take that sample, it's small compared to the many that use them that don't post on this site. Eotech should have more reliability problems as anything that gets more complex. |
|
Quoted:
I can't believe that you used "SOCOM is the only group that uses EOs" as a portion of your argument. Yes the vast majority of issue optics in the US military are AIMPOINTS, but let's look at this honestly and objectively... what are most of those 1.5 million aimpoints doing the vast majority of the time? They are sitting somewhere on a FOB or in an armory seeing little to no use. The Eotechs on SOCOM weapons (and the weapons of of other various members of the armed forces who have been issued or chosen to use them) are getting beat to hell in combat conditions on a regular basis. I will grant that Eotechs have reliability issues you don't see in aimpoints but the technology of an eotech is lightyears beyond that of an aimpoint. You also site people who teach various classes, a lot of the "big names" in the tactical training community have sponsorships, some openly, some not so openly, so I take everything I hear from that community with a grain(sometimes spoon) of salt. The thing that really gets me about the whole Aimpoint vs Eotech debate is the fact that those in the aimpoint camp generally refuse to acknowledge that the vast majority of eotech stories are of successful,functional,reliable,dead on balls accurate optics, and that what issues eotech has had in the past have been addressed, as well as the fact that many "eotech issues" are attributable to the HUGE flood of chinese clones purchased by the inexperienced and then bashed as though they were the real thing (because the user believes they are) when they (no surprise here) fail to function. I like aimpoints, I like eotechs. I have to purchase an optic for my new carbine, I'm going with an XPS, my next purchase is gonna get a T-1. I don't understand why the aimpoint camp is so indignant about this topic, as though using anything other than an aimpoint is some sort of personal afront. You don't see this in the eotech crowd, they are generally willing to acknowledge that they are both fine optics. Let people use what they wish and let their personal experience decide. That is far better than shaming/insulting/fear mongering someone into purchasing an optic that is not what they want. You want to look at this honestly and objectively?? OK.. lets do that.. - Other then SOCOM, name a large organization that has a contract for EO's from L-3.. Name a large contract period from L-3 That is for EO's?? Don't bother.. you can't. -EO's light years ahead in technology... Puhleese... It's tech is long in the tooth. and goes back to Fighter aircraft Gun sights... - You claim that the "big name" instructors basically get paid to endorse other optics... Please, tell me how many of them you know personally?? Which ones are being paid and by who?? You know little of this and your statement clearly shows that. - Blaming EO's well won reputation on Chinese clones.. that's a new one.. points to you for that...  .
You are the Typical EO apologist who will defend them in spite of all the factual data that is and has been out their for years...You have ONE... ONE sample and that is what you base your claims on... When you get to see hundreds of guns each year for the last 10-15 years... then maybe you might have a clue, There is no fear mongering or shaming anyone.. it's based off of failures that have been witnessed by many folks over the years... Funny how the Thread Zhukov started faded.... it clearly showed what has been know for years.. that EO's have had issues... You can dismiss them as knock offs or BS spread by paid endorsers all you want.. and it does not change a thing.. oh, and try a paragraph now and then... it makes things bit easier for others.... Oh, and have you seen your Girlfriend lately....?? 
|
|
Here they are archived now
Eotech 22.3% failure Aimpoint has 2 failures |
|
Quoted:
Holy Cow , This forum reminds me of bringing up a piston AR on M4Carbine.net ! Don't do it unless you want a flame thrower on your ass . DI vs Piston = same as Aimpoint vs Eotech ?? Its not that bad, for the most part this has been a civil good discussion from what i can tell most eotech failures are with older models, i havent seen any new ones yet |
|
Chinese EOTech clones are not clones at all. They are not true holographic sites but are a reflected red (and green) dot.
I have bought each of the Chinese models and they are fine for a 22LR AR type but talk about short battery life and while they solved the floating aimpoint it is now near impossible to get the red dot to adjust. They look like an EOTech on the outside but are not on the inside. The Aimpoint clones, however, are much closer to the real thing and are worth considering for the budget minded. I have a 512 on my PWS MK114 and a 553 on my FNH FS2000 but on my keltech SU16CA I have a T1 clone with a cloned QD mount. Now, I prefer the EOTech as it is faster for close combat multi target training, at least for me the T1 is so light and the whole point of the Keltech is a super light weight gun with reasonable function and with the T1 clone it is nice. Besides; the EOTechs on the other 2 represent 25% of the gun price. A real T1 would cost 50% more than the Keltech SU16CA. Somehow at under $40.00 it made more sense To me and I repeat, to me, the Aimpoint is a 1X tube scope a very nice one but requires a scope mentality. The EOTech is a both eyes open almost like hip shooting with an accurate site. I normally choose added reliability over superior function but the EOTech is simply too much faster for the 10-50 yard combat scenario to not accept knowing to check one's batteries With my Geissele on the PWS I can do head shots with the 512 at 200 yards as well This is free country so you can buy the one you like IMO Wulfmann |
|
Quoted:
I wouldnt call an aimpoint a 1xscope? Its still a both eyes open dot sight, no scope mentality needed Compared to the EOTech it is a 1X scope. IMO it is, you seem to see it differently Yes, you can do both eyes open but you do not do it subconsciously and reflexively in a natural way. One must make a conscious effort to both eyes the Aimpoint . Perhaps it is just me that feels that way in the comparison or perhaps the Aimpoint requires an extended training period to adapt to it Aimpoints are excellent I just feel the EOtech is much faster Wulfmann |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I can't believe that you used "SOCOM is the only group that uses EOs" as a portion of your argument. Yes the vast majority of issue optics in the US military are AIMPOINTS, but let's look at this honestly and objectively... what are most of those 1.5 million aimpoints doing the vast majority of the time? They are sitting somewhere on a FOB or in an armory seeing little to no use. The Eotechs on SOCOM weapons (and the weapons of of other various members of the armed forces who have been issued or chosen to use them) are getting beat to hell in combat conditions on a regular basis. I will grant that Eotechs have reliability issues you don't see in aimpoints but the technology of an eotech is lightyears beyond that of an aimpoint. You also site people who teach various classes, a lot of the "big names" in the tactical training community have sponsorships, some openly, some not so openly, so I take everything I hear from that community with a grain(sometimes spoon) of salt. The thing that really gets me about the whole Aimpoint vs Eotech debate is the fact that those in the aimpoint camp generally refuse to acknowledge that the vast majority of eotech stories are of successful,functional,reliable,dead on balls accurate optics, and that what issues eotech has had in the past have been addressed, as well as the fact that many "eotech issues" are attributable to the HUGE flood of chinese clones purchased by the inexperienced and then bashed as though they were the real thing (because the user believes they are) when they (no surprise here) fail to function. I like aimpoints, I like eotechs. I have to purchase an optic for my new carbine, I'm going with an XPS, my next purchase is gonna get a T-1. I don't understand why the aimpoint camp is so indignant about this topic, as though using anything other than an aimpoint is some sort of personal afront. You don't see this in the eotech crowd, they are generally willing to acknowledge that they are both fine optics. Let people use what they wish and let their personal experience decide. That is far better than shaming/insulting/fear mongering someone into purchasing an optic that is not what they want. You want to look at this honestly and objectively?? OK.. lets do that.. - Other then SOCOM, name a large organization that has a contract for EO's from L-3.. Name a large contract period from L-3 That is for EO's?? Don't bother.. you can't. -EO's light years ahead in technology... Puhleese... It's tech is long in the tooth. and goes back to Fighter aircraft Gun sights... - You claim that the "big name" instructors basically get paid to endorse other optics... Please, tell me how many of them you know personally?? Which ones are being paid and by who?? You know little of this and your statement clearly shows that. - Blaming EO's well won reputation on Chinese clones.. that's a new one.. points to you for that... .
You are the Typical EO apologist who will defend them in spite of all the factual data that is and has been out their for years...You have ONE... ONE sample and that is what you base your claims on... When you get to see hundreds of guns each year for the last 10-15 years... then maybe you might have a clue, There is no fear mongering or shaming anyone.. it's based off of failures that have been witnessed by many folks over the years... Funny how the Thread Zhukov started faded.... it clearly showed what has been know for years.. that EO's have had issues... You can dismiss them as knock offs or BS spread by paid endorsers all you want.. and it does not change a thing.. oh, and try a paragraph now and then... it makes things bit easier for others.... Oh, and have you seen your Girlfriend lately....?? Eotechs are the official issue optic of the Swiss military, and the Swiss don't skimp on gear. They are also used by any number of various "HSLD" groups: Australian SAS, British SAS,GSG9,French special forces, they are also an issue optic (although not the primary issue optic) to Canadian forces... I could go on and on and on. The technology in Eotechs is very different from old school WWII and vietnam era holographic gunsights, similar? yes. The same? Far from it. I don't have to know someone personally to spot an endorsement. There is a big difference between someone who has influence in the gun community using a certain piece of gear,maybe wearing clothing with their logo on it, and full on balls to the wall shilling for someone. I have said repeatedly I don't have ANY problem with Aimpoints, I acknowledge their strengths and weaknesses the same as I acknowledge the strengths and weaknesses of Eotechs (which at this point has pretty much been narrowed down to battery life). I rightfully blame part of the eotech rep on "clones" I've seen more than one thread where somebody blamed an optic failure on a legit optic and it turned out to be a clone. This has happened with both eotech and your beloved aimpoint. I have never claimed that EOs have NEVER had issues, however if you manage to track down the thread someone else mentioned above me there were HUNDREDS of eo stories in that thread and the vast majority had never had an issue, and those that did had issues that were caused either by A: User error or B: the battery compartment issues that are very well known (and that no one in this thread myself included has questioned) I have not seen a SINGLE complaint with the new series of Eotechs. I have however seen a torture test on another website (google "XPS torture test" ) where someone smacked it against a tree like a bat 50 some odd times, threw it out of the back of a moving vehicle, ran it over, and blasted it with a 12 gauge and it was still running like a top. P.S. If we avoided every item that had issues with its earlier generations ARFCOM wouldnt exist because the reputation of Armalite style rifles was up until relatively recently that of a Jam-O-Matic that couldn't kill a kitten at 10 yards, and we all know that to be BS. We all know where that rep came from, and we all know that steps were taken (and continue to be taken) to remedy any issues the platform has. Technology has growing pains, it's a fact of life. P.P.S. Yes, I have seen her lately. She is keeping yours entertained while you are busy playing Aimpoint fanboy   (sorry I couldnt help it that was way too easy)
That being said, I have enjoyed your posts and the fact that you have at least tried(though you have not succeeded) in presenting valid arguments for why Eotechs should not be an option for a go-to optic (along with aimpoint, trijicon, and elcan) |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I wouldnt call an aimpoint a 1xscope? Its still a both eyes open dot sight, no scope mentality needed Compared to the EOTech it is a 1X scope. IMO it is, you seem to see it differently Yes, you can do both eyes open but you do not do it subconsciously and reflexively in a natural way. One must make a conscious effort to both eyes the Aimpoint . Perhaps it is just me that feels that way in the comparison or perhaps the Aimpoint requires an extended training period to adapt to it Aimpoints are excellent I just feel the EOtech is much faster Wulfmann It is just you.. touch and feel and IMO is great and all, but means little from a technical standpoint.. Aimpoints have been the original Both eyes open sight long before EOtech came along.. To say that Aimpoints are a 1x compared to EO's indicates what little experience and training you have had with either of them. and also how little you know and understand about the human anatomy and how your eyes and brain work. Of course, thats just IMHO... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I can't believe that you used "SOCOM is the only group that uses EOs" as a portion of your argument. Yes the vast majority of issue optics in the US military are AIMPOINTS, but let's look at this honestly and objectively... what are most of those 1.5 million aimpoints doing the vast majority of the time? They are sitting somewhere on a FOB or in an armory seeing little to no use. The Eotechs on SOCOM weapons (and the weapons of of other various members of the armed forces who have been issued or chosen to use them) are getting beat to hell in combat conditions on a regular basis. I will grant that Eotechs have reliability issues you don't see in aimpoints but the technology of an eotech is lightyears beyond that of an aimpoint. You also site people who teach various classes, a lot of the "big names" in the tactical training community have sponsorships, some openly, some not so openly, so I take everything I hear from that community with a grain(sometimes spoon) of salt. The thing that really gets me about the whole Aimpoint vs Eotech debate is the fact that those in the aimpoint camp generally refuse to acknowledge that the vast majority of eotech stories are of successful,functional,reliable,dead on balls accurate optics, and that what issues eotech has had in the past have been addressed, as well as the fact that many "eotech issues" are attributable to the HUGE flood of chinese clones purchased by the inexperienced and then bashed as though they were the real thing (because the user believes they are) when they (no surprise here) fail to function. I like aimpoints, I like eotechs. I have to purchase an optic for my new carbine, I'm going with an XPS, my next purchase is gonna get a T-1. I don't understand why the aimpoint camp is so indignant about this topic, as though using anything other than an aimpoint is some sort of personal afront. You don't see this in the eotech crowd, they are generally willing to acknowledge that they are both fine optics. Let people use what they wish and let their personal experience decide. That is far better than shaming/insulting/fear mongering someone into purchasing an optic that is not what they want. You want to look at this honestly and objectively?? OK.. lets do that.. - Other then SOCOM, name a large organization that has a contract for EO's from L-3.. Name a large contract period from L-3 That is for EO's?? Don't bother.. you can't. -EO's light years ahead in technology... Puhleese... It's tech is long in the tooth. and goes back to Fighter aircraft Gun sights... - You claim that the "big name" instructors basically get paid to endorse other optics... Please, tell me how many of them you know personally?? Which ones are being paid and by who?? You know little of this and your statement clearly shows that. - Blaming EO's well won reputation on Chinese clones.. that's a new one.. points to you for that... .
You are the Typical EO apologist who will defend them in spite of all the factual data that is and has been out their for years...You have ONE... ONE sample and that is what you base your claims on... When you get to see hundreds of guns each year for the last 10-15 years... then maybe you might have a clue, There is no fear mongering or shaming anyone.. it's based off of failures that have been witnessed by many folks over the years... Funny how the Thread Zhukov started faded.... it clearly showed what has been know for years.. that EO's have had issues... You can dismiss them as knock offs or BS spread by paid endorsers all you want.. and it does not change a thing.. oh, and try a paragraph now and then... it makes things bit easier for others.... Oh, and have you seen your Girlfriend lately....?? Eotechs are the official issue optic of the Swiss military, and the Swiss don't skimp on gear. They are also used by any number of various "HSLD" groups: Australian SAS, British SAS,GSG9,French special forces, they are also an issue optic (although not the primary issue optic) to Canadian forces... I could go on and on and on. The technology in Eotechs is very different from old school WWII and vietnam era holographic gunsights, similar? yes. The same? Far from it. I don't have to know someone personally to spot an endorsement. There is a big difference between someone who has influence in the gun community using a certain piece of gear,maybe wearing clothing with their logo on it, and full on balls to the wall shilling for someone. I have said repeatedly I don't have ANY problem with Aimpoints, I acknowledge their strengths and weaknesses the same as I acknowledge the strengths and weaknesses of Eotechs (which at this point has pretty much been narrowed down to battery life). I rightfully blame part of the eotech rep on "clones" I've seen more than one thread where somebody blamed an optic failure on a legit optic and it turned out to be a clone. This has happened with both eotech and your beloved aimpoint. I have never claimed that EOs have NEVER had issues, however if you manage to track down the thread someone else mentioned above me there were HUNDREDS of eo stories in that thread and the vast majority had never had an issue, and those that did had issues that were caused either by A: User error or B: the battery compartment issues that are very well known (and that no one in this thread myself included has questioned) I have not seen a SINGLE complaint with the new series of Eotechs. I have however seen a torture test on another website (google "XPS torture test" ) where someone smacked it against a tree like a bat 50 some odd times, threw it out of the back of a moving vehicle, ran it over, and blasted it with a 12 gauge and it was still running like a top. P.S. If we avoided every item that had issues with its earlier generations ARFCOM wouldnt exist because the reputation of Armalite style rifles was up until relatively recently that of a Jam-O-Matic that couldn't kill a kitten at 10 yards, and we all know that to be BS. We all know where that rep came from, and we all know that steps were taken (and continue to be taken) to remedy any issues the platform has. Technology has growing pains, it's a fact of life. P.P.S. Yes, I have seen her lately. She is keeping yours entertained while you are busy playing Aimpoint fanboy (sorry I couldnt help it that was way too easy)
That being said, I have enjoyed your posts and the fact that you have at least tried(though you have not succeeded) in presenting valid arguments for why Eotechs should not be an option for a go-to optic (along with aimpoint, trijicon, and elcan) OK, that made me chuckle.. And I agree with you that technology needs to mature. Will the XPS finally put L3 over the hurdle and give them the reliability they have been seeking?? The transverse battery design may or may not be the answer... time will tell, but I'm not going to be the guy who finds outs.. we will have to renew this thread in about 5 years and see what happens... 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I wouldnt call an aimpoint a 1xscope? Its still a both eyes open dot sight, no scope mentality needed Compared to the EOTech it is a 1X scope. IMO it is, you seem to see it differently Yes, you can do both eyes open but you do not do it subconsciously and reflexively in a natural way. One must make a conscious effort to both eyes the Aimpoint . Perhaps it is just me that feels that way in the comparison or perhaps the Aimpoint requires an extended training period to adapt to it Aimpoints are excellent I just feel the EOtech is much faster Wulfmann It is just you.. touch and feel and IMO is great and all, but means little from a technical standpoint.. Aimpoints have been the original Both eyes open sight long before EOtech came along.. To say that Aimpoints are a 1x compared to EO's indicates what little experience and training you have had with either of them. and also how little you know and understand about the human anatomy and how your eyes and brain work. Of course, thats just IMHO... Thanks for straightening me out. How about I say you win, you are right, how could I not see the obvious, what would I know, how dumb am I and anything else that seems appropriate? I will still use the EOTech because I feel when Aimpoints are compared to EOTechs they seem like a 1X scope (Not that they are like a 1X scope compared to a 10X Mil-dot just when compared to a EOTech) to me and I do better with the EOTech. I can buy whichever I want and have no loyalty whatsoever to any brand. I have no motive; financial, ego or Kennelration to prefer EOTechs I tried ACOGs, Aimpoints and EOTechs and in my inferior to your intelligence and vast experience found I could site and shoot multiple targets faster and more accurately with the EOTech. I apologize for any distress that causes you Wulfmann |
|
Interesting question on the transverse battery that never occurred to me.
I was considering getting an XPS-2 or 3 but will put that on hold until more feedback comes in on the battery regarding recoil. I liked the fact I could mount a laser closer to the lens meaning it would be invisible in the bottom of the site picture whereas now I can barely see it I no longer have a CR123 phobia now that I can order them in large quantities cheap out of China and have many in reserve. The XPS was cloned and was the closest outward appearance wise of any previous EO-clone. They not only cloned the scope they cloned the box, the manual (I mean identical but perhaps L3 was having those printed in China and the clone people just ordered some from the same printer???) and they even cloned the warranty card with L3 address for service. Well, as you can imagine someone sent one to L3 for warranty repair and they, of course, told him it was a forgery and they were keeping it. I know these become a my dog's bigger/better than your dog thread but there has also been some very good data posted so was worth the few who couldn't resist the pissing contest these generate. In that spirit I drive an E-class not one of those 5 series Bimmers so bring it!!!!
Wulfmann |
|
I guess I am the odd guy out.
I had two of my .22 carbines out the other late afternoon/evening. One was fitted with a 512, while the other had an AP clone. I was shooting at 2in steel targets from about 30 yds..... The reticle on my 512 was harder to use when it got a bit darker - the 4moa dot was easier for me. Just for the record, I have two 512s, three AP micros, three AP M series, and several AP clones. Maybe it is just my older eyes, but unless the lighting is just right the EOT reticle can be a bit busy for me. Of course, if my target was a normal silhouette instead of those 2 in targets it might have been different. |
FWIW, I had an issued 552 on my M249 during my tour in Iraq from 07-09. It never had any issues.....
Loved how it used AAs.......very common batteries.
Our M68s on the other hand...a lot had issues with the brightness knobs coming off. Nothing is without its problems......and there is NOTHING a dedicated Infantryman can't break....hell, we could break a solid sheet of steel, given enough boredom and time.
I still run EOTech as my preferred close quarter optic to this day; I have an EXPS3-0 w/ Magnifier on my PWS MK114- 
|
|
I've used (and still own) a number of Aimpoints & Eotechs over the years and to be honest I've personally seen or experienced more Aimpoint problems (2) than Eotech problems (0). One Aimpoint had a bad rheostat and the other (friend's) had the battery go dead at the range (what're the odds w/Aimpoint battery life? I don't know, *but it happened*).
However, that doesn't mean Eotechs are more reliable than Aimpoints. If Eotechs were as unreliable as some would have us believe, where are the hundreds/thousands of reports of LEO's/Mil killed because their POS Eotechs died at a crucial moment? For those who want/need the ultimate in battery life and arguably ruggedness/reliability then Aimpoint gets the nod. However, that doesn't mean Eotechs aren't rugged/reliable *enough* (as already attested by actual .mil users), especially for civilian use. Sometimes these arguments remind me of the Tier-1 snobbery I sometimes see w/AR's ("If it's not a Colt 6920 then it's not worth owning!"). No-one in their right mind would call my STG-556's "Tier-1" *anything* but after many thousands of rds they've all proven themselves to be rugged and reliable and that's good enough for my needs (YMMV). Tomac |
AR Sponsor