Eotech vs Aimpoint vs ? vs Iron sights

[Aluisious]

My rifle currently runs with iron sights on the A2 carrying handle. It's pretty good that way, I only shoot at 100 yards, and I'm keeping Wolf in a 6 inch inch circle. Good enough shooting for me. But I get the "gadget" itch sometimes, to buy something fancy and shoot with that.

I assume someone is using at least one of all these devices, so how do you think they compare?

A scope with magnification at 100 yards is kind of lame, so I'm not really worrying about that.

[Pulsar]

I'm a fanboy o the eotech and I won't deny it. I love that the front lens can be completely covered in mud and it still works. It's also set up so that when placed on AR's the iron sights can be used with out removing the eotech.

[6172crew]

The EOTech has a 1moa dot that works great for 100 yards, the Aimpoint is 2,3. or 4 moa depending what model you buy.

They work great for close fast pumpkin killing. I was killing soda cans at 100 yards using some 69 grain win white box...I just bought 2 used Aimpoints the other day and will be putting up the x2 one in the for sale section when it gets here. I paid 100 bucks and will look to get the same out of it.

I just needed the comp xd but it was a package deal.

[mblat]

I think that the only think that Aimpoint has on EOTech as ranges you described and with rifle you've described is longer (much longer) battery life.
In all other aspects EOTech seems to be better.

Here is what I think good comparation.

http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2005/09/29/aimpoint_v_eotech_deathmatch/

[CWM4A1]

I would recommand EoTech 512. It's cheaper then 552 (night vision compatible, assuming you won't need that), uses AA battery so battery is pretty easy to come by. One nice thing about EoTech is it's center dot is only 1MOA, with a 65MOA circle around it. With 1MOA dot it's easier to do more precise shot if needed, compare to Aimpoint ML2's 4MOA dot; and for quick close quarter shot, if your target is in the 65MOA circle you are good to pull that shot. Aimpoint does have the advantage of longer battery life though.

[zenthemighty]

Pros and Cons:

Eotech Pros:
Nice Reticle design. Beats a "Dot" any day.
Robust Design. Will work with cracked/Dirty Glass, etc.

Eotech Cons
Fuzzy Reticle Its not Crisp.
Limitted Battery life
Heavier than the Aimpoint


Aimpoint Pros:
Light
Batteries last into the 1000's of hours. The batteries are also very small, making it easy to store replacements on the weapon itself.
Crisp Dot

Aimpoint Cons:
With the exception of its low power consumption circuitry, it really is 1980's technology.
Aimpoint Is a tad more expensive than the Eotech.

[Aluisious]

Any ideas on how to mount an Eotech to "cowitness" iron sights with a fixed carrying handle and standard hand guards? I've seen a funny rail addon that screws into the carrying handle and suspends a rail in front of the handle, would that work?

Or is there a cheapish way to get a rail forearm?

[CWM4A1]

Yeah, that would work. You pretty much described ARMS #39.

http://www.armsmounts.com/catalog.php?action=124&item_id=41

[Aluisious]

Yeah, that would work. You pretty much described ARMS #39.

http://www.armsmounts.com/catalog.ph...124&item_id=41

How do you see the iron sights with that thing on the handle?

Does it have a groove down the center or something? From the side it looks like it would block the view.

[maxicon]

Any ideas on how to mount an Eotech to "cowitness" iron sights with a fixed carrying handle and standard hand guards? I've seen a funny rail addon that screws into the carrying handle and suspends a rail in front of the handle, would that work?

Or is there a cheapish way to get a rail forearm?

A railed handguard is more flexible and allows co-witnessing, but more expensive. Here's how I mounted a clonepoint on my DPMS .22 A2 upper, giving perfect co-witnessing:



The handguard is a First Samco M44L, and has worked fine on the .22, but some folks worry about them on a centerfire upper. YHM's rails are very affordable, and Midwest Industry's are a bit more. It goes up quickly from there.

One thing to consider for a railed handguard is how much work you want to do to put it on and whether you want it free-floated. 2 piece ones are quick and easy to put on, just like a regular handguard. Next step of difficulty requires dremeling off the delta ring - still not too difficult. After that comes needing to remove the front sight, and some, like the very popular LaRue and many free-floaters, require removing the barrel.

[bobfried]

Take this advice:

Buy a flat top upper if you must have optics.

The goosenecks mounts are mediocre at best, you are basically slapping on a long piece of metal that's leveraged, great for moving rocks, not for mounting sights.

Mounting anything on anytype of railed handguard isn't a good idea. Even a quality piece like the Larue FF isn't optimal for optic mounting. Even as little as 100 yards your looking at some serious deflection and warping when you hold on the front end and it heats up after several rounds. How serious is this?

1 MOA is 1 Minute of Angle at 100 yards which is approximate to 1.047197580733 inches. To understand what it means let's view it as something more visual. A circle is 360 degrees. 1 Degrees is 60 minutes. So a minute of angle is 1/60 of a degree. Now if you have a projactor handy with you, you'll realize that's beyond small. Your hands on a free floated fore-end will easily deflect it several MOA, that's a few inches at 100 yards. Heating up the upper with firing will create further warping between the reciever, barrel and rail, this can lead to several DEGREES of shifting. What does this mean to you? Well it means that on a GOOD free floated rail fore-end you are looking at potentially being off by several FEET at 100 yards in the appropriate conditions.

The above upper posted by Maxicon with the plastic Samco handguards will have more than several degrees of deflection and warping when in any type of usage. Not to mention it can potentially shift by tenth of an inch in any direction, further exasperating the situation.

It's all quite complicated and a bunch of voodoo magic, but there's a reason why the flat top upper was concieved.

[m1371]

How do you see the iron sights with that thing on the handle?

Does it have a groove down the center or something? From the side it looks like it would block the view.

The ARMS #39 has a hollowed out section of the mount that allows you to use the iron sights. Not the greatest set-up in the world, IMO. Tends to give you a "tunnel vision" effect.

If you're going to run an optic on a carry-handle AR, you're pretty much limited in your options.

[Aluisious]

Yeah, I'll just wait for a day when I have a flat top upper. May as well do it right if at all, eh?

In the meantime, I'll just focus my beady little eye on that front sight.

[grywlfbg]

On a flat-top upper I'd recommend the RRA Dominator mount w/ an EOTech. It has a built-in rear iron sight and gives a slight rise to the EOTech so you end up w/ a lower 1/3 cowitness in the EOTech.



I use the EOTech for close-up work and the irons for distance although I am looking forward to the new EOTech flip-away 4x magnifier and going w/ an optic-only setup for rifle competition.

All that to say there may be a Dominator mount in the for-sale forum in a few weeks

Chris

[MrLogan]

I prefer the Aimpoint myself, as the dot is crisp and is easier for me to acquire quickly. I really like that the EOTech allows for a wider field of view, but I really don't like how the reticle is kind of fuzzy. The image is not crisp like the Aimpoint's dot, and makes it just slightly more difficult for me to acquire.