PDA

View Full Version : Through the lens Eotech v Aimpoint?



shadco
23 May 2009, 16:56
I have an Eotech 512, and the friend I went shooting with today has an Aimpoint M3. The Aimpoint is a 4 moa unit.

Both were well sighted in.

I was shooting off a bench and had the fore end supported by sandbags.

Both units had the brightness adjusted so there was no bloom on the dot, it was bright and clear.

Ammo was Back Hills blue box 62 gr MHP.

I'm considering an Aimpoint so I was looking forward for the chance to shoot with one.

Not considering battery life or the purported difference in reliability, I'm just looking at accuracy.

At 25 yards I had no problem putting either one in the black but then I don't have any issues with iron sights either.

At 50 yds I was at 1.5 inch groups with the 512 and a little over 3 with the M3.

At 100 yds things were worse. My groups with the Eo were less than 3 inches with the M3 they were more like nine inches, it seems to me that the 4 moa is just to coarse when you get out to those kind of distances.

Based on this I have a couple of questions and I would welcome someone setting me straight if I'm missing something here

1. A 2 moa Aimpoint would be better for distances?

2. Are 4 moa Aimpoints better suited close range?

3. What happens with a 3 X Magnifier? Do the dots cover even more of the target?

As an aside which cantilever Aimpoint mount is best suited if you plan on using a 3 X mag and you want cowitness in the lower 3rd?

Cameron
23 May 2009, 17:11
I found the same thing the 4MOA dot vs. the 1MOA in the EOTech means that you are not able to get the accuracy out of the AimPoint that you can out of the EOTech, then I find the EOTech is much faster at CQB range using the 65MOA circle. I suppose logically the 2MOA AimPoint with be obviously be finer and yield tighter groups but fast sight aquisition at close ranges would also suffer.

With Litium batteries in the EOTech, I don't see an advantage at any range with the AimPoint.

rob_s
23 May 2009, 17:39
I can't help but think people are using the Aimpoints incorrrectly somehow with these results, or are looking to verify a foregone conclusion to begin with.

I have never had a problem hitting a 6" steel plate at 200 yards with a 4 MOA Aimpoint.

federalist22
23 May 2009, 17:45
Something you may try with the Aimpoint is that when shooting over 25 yards and especially out at 100 or beyond, dim the dot. By dimming the dot you will not cover your target so much and be able to see much more clearly. Watch the Magpul The Art of the Tactical Carbine video. I found that tip in the video series and it has helped a lot. I own two Aimpoints (ML3 and C3) in 2 MOA dots, one is on a RRA Tactical CAR A4 and the other is on a S&W M&P15ORC (Ares piston), both with 16" barrels. My friend is an EOTech guy and he is considering an Aimpoint after shooting mine......almost forgot, I nailed a prairie dog with mine out past 100 yards--like hitting a 32oz soft drink cup.

shadco
23 May 2009, 18:12
I dimmed the dots on both so there was no bloom, my comment about bright and clear was the weather. I wasn't shooting off a bipod, simply resting the fore end on a stack of sandbags.

I wasn't really trying shoot like I was in a match, I just tried to acquire the target and hit the mark after an exhale and having the sight picture steady.

I'd like to understand what I may have been doing wrong with the Aimpoint but the dot simply obscured more of the target which is why I'm thinking I'd do better with a 2moa unit.

I don't have a fore gone conclusion, I'm trying to figure out if it was me, or anything I was doing. If I already had my mind made up I would not have expended decent ammo trying to figure it out.

It just seems for me that I acquire quicker and have better accuracy Eo compared to a 4 moa AP. I'm not sure a 2 moa AP will aid target acquisition but it does seem intuitive that 2 moa would probably lend to better accuracy.

The AR's might have had a hand in this too. Mine was an RRA with a better trigger than his DPMS but I did try to account for that.

Thanks everyone for your input.

shadco
23 May 2009, 18:14
I can't help but think people are using the Aimpoints incorrrectly somehow with these results, or are looking to verify a foregone conclusion to begin with.

I have never had a problem hitting a 6" steel plate at 200 yards with a 4 MOA Aimpoint.

I'm glad for you.

I'm just trying to make sure I don't buy wrong if I buy an Aimpoint.

m24shooter
23 May 2009, 19:05
1. A 2 moa Aimpoint would be better for distances?
Only to the extent that it would benefit you as the shooter to have a dot half the size.


2. Are 4 moa Aimpoints better suited close range?
The larger the dot, the more it will obscure a greater portion of the target at longer ranges.


3. What happens with a 3 X Magnifier? Do the dots cover even more of the target?
Actually no. You are magnifying the target image as well as the dot image. The dot covers the same amount of real estate, you just have a "bigger" image of both the dot and the target.

Cameron
23 May 2009, 19:20
It is certainly not complicated or surprising, the results you got with the two red dots you mentioned should be the same with all shooters and rifles. A finer dot or reticle will yield a smaller group. It makes sense that the groups will be smaller with the 1MOA dot over the 2MOA and the 2MOA over the 4MOA.
I recently swapped out a scope that had a 1.5MOA center dot on the reticle for one that is 0.3MOA it is much easier to hold tighter groups at distance.

The Aimpoint is an excellent red dot, I have just found that I am a little more accurate at longer ranges, and faster at closer ranges with an EOTech

Cameron

Ryo
23 May 2009, 23:18
Are you going for accuracy at longer ranges? Eotech and Aimpoint are more for CQB rather than long range. Might want to look at other scopes for that purpose.

People say adjust the Aimpoint's brightness down to dim to get a smaller MOA.. but to me that's silly if I'm going to be using it in a combat situation. I need to see my reticle clearly when I move around from lighted and shaded areas. I wouldn't spend time adjusting the brightness settings, I would be looking down range to spot my targets. IMHO.

rob_s
24 May 2009, 04:13
I disagree completely that smaller dot = smaller groups. that's the foregone conclusion I'm referring to. That and the idea that shooting a 3" group vs. a 6" group at 200 yards even matters.

the dot, regardless of MOA, is not completely obscuring a man, or even a 6" steel plate, at 200 yards. Put the dot on the center of the target at anything out past 100 yards (and in some cases even past 25 yards) and pull the trigger.

If you hold the dot on the same spot on the target every time then you're going to get the same sized groups, regardless if the dot is 4 MOA, 2 MOA, or 1 MOA. The only time dot size is the issue is if the target is smaller than the dot, at which point I'd have a hard time figuring out why I'm shooting at it to begin with. We shoot at 4" plates out to about 120 yards, and I cover the plate with the dot and pull the trigger, and hear the ding.

These are not precision optics, and typically you're not shooting precision ammo anyway. Out of curiosity, what kinds of targets were you shooting at?

The static-range target-shooting mentality is what leads to these "issues". Taking a fighting or gaming attitude of getting good hits quickly removes this impediment. If static-range target-shooting is what you do, then I'd maintain that an RDS, regardless of MOA or brand, is not the right tool for the job.

One trick, if you're still having precision issues, at 100 yards, is to use the TOP of the 4 MOA dot as your aiming point. If you zero at 50 yards you're *almost* two inches high at 100 yards. The 4 MOA dot is *almost* 4" at 100 yards. Hence, the center of the 4" dot is 2" low at 100, putting the top of the dot right where the bullet will hit.

shadco
24 May 2009, 05:40
I disagree completely that smaller dot = smaller groups. that's the foregone conclusion I'm referring to. That and the idea that shooting a 3" group vs. a 6" group at 200 yards even matters.

the dot, regardless of MOA, is not completely obscuring a man, or even a 6" steel plate, at 200 yards. Put the dot on the center of the target at anything out past 100 yards (and in some cases even past 25 yards) and pull the trigger.

If you hold the dot on the same spot on the target every time then you're going to get the same sized groups, regardless if the dot is 4 MOA, 2 MOA, or 1 MOA. The only time dot size is the issue is if the target is smaller than the dot, at which point I'd have a hard time figuring out why I'm shooting at it to begin with. We shoot at 4" plates out to about 120 yards, and I cover the plate with the dot and pull the trigger, and hear the ding.

These are not precision optics, and typically you're not shooting precision ammo anyway. Out of curiosity, what kinds of targets were you shooting at?

The static-range target-shooting mentality is what leads to these "issues". Taking a fighting or gaming attitude of getting good hits quickly removes this impediment. If static-range target-shooting is what you do, then I'd maintain that an RDS, regardless of MOA or brand, is not the right tool for the job.

One trick, if you're still having precision issues, at 100 yards, is to use the TOP of the 4 MOA dot as your aiming point. If you zero at 50 yards you're *almost* two inches high at 100 yards. The 4 MOA dot is *almost* 4" at 100 yards. Hence, the center of the 4" dot is 2" low at 100, putting the top of the dot right where the bullet will hit.

Rob thanks

Rather than trying to figure things out by just reading about them on the internet I'm trying some advice I read elsewhere "Go Shoot the Gun"

All I had available was a range to do the testing but I did have access to an Aimpoint. Seems like maybe I should done the zero with the aimpoint, I probably would have been more familiar with the way it behaves. I would move off the target and back on settle and fire for each round downrange, no bipod just bracing the fore end as I think anyone would do if they could in a tactical situation.

Both devices in question are primarily used for CQB, I get that but trying to understand the limits of them is useful.

I would really like to be able to try a Trijicon TR 24 with the triangle and post reticle, I believe it would probably be somewhat slower to acquire the target but a lot better for distance and decent from the overall cost standpoint.

Cameron
24 May 2009, 10:12
the dot, regardless of MOA, is not completely obscuring a man, or even a 6" steel plate, at 200 yards.
I am not sure this makes sense, by the very nature on subtension a 4MOA dot will more than cover an 6" steel plate at 200 yards.

It is not rocket science, a smaller aiming point provides for the ability to accurately shoot smaller targets, the Aimpoint is a great red dot sight and the 4MOA dot works well, however it is not the be all and end all. I prefer the 2MOA dot Aimpoint and even more so the 1MOA dot in the EOTech for shots made as fast as possible at ranges beyond 100m. At close range I find the EOTech circle to be faster than all the dots.

That and the idea that shooting a 3" group vs. a 6" group at 200 yards even matters.
At our 3 gun matches we will regularly shoot clay pigeons at 200yards which is a target only 4.25" across. I 4MOA dot covers approx 8" at 200 yards which makes it much more difficult to hit these as the dot is covering double the target size. Similarly a 1MOA dot is only covering half of the target allowing the shooting to hold on target and even adjust for trajectory depending on zero.

The static-range target-shooting mentality is what leads to these "issues". Taking a fighting or gaming attitude of getting good hits quickly removes this impediment.
With all due respect, it appears that using an Aimpoint at your range, in your game, may be where you are not experiencing the "issues". As a competition shooter, and an infantry combat veteran some of us may still even shoot small targets at 100 and 200yards and we may even shoot out to 500, 600 and even 700 yards where an 4MOA dot covers 20" 24" and 28" respectively and the 1MOA dot only covers 5" 6" and 7". The larger dot makes hitting these target and the small targets at 200yards a lot harder. Of course a magnified optic with a finer reticule, (I use a 5power Leupold SPR reticle which has a 0.3MOA center dot) will make these shots even easier but that is not what we are debating.

A good friend of mine, combat vet from Iraq, firearms instructor and a VERY good rifleman, recently re-thought through the Aimpoint vs. EOTech debate after shooting both under time at ranges from 10-100yards and shooting more accurately and faster with the EOTech, which he doesn't even practice with. Could he make all the hits and do it quickly with an Aimpoint? Sure, but he was faster and more accurate with the EOTech, and he didn't even shave to change batteries in the midlle of a course of fire[:D] Does that mean that Aimpoint owners should sell their optics, of course not it has nothing to do with the value of your chosen optic, but it can be helpful to someone considering the purchase of one or the other to understand the differences and the benefits of each. The EOTech is available with a 1MOA dot and a 65MOA ring, the Aimpoint can come with a 2 or 4 MOA dot. Understanding the difference and considering these, and even shooting with both many times at ranges from 10-400 yards I decided to purchase an EOTech rather than an Aimpoint, because of the "issues" that you mentioned. Different horses for different courses I suppose.

Cameron

Paulo_Santos
24 May 2009, 12:34
In order to get an accurate test, you have to test the same gun with both optics. The gun with the Aimpoint might just not like the ammo it was shooting.

I have both aimpoint M4s and the EOTech 512 and I like them both the same. With a 100 yard zero, once you get past 200 yards, the dot size is meaningless since you will be using holdovers anyway, so the dot will not cover up anything. I have the Aimpoint 3xMagnifier and I can shoot MOA using my handloads and the M4s.

Cameron
24 May 2009, 16:40
With a 100 yard zero, once you get past 200 yards, the dot size is meaningless since you will be using holdovers anyway, so the dot will not cover up anything.

That is why the 50M zero is advocated for a red dot carbine, as the drop at 300M can be less than 3" rather the the 8" afforded by a 100M zero.

I zero my red dot (EOTech) equipped carbines both, 16" and 10.5" for 50M and my scoped rifles both 5.56 and 7.62 for 100M due to the BDC features on the scopes.

Cameron

bigcoastie
25 May 2009, 04:47
I know it's a big mistake at first but most people will zero their aimpoints to basically make the center of the optic where the bullet will hit.

I've gone with the approach of zeroing to the top of the dot, I have 2 T-1 micros which are 4 MOA and a SPOT red dot on my .22 upper which is 6 MOA. I never have a problem since I sight in on the upper edge of the dot, for speed situations oh well I used the center and I'm 1/2" low or something.

To me this is the exact same logic when sighting in with irons, you never would sight in so that the middle of your front sight post is where you point of aim poi is you pick the top most part of the blade. Do the same with your red dots and you'll shoot better with them.

rob_s
25 May 2009, 05:54
At our 3 gun matches we will regularly shoot clay pigeons at 200yards which is a target only 4.25" across.


With all due respect, it appears that using an Aimpoint at your range, in your game, may be where you are not experiencing the "issues".

I find the juxtaposition of these two statements... interesting.

shadco
25 May 2009, 07:42
This has been an interesting discussion, I want to thank everyone for their input, it has helped.

I was able o find an Aimpoint C3 from Grant with a Bobro 180 mount, this seems to be the best Aimpoint setup based on my needs, I won't be diving, and I'm not over there so to speak.

I don't have much tied up in my Eo and the C3 seems to represent a good entry point into Aimpoint's lineup. I'm anxious to the them both out to the range, I'm hoping the Aimpoint prevails IMO since the rig could stand to lose a little wieght.

Cameron
25 May 2009, 10:01
I find the juxtaposition of these two statements... interesting.
I knew a different perspective would get you thinking.

Cameron

Eric
26 May 2009, 00:30
I was able o find an Aimpoint C3 from Grant with a Bobro 180 mount, this seems to be the best Aimpoint setup based on my needs, I won't be diving, and I'm not over there so to speak.
I think the C3 is one of the better values going on right now. I picked up a lightly used 4MOA C3 last year and have no negative issues to report. It's not on my duty carbine, but I'd have no problem dropping it on if the need came up.