I see most Aimpoint (esp T1s) dots as a 12 moa pixilated stripe. BAD. I find the EOTech dot better, still pixilated pretty good but more or less round . . . errr star shaped I guess.Originally Posted by GJM
I've seen some crazy good offhand shooting on a chest sized steel plate at 200 yards by Frank Proctor with an EOT. I'm guessing his vision is pretty tight though.
“Remember, being healthy is basically just dying as slowly as possible,” Ricky Gervais
I've never done any timer comparisons between my EOTech and Aimpoint. Given how lopsided my shooting time has been between the two, I'm not confident that it would be an apples-to-apples comparison, as noted by Rob.
So if the threshold is hard data, then I readily admit I cannot adequately make a case for my preference.
With that said, it is my perception that my eye locates the EO reticle more easily. If it's just a matter of shouldering the rifle from a ready position, both reticles are the same since I'm indexing to the target (just like a good drawstroke). If it's a matter of my eye and the optic meeting from weird angles, however, the EO just grabs my attention easier. This can be mitigated if I increase the brightness of the Aimpoint, but then it's brighter than I prefer.
Another difference for me is precision of shot placement. With the Aimpoint, my brain wants a more precise aiming point before it sends the "go" signal to my finger. With the EO, at appropriate ranges, my brain sees the big ring inside the aiming area and sends the "go" signal without chasing an unnecessarily high level of precision.
I absolutely realize that this last issue could be fully eliminated through training. After all, "seeing what you need to see" is not a new concept, and applies to any sight system. But I find that it's easier for my brain to see what it needs to see on the EO reticle, despite spending more trigger time behind the Aimpoints.
Finally... and this is a huge one... Aimpoints "dots" look like crazy stars to me. Even wearing prescription glasses, I don't get a crisp dot (not sure if that means I need a better prescription, but everything else in the world looks crisp as hell when I wear them). The EO reticle is vastly superior for my eyes though: I actually see a dot.
Again, I still prefer to mount Aimpoints on my carbines and continue to use them, despite my astigmatism. If I need maximum precision, I peek through the aperture on my rear BUIS, turning the star back into a dot. When I don't need maximum precision I accept the blurriness of the star and drive on.
I would guess the exact same thing, and think you make good points in your post.
Don't know how universal my experience is, but the EO is significantly better for me.
"If you run into an a**hole in the morning, you ran into an a**hole. If you run into a**holes all day, you're the a**hole." - Raylan Givens
Large window is very forgiving of eye placement, the reticle is very fast at close range, the dot is sub-MOA (as small as your eyes, or your eyes + magnifier, can resolve, since it's diffraction-limited) for precision.Why does everybody prefer the EO reticle?
I'm asking because I know several people that when pinned down to answer have never put things on the timer, they just think it looks cool, or they "feel" that it's better.
The downside is that it takes more energy to generate the hologram than it does to simply light a 2MOA LED (Aimpoint), which is why even the 2xCR123 models only have about 1000 hours of battery life. And the laser/diffraction grating setup is a little more complex and bulky than a regular RDS.
The EOTech dot is sharper to my slightly astigmatic eyes than the Aimpoint dot as well.
Moreover, I find the circle around the dot of the EO reticle is useful for dealing with sight offset issues at close range and leading moving targets.
I DID compare the eotech and aimpoints on the clock. Despite hating the way the eotech looks to me, my times were pretty much identical. Since there was essentially no difference, I go with the one I prefer and also happens to have the battery advantage etc etc.
Shane
Because of my particular astigmatism, I see the Aimpoint dot in my R1 as a jagged line that is about 6MOA long. Using my buddy's Eotech, I see a perfect dot inside a clear circle.
I still use the R1 due to the superior battery life and that it never turns off. But if Eotech, or someone else, could get their reticule with the Aimpoint pluses, I would switch in a heartbeat.
I went to T1 after having issues on several units with EO durability. Battery compartment springs seals etc....
The huge majority of people I talked with at Pat Rogers carbine classes favored Aimpoint for reliability and durability. I still like the EO 1moa dot and 65 moa circle better but use T1 as my go to.
Even before I got my eyeballs lasered I could see both the EO and AP reticles without too much issue, so I never had that problem.
I have broken three personal EOs, and seen over 20 others shit the bed.
On long call outs the EO will auto-off, that can be a problem. The EO eats batteries at an alarming rate. They die in recoil, battery boxes go TU, etc. I never have to bail out of the car and turn my Aimpoint on, all I have to do is rack the charging handle.
I have pinned some folks down on the "why" issue and basically it comes down to they think the reticle on the EO looks cooler.
I have not noted the 1 or 2 or 4 MOA makes a damn bit of difference in accuracy at distance for me.
I see Aimpoints as a bloom/starburst, especially as the brightness goes up. The EoTech is noticeably pixellated (IIRC, that has to do with how it's projected), but otherwise sharp.
I'm jealous
"If you run into an a**hole in the morning, you ran into an a**hole. If you run into a**holes all day, you're the a**hole." - Raylan Givens
Reply With Quote