I will have my AR battle rifle in a couple weeks after it is completed and am begining the hunt for a good optic. My budget is around $400. Thanks in advance for the input.
- Thread starter the_dude8541
- Start date
For fixed, check out the Burris AR Prism sights, variable Leupold Mark AR 1-4
A true battle rifle just looking to place hits on a target 300 and in I would only use a red dot of choice.
Absent budget constraints... US Optics SR-8 1-8.
A good used Aimpoint.
If your looking for a red dot, the aimpoint pro falls into your price range.
Aimpoint, or acog.
Eotechs break
end of debate
Eotechs break
end of debate
USO are great optics, but out of budget for this build. I have an SN3 on my bolt gun. I've looked at eotech, but have mixed reviews. A red dot is probably what I'll go with.
What's it chambered in? What length barrel?
How far out do you want to reliably shoot? What's the purpose--home defense, making little groups on paper, 3-gun, hunting, night vision in use, etc.?
At the outset--if you have astigmatism you may find red dot sights are not finely resolved to your eye. It's a known issue, and it affects me. Not a big deal at CQ, but annoying at distance.
EOTech: The big ass circle-dot reticle is great for CQ shooting in good lighting--using your own white light or daylight. The wider field of view can be a bit more forgiving than Aimpoints. That's about all I can say it does well. Now for the suck.
Battery life is laughable compared to the more recent Aimpoints.
User interface:
- The circle-dot intensity is not easily adjusted on the fly. Rear-mounted button models are the worst. The brightness steps are useless for quick changes; they're too little brightness increase/decrease. Usually you're wanting to move in big steps one way or the other.
- It powers down after 4 or 8 hrs. No way to override.
Low light use, circle-dot reticle:
- If you adjust the reticle brightness for low light use it is useless when you hit the white light. It almost disappears. Having to press the brightness button more than a few times sucks. Not a quick reaction sight.
- If you adjust for white light use it is too flippin bright In low light. Properly mounted--well forward of your rear iron--it dominates your view. So much for discernment/ID until you hit the white light. And if you have it turned way up in the dark you are carrying around a dim little beacon.
I tried the 1 MOA-only dot version. Using a 200 lumen light indoors necessitated higher brightness. This cause reflections on the upper edge of the glass. From low-ready it would grab my attention before the dot came into sight. And of course there was the low level reflection inside anyway. I didn't like the small size of the 1 MOA. Didn't even keep it for a week.
The last few years have seen a marked improvement in reliability. My old agency had a dozen or so issued; N-battery (old style "skin" buttons) to AA-battery models (rubber buttons). IIRC two went tits up but the rest didn't have problems.
I think this article says it best:
http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=1526
Evaluate your quick release mount/co-witness needs.
All that said... I think they're nice competition optics. Quick to acquire, nice in improvised shooting positions. The user interface issues are not a problem. But it's not my first choice for home or patrol use.
Aimpoint:
Reliable, LONG battery life. Measured in years. Reasonable adjustment speed. Dot is large enough to acquire quickly, but not as overpowering in low light at reasonable brightness levels (compared to EOTech).
Multitude of mounts available... some Aimpoint models don't come with mounts.
Micro size T and H models have the same electronics as full-size M models, just in a more compact/lighter form.
They have a narrower view than an EOTech, and the T and H are a bit less forgiving in improvised positions.
I don't like the clutter of knobs, caps surrounding the M series view, but it's not a huge deal. The M4s model moves the battery compartment to the bottom side, but at the expense of brightness adjustability for some.
Scopes:
Right now I'm big on 1-4X scopes. They work well from 0-500yds for me in 3-gun. They have less surrounding clutter than an Aimpoint M; in fact it is a thin, fuzzy ring. The occulars are larger than 30mm, so they have a nice, bright field of view and the caps aren't visible. Many models have very little distortion at 1x, easily used with both eyes open.
Illumination is weak compared to red dot sights. Most models have usable brightness in low light, but it usually disappears in bright ambient light. The saving grace is the reticle never needs batteries and is always there.
Fogging/icing can be a big issue as with any optic. Offset irons help for closer range, but it's not a free ride.
Scopes don't have the astigmatism/precision problem of red dot sights.
You get what you pay for. I've owned Burris TAC30, XTR, SWFA SS. The TAC30 and maybe MTAC are in your price range; drop reticle doesn't really make 500yds for carbines. I thought the XTR was not much of an upgrade over the TAC30/MTAC--other than the BDC reticle (Gen 2) of the XTR. I found a deal on the XTR, intended for a 2nd rifle, but was disappointed when compared to the $150 more for an SWFA 1-4x.
If you're seriously considering a scope, I'd recommend saving for a new or used SWFA 1-4X. The HD glass is great, mil dot reticle usable for more than one caliber, and it's built much better. I prefer the capped version; my zero needs to be protected. I find the donut quicker for me than the crosshair version. YMMV. I got mine used for $625.
EOTech: The big ass circle-dot reticle is great for CQ shooting in good lighting--using your own white light or daylight. The wider field of view can be a bit more forgiving than Aimpoints. That's about all I can say it does well. Now for the suck.
Battery life is laughable compared to the more recent Aimpoints.
User interface:
- The circle-dot intensity is not easily adjusted on the fly. Rear-mounted button models are the worst. The brightness steps are useless for quick changes; they're too little brightness increase/decrease. Usually you're wanting to move in big steps one way or the other.
- It powers down after 4 or 8 hrs. No way to override.
Low light use, circle-dot reticle:
- If you adjust the reticle brightness for low light use it is useless when you hit the white light. It almost disappears. Having to press the brightness button more than a few times sucks. Not a quick reaction sight.
- If you adjust for white light use it is too flippin bright In low light. Properly mounted--well forward of your rear iron--it dominates your view. So much for discernment/ID until you hit the white light. And if you have it turned way up in the dark you are carrying around a dim little beacon.
I tried the 1 MOA-only dot version. Using a 200 lumen light indoors necessitated higher brightness. This cause reflections on the upper edge of the glass. From low-ready it would grab my attention before the dot came into sight. And of course there was the low level reflection inside anyway. I didn't like the small size of the 1 MOA. Didn't even keep it for a week.
The last few years have seen a marked improvement in reliability. My old agency had a dozen or so issued; N-battery (old style "skin" buttons) to AA-battery models (rubber buttons). IIRC two went tits up but the rest didn't have problems.
I think this article says it best:
http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=1526
Evaluate your quick release mount/co-witness needs.
All that said... I think they're nice competition optics. Quick to acquire, nice in improvised shooting positions. The user interface issues are not a problem. But it's not my first choice for home or patrol use.
Aimpoint:
Reliable, LONG battery life. Measured in years. Reasonable adjustment speed. Dot is large enough to acquire quickly, but not as overpowering in low light at reasonable brightness levels (compared to EOTech).
Multitude of mounts available... some Aimpoint models don't come with mounts.
Micro size T and H models have the same electronics as full-size M models, just in a more compact/lighter form.
They have a narrower view than an EOTech, and the T and H are a bit less forgiving in improvised positions.
I don't like the clutter of knobs, caps surrounding the M series view, but it's not a huge deal. The M4s model moves the battery compartment to the bottom side, but at the expense of brightness adjustability for some.
Scopes:
Right now I'm big on 1-4X scopes. They work well from 0-500yds for me in 3-gun. They have less surrounding clutter than an Aimpoint M; in fact it is a thin, fuzzy ring. The occulars are larger than 30mm, so they have a nice, bright field of view and the caps aren't visible. Many models have very little distortion at 1x, easily used with both eyes open.
Illumination is weak compared to red dot sights. Most models have usable brightness in low light, but it usually disappears in bright ambient light. The saving grace is the reticle never needs batteries and is always there.
Fogging/icing can be a big issue as with any optic. Offset irons help for closer range, but it's not a free ride.
Scopes don't have the astigmatism/precision problem of red dot sights.
You get what you pay for. I've owned Burris TAC30, XTR, SWFA SS. The TAC30 and maybe MTAC are in your price range; drop reticle doesn't really make 500yds for carbines. I thought the XTR was not much of an upgrade over the TAC30/MTAC--other than the BDC reticle (Gen 2) of the XTR. I found a deal on the XTR, intended for a 2nd rifle, but was disappointed when compared to the $150 more for an SWFA 1-4x.
If you're seriously considering a scope, I'd recommend saving for a new or used SWFA 1-4X. The HD glass is great, mil dot reticle usable for more than one caliber, and it's built much better. I prefer the capped version; my zero needs to be protected. I find the donut quicker for me than the crosshair version. YMMV. I got mine used for $625.
Something along these lines... start saving... not being a smart ass, serious suggestion.
Last edited:
I'm a big fan of the SWFA for 'inexpensive' optics
http://swfa.com/SWFA-SS-MRAD-Scopes-C4225.aspx
and the Vortex PST's are even more 'inexpensive' for entry level stuff
http://swfa.com/Vortex-Viper-PST-Rifle-Scopes-C2860.aspx
A low power scope does great work close, and good work out to perimeter distances around 500M, in other words, perfect for a battle caliber rifle
http://swfa.com/SWFA-SS-MRAD-Scopes-C4225.aspx
and the Vortex PST's are even more 'inexpensive' for entry level stuff
http://swfa.com/Vortex-Viper-PST-Rifle-Scopes-C2860.aspx
A low power scope does great work close, and good work out to perimeter distances around 500M, in other words, perfect for a battle caliber rifle
I tend to stray from the pack a little. As good as red dots and eotechs are for speed, frankly they tend to shoot accuracy for sh&t. I prefer good old glass. If you search you would be surprised what you can find for little money. Leupold has a couple 1.25-4 or 1.5-4 scopes. I found a great deal on a Leupold VX-R just because it said zombie on the side of it. The thing works great on my Scar and let's me shoot fast at close range and under an inch at 100 yards. I also have a Burris XTR 1-4 that is awesome. Both of those have lit reticles. At the shop we had a Burris MTAC for under 400.00 again a great scope for an AR-15. Any of those I would take any day over a red dot or eotech. My .02
to truly get the best out of your battle, go with a countersniper. You not only are getting your battle on with bad guys and zombies but also a nice little inner battle with your optic trying to get it to function, I dont always scope my battle rifle, but when I do, I want it to be a steamy piece of shit.
For the money and based on what you said you need would be a good set of Iron sights. If you already have those then great but that would be a start. Troys would be the first thing that belong on a battle rifle then an optic. With your budget you don't have much room after you buy a good mount also. A used aimpoint if you can find one. The Eotechs do have issues and that is a known fact. I have seen many service people use them and go through three or more in the sandbox so I would make sure it looked well taken care of and still know that they can have issues even then. A millet in a good mount is going to eat up every bit of your budget so like I said get some Troys.
IMO for a combat rifle (self defense / work gun) EoTechs are the best optics. Once you learn how to use the reticle it is crazy fast and very easy to change from accurate distance shots to doing accurate shots under 10 yards. Yes you can't leave it on all year like the aimpoint but if you take care of your equipment and regularly swap batteries (something you should be doing even with the aimpoints to prevent any possible corrosion from a bad battery) it is a non issue. Mine has been beat to hell on a work rifle and has yet to fail me so I don't think the current rev. F models tend to break or fail like some claim. FWIW I have personally seen an aimpoint fail and not function at all during a training class. I'm not saying they are bad but its proof anything can fail. I've never seen a EoTech fail but have heard a few stories on the internet usually right next to the articles about how the M4 sucks and fails 90% of the time in combat... I'm sure there have been problems and know for a fact pre rev f ones failed often but now days I think they are very reliable as are aimpoints.
The problem is what I like you may not like. Your choice is going to come down to preference and your intended use. If you want accuracy out at the range a 1-4 power will be best for you and will still be versatile for defense use. If its going to be run as a fast defense carbine a rds in whatever flavor you prefer will be best. Decide what mission you're trying to fill then get out and handle and try to shoot with whatever type you decide go go with before making a decision. Either way you will be happy with any of the quality optics that the other guys have mentioned on here.
The problem is what I like you may not like. Your choice is going to come down to preference and your intended use. If you want accuracy out at the range a 1-4 power will be best for you and will still be versatile for defense use. If its going to be run as a fast defense carbine a rds in whatever flavor you prefer will be best. Decide what mission you're trying to fill then get out and handle and try to shoot with whatever type you decide go go with before making a decision. Either way you will be happy with any of the quality optics that the other guys have mentioned on here.
Last edited:
I run an EoTech on my 16" 308 and have hit human sized silhouettes from room close and out to 450 shooting prone off bipod. Was not dissecting a target for groups or such but the 4 of us hit the silhouettes at 60% or so out to 450. Have to learn to use the center dot and the bottom half of the ring. Not saying much but it can be done with practice and some learning.
Iron sights! If you're a young guy. Scopes are for long shots, or us "Old guys".The suggestions are good. Or, save for a Trijicon AcogX4. Just me.The "beauty" of the AR, is it's stellar shooting. Any "Idiot" can pick one up and shoot 100yds., and hit the kill Zone, with open sights. That's it's realm. After 100, bring on the optics.4X to 200, and on, from there. When "these plastic Rifles" first came out, I shot one, that my cousin bought. We shot snapping turtles, at 125yds., on our farm pond, with open sights. We killed every one we shot at.I was 24, at the time. Good eyes.
Last edited:
Fact. I'll never buy another EOTech again. The battery life wasn't anything to call home about and I had to replace 2 battery compartments before I got sick of it and sold it. I picked up an Aimpoint T-1 and its awesome.... and much lighter than the EOTech.
I do, however have an NF NXS 1-4x on my SCAR17 that I feel is a good fit. It would be even better with an offset RMR. I think the new Vortex Razor HD 1-6x (I'm pretty sure that's the mag level) would be the best fit fit since its a FFP optic and has an illuminated ret dot. The bad part is it will cost you your first born child.
Last edited:
Burris Mtac 1.5-6 in a pepr mount. almost a red dot on the low end, 6x on the top. 7.62 calibrated reticle (for what its worth). Cheap, effective, pefect for hunting, or 3 gun.
Not to hijack the thread, but I have yet to see a broken EOTech or hear a first hand account of one taking a shit.
I guess my EOTechs must be broken then, cuz they have both always worked flawlessly.
The crap that gets spewed on the 'net....
One more fan of the Aimpoint PRO here. Keep one on the 50 Beowulf and have had zero issues....
On my AR15 I had an Eotech 517 -- It was a little beastly but, it's definitely been dropped a few times and worked flawlessly up to being sold.
In fact, it worked so well, I've been debating getting another one for my 308. -- Have seen some lemons, though -- But, that can happen to anything.
I'd suggest Aimpoint/Eotech or ACOG though.
In fact, it worked so well, I've been debating getting another one for my 308. -- Have seen some lemons, though -- But, that can happen to anything.
I'd suggest Aimpoint/Eotech or ACOG though.
I have to agree, sorry if I am spewing more crap on the net but I have bought one Eotech and its broken.
I have an Eotech (forget the model) and the magnifier. It has worked well for my needs, but I don't use it professionally. The intensity has to be adjusted just right for me or the display blurs when I look at it. This makes it a little aggravating to use.
ERP WRONG.
There is a reason the tip of the spear (IE men who shoot people for a living and live in a shoothouse) use eotechs.
They are every bit as durable as aimpoints and absent a battery that lasts 10 years or is lighter (h1/t1), they fall behind in every category.
Comparing and 10 year old eotech model to a T1 is pretty disingenuous to downright ignorant.
Compare a EXPS 2 or 3 to the T1/H1/M4.
IMO, having handled hundreds of aimpoints/eot/acogs, eotechs win on value and targeting. New Eotechs are JUST as reliable and durrable as aimpoints. Don't listen to bullshit spread by people who's shooting experince is dirt piles.
IMO, Aimpoints are highly overpriced for very simple technology and branding. Eotechs are cheaper, much more technologicaly advanced and quicker on target. Many dont like to shoot through a tube, or a tiny ass tube like the micros.
Shoot them all before you buy. No one can tell you what to buy but you. You will save money and frustration in the long run by getting what you want. Any of the options (ap/eo/acog/1-4x) are viable options.
Earlier models had battery housing issues that were rectified MANY years ago.
I guess you're right
Good call using a picture from about 10 years ago when EOTechs were new on the scene and hadn't developed a reputation for breaking often. SF gets some cutting edge gear and will use it until it proves to be crap or until something better comes along. I would be willing to bet none of those EOTechs in this picture are still in service.
First hand experience you want? When I got to a team I went through all my optics and took them to our maintenance/repair section (EMS). Out of 12 ACOGs (which were older than the EOTechs), 2 different generations of EOTechs to include the recent SOPMOD versions totalling 24, and 12 of the new Elcan sights: IIRC 2 or 3 of the ACOGs were broken (out of 12), 3 of the EOTechs were working (out of 24), and 2 of the Elcans were broken.
Now I can't speak to how the optics were treated as it was before my time, but the ACOGs for a fact have been around longer and had a 17% failure rate compared to a 88% failure rate for the EOTechs. Truth be told I wasn't thrilled with the Elcans since they are new and failing already but those ACOGs have my respect.
I will not mount an EOTech on anything my life depends on.
I'm not sure what tip you were riding or what shoothouse you lived in.
We had ACOGs, a couple RCO ACOGs, and aimpoints. I have owned an ACOG and 2 eotechs. I had a 512 with a magnifier and that was a heavy awkward mufucker, beat the piss out of it for a couple years and never changed the batteries, now I have a xps3 that hasn't broken yet. Expensive batteries, and adjusting brightness is irritating sometimes but overall I think they hold up pretty well and are good for the price.
Still a little curious why someone with 8541 in their name is asking for opinions on optics for his "AR battle rifle"..
Everything breaks.
If anecdotal evidence from the internet of things that break kept me from buying that product, I wouldn't buy cars or houses, or pencils or cell phones or computers or guns or staplers.
My POINT is the crap like "EOTechs break. End of discussion."
As hinted above, that's just ignorant. If anyone wants to be ignorant themselves, its a free country. But when they want to impose their ignorance on the whole world - and especially on people who are seeking legit opinions / information - well, then, somebody gotta say something bout that.
EOTechs are well known to be junk. Which is why they demand nearly the highest price of any red dot on the market.
Cuz people know they are junk, and like wasting their money.
DO people even think before they post?
There's nothing ingenious or ignorant about it. Its just the personal experience that I've had and why I won't buy another EOTech again. Both my personal EOTech and the ones my unit uses get broken all the time.
I will agree with you and say that the target acquisition and field of view is better in an EOTech, but when it comes to reliability, I'd rather pay another $150 and get a T-1 than spend $450-$500 on a sight that I'm going to have to send back to EOTech to get repaired a year after I purchased it and then replace another battery compartment on it 6 months later. They're not bad optics at all, but I feel that there is better to be had for the money.
My compML2 is about the same price as most models of EOTechs that civilians will buy, has a field of view that is very comparable to the EOTech's. It has jumped from gun to gun (starting on my .50 Beowulf) and been beaten on a lot harder than my EOTech was and is still ticking.
None of what I'm saying is Gospel, its just my opinion and what I've seen from personal experience. Take it or leave it.
Last edited:
Yes Garand, I do think before I post. Perhaps you missed the rest of my post which included rational thought because it didn't fit your desires.
Good to know that you apparently think price is the true measure of something's value/worth/ability, and that reviews from actual users mean nothing as long as the item in question is sufficiently expensive.
Do you think before you post?
Good to know that you apparently think price is the true measure of something's value/worth/ability, and that reviews from actual users mean nothing as long as the item in question is sufficiently expensive.
Do you think before you post?
Last edited:
I do think before I post. I think your 88% failure rate is either purely anecdotal. Or BS.
Anything that actually failed that much on any sort of global scale would NEVER be able to demand the prices the EOTech does, globally.
I also think you should carefully read what people actually post, and take care not to mischaracterize it.
Last edited:
I'm putting a mark4 2.5x8 on my new core 30 RL Tac and I will love it near and far
Sounds like user error to me. Perhaps better training would help? [evil grin]
These threads often end up addressing cross purposes.
A home defense gun is really worlds different than a 3-gun gun.
One optic can't really be highly effective in both situations.
A home defense gun is really worlds different than a 3-gun gun.
One optic can't really be highly effective in both situations.
Aimpoint CompM4. Throw a 3x mag behind it if you so desire
Ah, didn't see the budget constraint there. Aimpoint regardless. Built like tanks and run forever. Went the EO-Tech route the first time...never again.
That's probably the case....lol
I have heard other anecdotal evidence of .mil units with higher EOTech failure rates that were investigated. TUrns out, due to the aluminum shield on the EOTech, soldiers thought they could slam the things on the deck, and generally abuse them as if they were not sensitive electronic devices.
Comparatively, the Aimpoints were treated much more delicately - being they had no protective alum shield surrounding them.
Thus I view with suspicion these high failure rates I hear about. An do beleive it an be a training issue, in some cases.
I will def give anything other than the EOTech the edge in battery life.
Interesting. We have had a few that had the glass broken on them, so the GG&G flip up caps and armor would've been a good investment. I had that installed on my EOTech and it kept the glass clean and scratch free. Other than that, it seems that the battery compartments are the biggest issue. We have replaced a ton of those.
We don't bounce our optics off the deck because that's retarded and you should take care of your stuff. Just because its advertised to be rugged doesn't mean you take it to the extreme and bounce it off the concrete until it breaks. I think that the only training required for an EOTech is how to turn it on and off, turn the brightness up or down, use NV mode, replace the batteries and sight it in. All those can be figured out by looking at the damn thing. Training isn't required to know that you shouldn't beat the shit out of your stuff for no reason. That's just common sense. Both my unit and I take care of our equipment because neither one of us have the funds to be replacing shit all the time.
