Bartholomew Roberts
Member
It has been my experience that an EOtech is faster close up and optics slowest. This is based on generalizations of watching people shoot for score; but I have never bothered to quantify exactly how much difference it makes...until today.
For our experiment, we needed a place that would let us shoot how we wanted as long as we were responsible (and we also needed to do some long-range shooting and zero from a bench for other unrelated stuff). There is only one public range around DFW that qualifies - Tac-Pro Shooting Center.
After talking with Bill & Alice, we grabbed a range and proceeded with our experiment. The sights being evaluated were irons (Troy folding rear, PRI folding front), a variable scope (Leupold 1-4x shotgun scope), an ACOG (TA11), and an EOtech (552 Rev E). Our test would be a "box drill" from 15yds. For this test, two IDPA targets were set 18" apart. On the buzzer, the shooter would engage with two to the body of each target followed by one to the head of each target (making a "box" with the muzzle). This drill would be done stationary first and then with movement. Each shooter would get up to 30rds to familiarize themselves with the sight and then would execute three stationary drills followed by three moving drills.
We used IDPA targets and the IDPA scoring system (no time added for hits in the center 8" circle or the head, 0.5 seconds added for hits outside those areas, 1.5 seconds for hits on the very outer ring of the silhouette and 2.5 seconds for a miss).
In order to reduce the variables, each shooter would use the same rifle. However, we did get lazy and rather than remove the variable from the rifle it was already on and rezero it, we used an Armalite midlength 16" HBAR with muzzle brake for that portion of the test. The reminder of the test was conducted with my 16" midlength rifle pictured below:
Shooter 1 was me. I have trained regularly with the ACOG for several years now and have three formal carbine classes. I was most unfamiliar with the EOtech 552.
Shooter 2 was a former military small arms instructor and member of the USAF marksmanship unit. He has a lot of time with irons; but is most familiar with Leupold 1-4x shotgun scope. He was least familiar with the EOtech.
Raw Time is time without any penalties for missed shots. Final time is with penalties for dropped shots.
======================================================================================================
Results:
Shooter 1 Irons
Avg. Raw Time: 5.19
Avg. Final Time: 6.52
Leupold 1-4x
Avg. Raw Time: 4.98
Avg. Final Time: 5.31
TA11 ACOG
Avg. Raw Time: 4.78
Avg. Final Time: 5.68
Eotech 552
Avg. Raw Time: 4.37
Avg. Final Time: 5.70
Best Stationary Raw Time: 4.50 w/ Leupold
Best Stationary Final Time: 4.50 w/Leupold
Shooter 1 Moving Irons:
Avg. Raw Time: 5.81
Avg. Final Time: 9.31
Moving Leupold 1-4x
Avg. Raw Time: 5.42
Avg. Final Time: 7.42
Moving TA11 ACOG
Avg. Raw Time: 5.39
Avg. Final Time: 7.05
Moving Eotech 552
Avg. Raw Time: 4.27
Avg. Final Time: 5.43
Best Moving Raw Time: 3.99 w/ Eotech 552
Best Moving Final Time: 4.49 w/ Eotech 552
For our experiment, we needed a place that would let us shoot how we wanted as long as we were responsible (and we also needed to do some long-range shooting and zero from a bench for other unrelated stuff). There is only one public range around DFW that qualifies - Tac-Pro Shooting Center.
After talking with Bill & Alice, we grabbed a range and proceeded with our experiment. The sights being evaluated were irons (Troy folding rear, PRI folding front), a variable scope (Leupold 1-4x shotgun scope), an ACOG (TA11), and an EOtech (552 Rev E). Our test would be a "box drill" from 15yds. For this test, two IDPA targets were set 18" apart. On the buzzer, the shooter would engage with two to the body of each target followed by one to the head of each target (making a "box" with the muzzle). This drill would be done stationary first and then with movement. Each shooter would get up to 30rds to familiarize themselves with the sight and then would execute three stationary drills followed by three moving drills.
We used IDPA targets and the IDPA scoring system (no time added for hits in the center 8" circle or the head, 0.5 seconds added for hits outside those areas, 1.5 seconds for hits on the very outer ring of the silhouette and 2.5 seconds for a miss).
In order to reduce the variables, each shooter would use the same rifle. However, we did get lazy and rather than remove the variable from the rifle it was already on and rezero it, we used an Armalite midlength 16" HBAR with muzzle brake for that portion of the test. The reminder of the test was conducted with my 16" midlength rifle pictured below:
Shooter 1 was me. I have trained regularly with the ACOG for several years now and have three formal carbine classes. I was most unfamiliar with the EOtech 552.
Shooter 2 was a former military small arms instructor and member of the USAF marksmanship unit. He has a lot of time with irons; but is most familiar with Leupold 1-4x shotgun scope. He was least familiar with the EOtech.
Raw Time is time without any penalties for missed shots. Final time is with penalties for dropped shots.
======================================================================================================
Results:
Shooter 1 Irons
Avg. Raw Time: 5.19
Avg. Final Time: 6.52
Leupold 1-4x
Avg. Raw Time: 4.98
Avg. Final Time: 5.31
TA11 ACOG
Avg. Raw Time: 4.78
Avg. Final Time: 5.68
Eotech 552
Avg. Raw Time: 4.37
Avg. Final Time: 5.70
Best Stationary Raw Time: 4.50 w/ Leupold
Best Stationary Final Time: 4.50 w/Leupold
Shooter 1 Moving Irons:
Avg. Raw Time: 5.81
Avg. Final Time: 9.31
Moving Leupold 1-4x
Avg. Raw Time: 5.42
Avg. Final Time: 7.42
Moving TA11 ACOG
Avg. Raw Time: 5.39
Avg. Final Time: 7.05
Moving Eotech 552
Avg. Raw Time: 4.27
Avg. Final Time: 5.43
Best Moving Raw Time: 3.99 w/ Eotech 552
Best Moving Final Time: 4.49 w/ Eotech 552