Aimpoint Comp ML2 vs. Eotech 552 Holosight

[dave3006]

I have a standard Mini-14 with a DRC shortened barrel and an Ultimak scout rail. I bought (and returned) an Eotech Holosight #552. Instead, I recently installed the Aimpoint Comp ML2. I like the Aimpoint MUCH better. Here is why:

1. You can see your iron sights at the bottom of the tube. With the Eotech, the iron sights are impossible to use. Big advantage if the scope goes out.

2. The Aimpoint mounts much lower to the bore. The cheek weld on the Eotech was way too high.

3. The knobs on the Aimpoint are much easier to use than the push buttons on the Eotech. They are faster and easier.

4. The Eotech is HEAVY. And BIG. It was kind of like having a big screen TV mounted on the front of my rifle.

5. Dot vs. Circle/Dot - The Eotech reticle was too busy for my tastes. I like the dot better. I zeroed the rifle so that the POI is at the top of the dot.

6. Batteries - The Eotech has an auto off feature. The Aimpoint lasts for about a year. In my opinion, no big advantage either way.

I hope this helps anyone trying to decide between the two. It is just opinion.

 

[DMK]

I hope this helps anyone trying to decide between the two. It is just opinion.

Thanks for sharing your opinions of these. I'm shopping around for a high quality optic to put on my AR carbine.

What are your thoughts on the dot sizes of these two optics. It's my understanding that the Aimpoint has something like a 4MOA dot where the Eotech has a smaller dot and may be better for precise/distance shooting.

I'm looking for something that would be acceptable for night time defensive use at no more than 50 yards but also have decent accuracy potential for 100 yard target shooting.

 

[fix]

I've had plenty of success out to 350 yds with the aimpoint. Beyond that, the dot does get pretty big, but not much worse than iron sights IMO.

 

[dave3006]

My opinion (just opinion) is that the dot size is not a big issue if you zero so that the POI is at the top of the dot. The Eotech is smaller.

Also, at night and at short distances, dot size is not that important.

 

[Chipperman]

I like the EOTech better for a couple of other reasons.

The big TV screen as you call it (I think that's actually a pretty good description) is faster to acquire for close range targets.

It also does not require any rings, which is an added expense for Aimpoint.

As far as seeing the iron sites, it depends on which gun and which mount you use. For some guns you can see the iron sites with the EOTech.

Try both and buy what you like for your particular circumstances. They are both high quality and have there places.

 

[Correia]

I think that these are two of the best sights out there, so it is hard to pick a winner.

I've used both, and right now I like the EO Tech better. I like the bigger recticle, as it seems to be the fastest thing I have ever used in competition.

 

[fix]

Bottom line. Both are damn good sights. The edge in speed goes to the EOTech for most people in my experience, but the Aimpoint is much more durable. It's tough to go wrong with either.

 

[dave3006]

With rings, the Aimpoint cost was $355. The Eotech was $399.

 

[hksw]

The ML2 is not night vision compatible, the 552 is. The 512 is not night vision compatible and will run about $330-$350.

 

[dbshabo]

I've got an Aimpoint ML2 on my Bushy 16" A3. It does have a 4 MOA dot. I figure the 5.56mm round isn't very effective out past ~175yds being spit out of a 16" barrel and a 4 MOA dot isn't too large at that range. At 200 yds the dot will just about cover a paper plate. I've never used an EOTech so I can't compare the two. I can say that target acquisition with the ML2 is extremely quick in my opinion and the fact that there is no parallex error is quite nice. You know the Army put these things thru hell before they gave Aimpoint a contract so I'm confident in it durability.

Shabo

 

[Zak Smith]

The Aimpoint Comp M2 is NV compatible; it's about $30 more than the ML2.

-z

 

[SkaerE]

the Aimpoint is much more durable

says who? seriously, have there been side by side tests involving these 2 sights?

 

[444]

I am a big believer in the Aimpoint ML2. I have fired many thousands of rounds with mine (maybe 10k) and am still totally satisfied with it.
I have to admit that one reason I like it is that it is the optic issued by the US Army. I have never heard anything negative about their use in the military and I figured if they can stand up to that beating, they will stand up to me babying mine.
One of my main shooting partners uses an Eotech. In fact, I recommended to him that he try it. After seeing and using his, I don't like it. Part of it is looks. It just looks like a big electronic box mounted to the gun. I also don't like the reticle. I agree that it is too busy for me, but I also can see that if I had as much experience with it as my Aimpoint, I might have a different opinion. I don't like the controls on the Eotech either. I prefer the knobs on the Aimpoint.
As was mentioned, the size of the dot on the Aimpoint is not an issue for accurate fire. You zero the weapon so that the very tip of the dot is your POI. Just like using an iron front sight. If you want to make a precise shot, you put the target on the very tip of the circle at 12 o'clock. At close range and for COM shots it is close enough. I have used my Aimpoint at two different shooting schools where we fired at 400 meters at pepper poppers and I had little difficulty hitting them from the prone position. I even hit one a couple times from a standing supported position from the tower at Gunsite. Considering that a pepper popper is smaller than a human torso, I feel pretty confident that I could hit a person at 400 with the 4 MOA dot (assuming I he isn't shooting back and all that).

"The big TV screen as you call it (I think that's actually a pretty good description) is faster to acquire for close range targets."
I am not sure what you mean by this. With an optic you should be shooting with both eyes open. The dot appears on the target as an optical illusion. If you mount the gun correctly, the dot should be there with either sight. I wouldn't even notice the "big TV screen".

Both optics are very highly thought of by people whose opinions I value. So, I don't think you will go wrong either way. It would be nice if you could spend a day with each one before you decide.

 

[Onslaught]

Just a couple small points...

With the Eotech, the iron sights are impossible to use. Big advantage if the scope goes out.

True on the Mini-14, not so on an AR15. With the EOTech mounted on the AR flat top, you can see thru it as you mentioned. With the Aimpoint, you need a relatively expensive mount to raise it high enough to do the same. Cheek weld is "normal" with either optic on the AR.

I have to admit that one reason I like it is that it is the optic issued by the US Army.

So is the EOTech.

U.S. Army- RFI and EOTech Agreement

Ann Arbor, Michigan - The U.S. Army has awarded EOTech, Inc. a contract for immediate supply of optical weapon sights. The contract acquires in excess of 6,000 EOTech standard commercial off-the-shelf, HOLOgraphic Weapon Sights for use on M4 weaponry. The specific version is the night vision compatible, AA battery model, M554.

EOTech invented and manufactures the World's 1st holographic sighting system to interface with tactical small to medium arms weaponry called the HOLOgraphic Weapon Sight (HWS). Adapted from the fighter jet's Heads Up Displays, the HWS achieves significant target acquisition speed gains while maintaining complete vision control of the engagement area.

The U.S. Army and EOTech look forward to a successful partnership that enhances the performance of the operators within the Army community.

What are your thoughts on the dot sizes of these two optics. It's my understanding that the Aimpoint has something like a 4MOA dot where the Eotech has a smaller dot and may be better for precise/distance shooting.

EOTech has a 1moa dot surrounded by a 65moa circle.

One big plus on the AR for the Aimpoint is the ability to vary the height over bore to your particular liking. With the EOTech, you're stuck at that height, with your front sight post smack in the middle of the glass. You can get the M2 high enough that your FSB is in the lower third and not as much in the way.

Both are great, both have goods and bads... But I agree, I'd play with both before I decided. Unless I was scoping a Mini-14 or M1A or other rifle... then I'd just get the Aimpoint

 

[rock jock]

Check over at AR15.com. There are only about ten hundred dozen threads on the EOTech vs. Aimpoint debate. Right now I have a Holosight on my 16" Bushmaster. The new AR I am building will be topped with an Aimpoint. Then I can argue with myself for hours on end and skip the Internet research.

 

[444]

"The U.S. Army has awarded EOTech, Inc. a contract for immediate supply of optical weapon sights. The contract acquires in excess of 6,000 EOTech standard commercial off-the-shelf, HOLOgraphic Weapon Sights for use on M4 weaponry. "



"The U.S. Army signed a contract with Aimpoint guaranteeing the purchase of 80,000 (with the option of purchasing an additional 20,000) Aimpoint Comp M electronic reflex sights and associated mounts for the M16A2 rifle and M4A1 carbine. Aimpoint sights now become the primary aiming systems for these two military firearms."

 

[mark mcj]

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=18&t=164971


be careful not to get dizzy.

 

[SkaerE]

The specific version is the night vision compatible, AA battery model, M554.

the 554? i see the 511, 512, 551 and 552, but no 554.

"The U.S. Army has awarded EOTech, Inc. a contract for immediate supply of optical weapon sights. The contract acquires in excess of 6,000 EOTech standard commercial off-the-shelf, HOLOgraphic Weapon Sights for use on M4 weaponry. "

"The U.S. Army signed a contract with Aimpoint guaranteeing the purchase of 80,000 (with the option of purchasing an additional 20,000) Aimpoint Comp M electronic reflex sights and associated mounts for the M16A2 rifle and M4A1 carbine. Aimpoint sights now become the primary aiming systems for these two military firearms."

i'd like to see the prices these were sold to the government at. wouldnt be surprised if aimpoint sold them at a small fraction of what it costs us, and not just because it was such a large order. its generally a BIG boom in sales when a product such as this is issued to our military.

not that i'm saying they shouldnt do that. but hey, just because something is used by the military doesnt make it the best. generally it was the most "cost effective", or greased someone's palm along the way...

not always, i know, but sometimes these things do happen.

 

[G&R Tactical]

dave3006, if you paid $399 for a 552, you paid WAY to much! Contact me for better pricing next time. [email protected].

First off, let me state that I am an Aimpoint and EOTech dealer. Truth be told, I make more money off the sale of an Aimpoint than I do off the EOTech. Which optic do I push? The EOTech! Why you ask? Well it is cheaper (don't need a mount $100 mount), is the fastest optic on target and allows you to see your corners better if using NV. It is also made in the U.S. and with the Rev F models, the battery run time of the 512/552 is the same as the Aimpoint. Some people also stated that they like the knob on he Aimpoint better. That is of course personal preference. I can push a button faster than you can turn the knob 3-5 clicks to see the dot. I used to have Aimpoints on all my AR's, but changed them out with EOTech's if that tells you anything.


G

www.gandrtactical.com

 

[TechBrute]

but the Aimpoint is much more durable.

Where did you get the information to make this claim?

 

[Blackhawk 6]

SkaerE,

As I recall, value for an M-68 on my property book was about $185. As for your comments regarding the selection of the Aimpoint for general issue, it is more than up to the task. in fact, I reard it as one of the finest pieces of equipment ever issued.

 

[fix]

Where did you get the information to make this claim?

Personal observation. I'm not saying the EOTech is flimsy, so no need to start an optic jihad. I just feel more comfortable with the overal construction of the Aimpoint. The EOTech is plenty durable though. As I said before, it's tough to go wrong with either. I've not seen a failure with either one, but I have seen an EOTech lose it's zero after a drop. This might have been an issue with the upper being out of spec, but at least with the Aimpoint you have the option of getting a different mounting system to help compensate for that, such as the LaRue mount.

 

[dave3006]

There is a lot of personal preference driving this decision.

I found the Eotech reticle too busy. The buttons on the Eotech are much slower for me to adjust than the knobs. There were many other reasons.

I do not regret chosing the Aimpoint after trying them both. It was not even a close comparison to me. Everyone is different.

 

[G&R Tactical]

Optics are a very personal choice so I am not faulting anyone for choosing an Aimpoint over an EOTech. Personally, if I was going into battle, I would take a TA31!

G

 

[TechBrute]

I would take a TA31!

Bah! TA11 all the way...