EO Tech/ Aim point on an M1A? for MBR

Status
Not open for further replies.

jlott00

Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2009
Messages
195
im interested in putting an eo tech or aim point on my loaded m1A (not big on scopes as this is more of a MBR)

i havent used one before, whats the range of the Eo/aim?

i know they would be fast in 100 yards maybe 200?....

but what about 4-500 yards or so? is it still going to be better then iron sights?
 
I have an eotech on my 458 socom and like it a lot. It is very fast to aquire target. I would want magnification out past 200 yds for small targets.
 
How are you planning to install it? The Ultimak won't fit the loaded-model barrel, so I assume you're going to have a scope mount in the ordinary spot over the magazine/action. The sights you list will work for that, but it's a bit close to your eye and not the most typical mounting spot for them.

I have an Eotech 552 and I've owned and used Aimpoints the past. First off, the Eotech is a different technology, true holography, which is great - as long as it works. Eotechs don't have quite the bombproof reputation that Aimpoints (and ACOGs) have. Yes, they can be really solid and do see some military use, but I would not consider them as durable. Second, in precision the Eotech is superior - the center dot is smaller (about 1/3 MOA though it will appear about 1 MOA unless you have stellar eyesight) and I find the outer ring to help with speed. The Aimpoint in comparison is just one little dot, either 2 or 4 MOA. However, if you're mounting over the action, the design of the Eotech will raise the sight picture more than the lowest rings you could get for an Aimpoint, which may screw up your cheekweld. Finally, the Eotech has somewhat short battery life, claimed 500-1100 hours and possibly even less in real world use.

The Aimpoint is simple, well made, and older technology. It is extremely durable, and simple. Simple simple simple. It also has extremely long battery life on the order of 50,000+ hours depending on the model, which works out to years of continuous use. Most people who own them don't turn them off - no real reason to. It's also extremely pricey for what it is, IMHO, and a quality mount will add another $50-150 on top of whatever scope mount you need for the M1A itself. I can see the appeal given its extensive combat testing, but unless this is your ultimate SHTF setup, I would also consider a Vortex Strikefire, which for $150 is about 98% as good as a real Aimpoint. I sold my Aimpoint and will be keeping the Strikefire for a very long time.

You might also want to consider an ACOG, especially the low magnification compact ACOG models, as another high quality option that is durable and usable at close or medium range. The ACOG is basically a conventional scope with illumination, but it is an extremely high quality and durable scope, and the illumination plus clarity allows it to be used quickly at close range - google "bindon aiming concept." This is apples to oranges, but I would look into that option before buying the others. The ACOG is usually in the $900+ range, but SWFA has some discontinued compact models for $550. You will need to spend another $80 or so for a mount, however, so it will be more expensive than most Eotech or Aimpoint setups, though not by much over a good Aimpoint + quality mount.
 
thanks Z

well this is kinda my ultimate shtf rifle. but i just need what works.
ill check the vortex. also have considered the mini aim point.
 
If it's your ultimate shtf rifle, it may be worth the 200% extra cost of the Aimpoint, since they are genuinely combat proven and have far longer battery life. For anything less, I'd go Vortex. BTW, Vortex has a new "SPARC" model that just came out and is very comparable to the Aimpoint Micro (H1) but costs $200 instead of $550. I have not seen or handled that model, however.

I would also keep in mind that the M1A loaded model has some of the best iron sights put on anything semiauto, ever, so it's not as if you won't have a backup if the optic fails.

Not to be pushy but I would again suggest considering the ACOG or a quality 1-4X conventional scope. While there's nothing wrong with a 1x red dot on a 22" barrel, 44" overall M1A, it's not normal, for a reason.
 
While there's nothing wrong with a 1x red dot on a 22" barrel, 44" overall M1A, it's not normal, for a reason.

The lack of cheek weld is OK for AR's and CQB, but M1A's don't handle as well for close in stuff, where the sights you're talking about shine. Once you get into the longer distances, you want cheek weld and a comfy shooting position..which you don't have with anything but irons on an M1A; unless it's mounted up on the barrel (no scout mount or ultimak for a Loaded model yet, that i know of)...so overall, i wouldn't recommend it...I think the Loaded model is the quintessential .308 semi with irons, and mine stays that way.

I'd say use that loot to buy a bunch of ammo for practice, and when things do get real, you'll be right on target with the irons...even when it's a protracted war and you can't get batteries.
 
Not sure about the Eotech but the Aimpoint has a 10 year warranty as Long as you use it for non professional reasons. If it is your go to gun for shtf situations and what not a 10 year warranty equates to roughly a $ 60.00 a year top notch optic. Just my .02 cents worth
Good luck and God speed
 
And in comparison the Eotech has a rather short 3-year warranty, while Trijicon provides a lifetime warranty on the ACOG, except for the tritium illumination which is warranted to work for 15 years.
 
what about the eotech and a 3x or 4x magnifier infront of it with a flip to side mount. best of both worlds.

The scope mounts available for the OP's model of M1A don't really have enough room for that combination; that combination would be very bulky sitting right over the action; and the combination would have a line of sight so high that it would almost impossible to get a cheekweld even with a large comb riser.

That's a good combination for an AR or similar with a long flattop and an intended use of CQB and middle range. It's not so well suited for the M1A.
 
BTW, I am only discussing scope mounts of the ordinary sort. There are "chassis" stocks available for the M1A, for upwards of $500, that add a lot of rail space and might make it possible to do the rail things you see on ARs. But at that point your rifle alone is over $2k, probably well over, and weight will be 12lbs+ (you get to 15 pretty quickly taking this route). I've seen someone using one at a tactical competition and while he liked it, it didn't look at all practical. Oh, that guy was active military and a SAW gunner (21lbs) if I remember correctly, so enormous heavy guns were the norm for him.
 
Try this from Global Defense Initiatives, G1-OSM (Optical Sight Mount). http://www.gdiengineeredsolutions.com/engineered_solutions_g1.html
It's a pretty good scope mount for mounting ACOG's, although it's pricey.
One good feature is that the rail extends over the rear sight, giving you more eye relief options. It also has a sight channel to access your iron sights.
If you want to mount a EOTech or Aim Point, I would use the set up Springfield offers on their M1A Scout and SOCOM 16.
 
One thing to keep in mind with red dot/holographic type sights is if you have even the slightest astigmatism, your eye will not be able to properly focus the dot. Instead of a crisp 1, 2, or 4 MOA dot, you will see a smudged blur instead. Its a good idea to try looking through a RDS optic first, preferentially at low light when your pupils are at their largest to avoid a camera-obscura type effect, to see if you can focus it. Statistically speaking something like 1 in 3 people suffer an astigmatism.
 
In the finest tradition of the "Main Battle Rifle" silliness, it should be noted that anything more technologically advanced or combat optimized than National Match iron sights renders the weapon completely ineffective at staving off the hordes of inept assault rifle armed foreign enemies who're just waiting to swarm the nation as soon as the valiant men of the Mudlick County Rod and Gun Club turn their backs . . . :D

AimPoints and EOTechs are extremely fast close in, but I also find the 1 MOA dot on the EOTech to be better than irons at longer range. An AimPoint version with the 2MOA dot would probably be pretty nice as well in that respect. You have to know your hold overs, since you're not going to be adjusting your sights for range like irons, but that's not much of an issue for a real fighting gun. Mileage on the range may vary.
 
EOTechs are pretty expensive, considering they give you the same thing that a $150 used Bushnell Holosight can give you from eBay. It's outrageous really, over $500 for a little plastic window with a $5 red laser assembly inside.

If I was going to pay that, I would get my moneys worth and give it to someone who will provide you with a nice set of optics. I know you said you don't like scopes, but what about a 1-3X? You can set it to 1X and it's just like the Aimpoint. But then when you want to shoot 400-500 yards, you'll quickly remember that you probably do in fact like scopes, and switch to that 3X.
 
considering they give you the same thing that a $150 used Bushnell Holosight can give you from eBay. It's outrageous really, over $500 for a little plastic window with a $5 red laser assembly inside.

Uh, no. Not even close. Are you just trolling or do you not understand the differences?

BTW, EOtechs are readily found for under $400 new, now.
 
Matt304
Member


EOTechs are pretty expensive, considering they give you the same thing that a $150 used Bushnell Holosight can give you from eBay. It's outrageous really, over $500 for a little plastic window with a $5 red laser assembly inside.

If I was going to pay that, I would get my moneys worth and give it to someone who will provide you with a nice set of optics. I know you said you don't like scopes, but what about a 1-3X? You can set it to 1X and it's just like the Aimpoint. But then when you want to shoot 400-500 yards, you'll quickly remember that you probably do in fact like scopes, and switch to that 3X.
__________________

this sounds like it maybe the way to go.....what brand/scope do you recommend?
 
Uh, no. Not even close. Are you just trolling or do you not understand the differences?

BTW, EOtechs are readily found for under $400 new, now.

Why don't you enlighten me. As a person who has owned both, and as a person who operates on and designs laser systems, maybe there is still some learning left on the subject which you can teach me that I have overlooked.

I still own the Holosight. The EOTech went back to eBay. The Holosight has never missed a beat, and I saw no reason why I was paying $500 for the same technology.

The only difference was that I could mount my PVS-14 night vision behind the EOTech. So it had an extra dim setting. But I never found myself actually using the NV behind it besides to show friends.

One thing I find funny is how people use the term "troll" to now merely depict someone who doesn't share their views.

jlott00,

I have the perfect choice for you. Now this is money well spent...Nikon M223 1-4x20, a little over $240. http://www.arcadian-sales.com/Merch...ory_Code=Nikon_M223_Riflescopes&Store_Code=AS

M223-1-4-X-20-8485-bg.gif
 
Why don't you enlighten me. As a person who has owned both, and as a person who operates on and designs laser systems, maybe there is still some learning left on the subject which you can teach me that I have overlooked.

The EOTech is hardened to stand up to hard use, hopefully. The Holosight is not. But mostly I was taking issue with your claim that the EOTech is merely a little plastic window and a $5 red laser. Perhaps, from one perspective, that is true - especially if someone already makes the laser you want and you can buy it in huge quantities. What about that plastic window? Could I use a random piece of acrylic or polycarbonate instead? I mean, a plastic window is a plastic window, right? There couldn't possibly be any engineering, systems integration or precision assembly that would make it more than a $5 laser and a few cents worth of clear plastic, eh?

I interpreted your statement as in the same light as someone who says a $20 Tasco dot is the equal of an Aimpoint. (Except that your post was even more exaggerated; at least those are fundamentally the same design, although different in nearly all details.) Or someone who might say that a benchrest barrel is, after all, nothing more than $20 worth of metal with a little hole drilled through it (technically correct). Maybe you didn't mean it that way, but that's what it sounded like.

BTW, if you work in laser systems design, have you considered making a homebrew holosight to demonstrate how simple and mundane the technology is? Patent won't stop you if it's for your personal use.
 
Thanks for dragging this thread into an argument so you can further justify the purchase of an EOTech, Z-Michigan. I bet that the poster appreciates it. ;)

My point is, at the end of the day, the technology required to mass produce these sights is not that sophisticated from an engineering perspective. It's a simple aluminum chassis, very simple electronics with rubber buttons, coated plastic window which costs a company very little as they cut the proper shaped pieces from a large stock that they buy in bulk, a 635 nanometer red diode found in the oldest of dollar store laser pointers, and a shock isolated mounting and positioning system which is also very simple from an engineering standpoint. They do look durable, but a rock is durable and it usually doesn't cost very much. I'm just kidding about that. ;)

I know where you are going, Z-Michigan. They are quality sights. They are worth it to you. I get that. Unfortunately, the way I see it, at the end of the day you still have a device that was undoubtedly simpler to manufacture than a DVD burner that costs a consumer under $30 and is actually far more sophisticated to manufacture than an EOTech sight. For some mysterious reason, when these same forms of simple technology drift into the firearm market, suddenly the price increases ten fold, and the things we do not know about the manufacturing process must somehow be justified and worth it. We never seem to question it, we just accept and pay it for the most part.

I respect the American way of being able to build what you want and charge what you want for it. I merely see it as being taken in certain respects, and would prefer to pay for an optical sight that makes better use of my funds. Harp on me if you will; that is just the result of my cumulative experiences that are tailoring my mindset on the whole issue. It is what it is. :cool:

BTW, if you work in laser systems design, have you considered making a homebrew holosight to demonstrate how simple and mundane the technology is? Patent won't stop you if it's for your personal use.

Now you're just being silly.

Though, I can take your weapon laser and turn it into the most powerful weapon laser you will have ever seen before. ;)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top