Rifle Scopes ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

[11B-B4]

I know without laying much groundwork most people will say it depends on the model... I agree.

I know Eotech has changed alot over the years. My first 552 i had in the army back in 2005 didnt last long. It could take a beating, that wasnt the problem. But it would shut off randomly much like some of the older aimpoints.

I started talking about this subject with some guys at work, we use eotechs and acogs. In my memory i had personally remembered 3 issued acogs that I used that went down. Nothing durability related. The adjustments went to shit... all of a sudden no tracking. One of them was brand new.

Some of the guys had similar stories. I think i have had more bad luck with Acog's than most. As such i stuck with eotechs the past few years. Used the SOCOM one on my last deployment and have been using an Xps since then. No problems with either.
<span style="font-weight: bold">

My question is: Which do you think is more reliable?
</span>
I dont think many people will complain of durability... they are pretty similar there. They seem to be capable of beating people to death with them if need be. (im talking rigidity of the body/mount)

Im looking to get away from a 10" carbine and go back to a mid lenth gun... and an ACOG to harness the Accuracy and mid range capability im just not sure if its the right thing to do with the bad luck i've had.

Your opinions would help, thanks.

 

[jerseymike]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

As you know both are great optics, but since its made by man it has the chance of going tits up regardless of how much they cost or how durable they are. Have you thought of an xps with a magnifier?

 

[Hi Speed]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

Eotech

 

[HillbillyfromAL]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

I've beat some ACOGs to shit and they never went down on me. I only know of 2 ACOGs that shit the bed and both were caused by user stupidity. In one case a TL used a wrench and screwdriver to try to get someone zeroed, dumbass was shooting at the wrong target. The other was ran over by a Bradley when it was left leaning up against it. As far as eotechs I never cared for reflex sights, but I know that they still have some problems with randomly turning off. Tritium ghost rings would be a good choice if you don't need magnification. In my last CO the only people that didn't have ACOGs were machine gunners and privates that could hit the wide side of a barn anyways.

 

[11B-B4]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jerseymike</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As you know both are great optics, but since its made by man it has the chance of going tits up regardless of how much they cost or how durable they are. Have you thought of an xps with a magnifier? </div></div>

Ive thought about that, but whats the total system weight of Eotech + magnifier vs. Acog? Im guessing the acog might be a few ounces lighter. Not a deal breaker but something to think about.

I have an XPS right now. I like it. It would be nice to get away from batteries. But im thinking more just reliability in mind. Not sure. I appreciate everyone's responses though.

my gut is telling me i just had bad luck with Acog and i should give it another go.

 

[StrykerSDM]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

It is kind of like apples to oranges...

The ACOG is a very durable and fine combat optic. We used them for SDM's, squad designated marksmen, early on about the time Iraq started on M4's. 600m with a regular M4 and an ACOG and bipod was really stretching it... But we made do at the time.

Out of all those guys beating them up for over a year of training in the rain, woods, dusty desert, rocky desert, swamps --they all held up. These were the NSN models with the yellow stadia.

Wow, I can't believe you got all those lemons! Were they used?

As for EoTech, I'm an Aimpoint convert. I didn't care for the M68, but the EoTech grew on me. I honestly believe there isn't a faster sight. If I hunted jack rabbits, I'd use it on whatever, no doubt about it. My M4 sports an EoTech and it is about 5-6 years old and holding up just fine. I like the newer models better, this one I have is an older, longer NV military model.

So for close range, less than 300m, that EoTech is fine for an M4, and for close in, say HD, that EoTech is the best thing I think you can have. Dragging it around, I understand they can take some abuse, but to be honest, I haven't abused these. I have abused some M68's and saw a mount get sheared off but the M68 was UNHARMED!

For 600m and an M4, for a combat optic, I like the ACOG hands down. They were made for each other. Tough, accurate, well made for what it does. I don't like them on a rifle that will never be used past 300m and also used for HD --here I like the EoTech.

So I think either one is a fine sight, you need to figure out what you'll be doing with 'em. That EoTech is good to 300m, but you can go further with it, and it is great for fast moving targets and up close stuff. Just won't be as accurate as the ACOG with a stadia reticle at longer ranges.

I currently have a 7.62 ACOG on my Grendel, but it doesn't get used for anything but range stuff really. Nice and accurate, but that rifle is so accurate it deserves better glass. ACOG belongs on a combat rifle, not a sub-MOA AR.

I also have an Elcan 7.62 4x scope with the "Washington Monument" reticle on an FAL. Great scope, heavy rubber jacket and tough as nails, but poorly designed adjustments on the base and the reticle sucks. Their newer ones are much better. So give Elcan a look if you feel burned by the ACOG and EoTech. Just make sure to get one with adj. on the scope and a better reticle than a post.

Finally, if you want a reflex sight that won't let you down, that Tri-Power sight from Trijicon looks REALLY nice. Tritium, batteries and fiber optics. Come to think of it, I may go with this if I need another reflex sight.

Good luck!

 

[austin.k]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

Haven't used the eotech much but I have alot of experienced with the acog. And they do have acogs for machine gunners now. I've had one on my SAW my last two deployments and they have one for the 240B also. I love them and the only time I've seen them go down was when the operator messed up and did something wrong with it or they just took more abuse than any optic should ever take.

 

[beechcraftpilot_eaglescout]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

My Buddy has an Eotech, it is reliable. Granted any device that relies on batteries can be prone to failure because you will be dependent on the batteries. I'm a big trijicon fan, they make good stuff. The acogs seem to be really well built. I don't own one, mainly because I prefer a 3-9 on my AR rather than fixed magnification. Both optics you are talking about are decent optics, in the end Its more personal preference. Reliability I think leans more toward acog as far as dependability, no batteries. However no matter how tough any piece of equipment is anything can be broken.

 

[eight]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

Which is more reliable? My opinion, Acog. If you put both optic beside each otehr and submit them to the same conditions, I think the Acog wins every time.

Now, the optics are used for different purposes, but you didn't ask about that. Also, I'm just a range/competition type guy. Never been active duty, so my experience/opinion has zero weight compared to those who really use them.

 

[ZLBubba]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

Having used both, the ACOG is my choice for reliability. It's a tough, especially considering there are no batteries or switches to mess with. The EoTech is naturally going to have more technical issues than an ACOG because it's a more complex design. Still, the EoTech is a good reflexive shooting tool.

I'd have both, in all honesty. EoTech for CQB and room-clearing and ACOG for patrolling. In A-stan, no question I'd rather have an ACOG than an EoTech.

 

[chittnp]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

For mid range use, The ACOG would be my top choice. I carried an M4 with an ACOG for 14 months in Iraq, and it performed flawlessly. I dont have any experience with EOTECHs but the Rangers seem to like them. That being said, I think ZLBubba said it nicely, they both have things they excel at, but fo ryour purposes I think you would be happy with the ACOG.

 

[Subxero]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

ACOG's require no batteries so they get my vote

and the basic idea behind their design seems like it would be less prone to malfunctions when compared to an eotech

JMO

 

[Sapper524]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

I have to go ACOG ... no batteries ... rock solid. I have never had one fail and I have beat the snot out of a few. I did break two Eotechs inside of a week once banging them on a door jam of a RG31 while exiting with a purpose ...

 

[unreconstructed]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

ACOG's are cetainly more reliable.

I've seen an Eotech that would turn off when it was fired. I'm guessing the recoil caused the batteries to lose contact and the sight lost power. I'll also guess that Eotech fixed that b/c I see the new sights have the batteries turned sideways. I have not used the new Eotechs.

I use ACOG's and Aimpoints in the Army and they have earned my trust.

 

[The King]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

Acog. The ACOG is #1 of the common combat optics IMHO. The M68/Aimpoint is second...Eotech a third.

I consider the Eotech to be the bottom line below which one should not go on an optic being used for people problems.

 

[BBJones13]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

Aimpoint

 

[TexasClassIII]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

ACOG.

Although Aimpoint seems the more logical comparison.

And in that one Eotech still loses.

Parker

 

[Pflyinguy]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

+1 on ACOG. I've had one and used one at work for over 5 years now and many of the guys at work have too. I've never seen one go down, never seen one run over by a Bradley either,lol.

Eotechs I have seen go down. If you don't break the seal and let the batteries "air out" they can and will corrode. That I have seen along with, oh sh%^ my batteries are dead when Murphy says you need batteries. BTW Eotech charges $60 to repair when the batteries corrode and eat up the contacts.

As for the magnifiers? I've yet to see one that was worth the cost. Especially the Eotech version. It's like looking through a TV. And the flip mounts break too easy. I've seen two snap off in classes I've taught.

Better option might be a Trijicon Reflex if you are looking for a dot. No Batteries!

 

[realbass1]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

I haven't spent enough time behind either of the optics to really have an opinion, but I know that all of my buddies that depend on their rifles to save lives have ACOGs on em. Ive also seen folks in training that figured out they ran out of batteries in their EoTech... right before we began the drill- fail.

If I could afford an ACOG, i'd have one on my AR, but until then I have an Aimpoint T1- I can leave that sucker on for a few years (supposedly) without worrying about the battery.

 

[USACS]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

Sort of apples vs oranges, but the ACOG is far more durable. The ACOG is also able to run without the need for batteries. If the EOTech runs out of batteries, it has a malfunction, or you have that pesky auto shutoff at 4hrs or 8hrs after sitting on perimeter for a while, the optic is unusable. The ACOG will have a reticle able to be used without worry of the battery going down. The tritium replacement is insanely expensive, so that serves as a major down-side to the ACOG, but until that point, it's got the durability.

I've never seen an ACOG go down. I have heard stories of it happening, which is fair to say. Nothing is ever 100% reliable. The TA01 I used in the Army was rock solid. However, I've seen EOTechs go down. I've seen photos, write-up, and seen them tank in person. Everything I've seen points to EOTechs being well behind the curve of durability.

 

[jwp6114]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

as far as reliability... they have all been good to me...

i own a 512 Eotech, an Aimpoint, and a TA31RMR Acog, and i would have to agree with strykersdm on that if its a 10" gun or a 300yd and < gun...eotech, if it is to be used out to 600 yards, trigicon with a BDC...

so one of my favorite is the TA31RMR (having both a holographic and 4x acog) but the most used would be the 512 eotech... depends on what im doing at the time...

multiple guns, mutiple optics, multiple puorposes.

as far as durability, i got all 3 of these optics used and they allare a little beat up but the ALL work like a champ... never had any issues with the Eotech, my RMR has a decent size ding in it but still works flawlessly, the acog shoots close to MOA when i am using good ammo and i do my part. the Aimpoint sits atop a 9mmSD AR-15 SBR. the Eotech sits on my Sig 556 10" factory SBR and the Acog on my 16" 5.56 AR, nightforce 5.5-22x56 on my bolt gun...

just choose the right tool for the job, if you spend the money on quality gear it wont let you down, and if it ever does, all of these high end manufactures will take care of you.

 

[11B-B4]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

Thanks for all the replies... Im gonna Grab an acog and train with it for a bit... if im feeling it again, i'll flip my XPS.

Thanks for the input. Great community here.

 

[Arbiter]

Re: ACOG Vs. Eotech... which is more reliable?

The general course of answers here mirrors my own observations...ACOGs tend to have fewer issues longer-term than EOTechs.

With that being said, I'll be <span style="font-weight: bold">very</span> interested in seeing how the new Trijicon SRS turns out once they begin shipping in the next month or two. If it only had the reticle of an EOTech, it would be damn near perfect...