Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I have had my 552 for a long time and aside from changing the batteries, I have not had any issues. I have moved it around from one rifle to another, used it at point blank distance and out to roughly 200 yards.
When it came time to get a second optic for an SBR I went with something different and got an Aim Point Pro. While I have not had near the amount of time with the Pro that I have had with my EOTECH, it is damn cool. No complaints, nothing bad to say about it.
Both have their strengths and weaknesses, but I am tracking with the general consensus here, FOV in normal conditions is not an issue with either.
Now with that said, I did come across this piece of information/marketing that may have lent itself to the argument
Marines buy more EOTechs - The Optics Talk Forums
Depending on the details of the setup, I can see how the FOV as it relates to a night vision monocular behind the optic could create the argument, but.... well I will leave it at that.
In addition EOTECH markets their design as having a larger FOV than a typical Red Dot tubular design
Holographic Sight Versus Red Dot Sight | EOTech
Marketing doesn't make it true, and neither does repeating something just because it is in writing.
Best I can tell FOV is not an issue at least not for me.
My AimPoint is on my CQB setup, my EOTECH is on an SR15
The OEG?
YES!!!!! Aweome bit of firearms trivia for you to pull that out of your hat. I'm impressed. I confirmed it by visiting Trijicon's website to make sure that was it. I didn't realize the sight was that old (1981) when I selected it, but at the time (1994) it was lightyears ahead of the current choices. I had it mounted on a Colt CAR 9mm, so its sole purpose in life was a CQB/Patrol carbine back when many LE Agencies required pistol-caliber carbines.
Had I realized how "vintage" that thing was I wouldn't have sold it along with the 9mm CAR. It was funny to see people try to look "through" it and tell me it was broken, getting them used to the idea of both eyes open and focusing on a target was a foreign idea.
Anyway, I know we've beat the issue to death, so I'll leave it at...... LETS GO BACK TO THE OEG!!
The OEG: did you have any impression of its fragility? I keep visualizing snapping the front off of it since the tritium rod protruded from the front and was only "protected" by that little plastic cap. Nowadays I'd look at it and be like "I'm going to break this on a doorjamb or something". Back then, red dot sights were the size of toilet paper tubes so the OEG was the shit. Aimpoint has come a LONG way from their early models.
I remember when they (red dots) began dominating the race guns: I went out to the range on a Friday afternoon to practice some reloads for a Saturday IPSC match (I was the only revolver shooter) and the rangemaster was out there painting red polka-dots on all the targets. I asked him if he was feeling pretty that day and he (who was still shooting limited at the time) said he was "fucking tired of all these guys with red dots" so he was painting the polka dots on the targets to see if it fucked with their sight pictures and slowed them down a bit.
I believe we currently only authorize the Eotech and Aimpoint, and neither one is mandatory.
I can't finish reading this whole thread because it is seriously rising me off for some reason. I made it about half way down the first page.
With that said, to the OP, congratulations on finding something you like.
But without turning this into a brand vs. brand thing, if you try to argue anything "Field of View" related to a reflex or red dot, you are not using it correctly and your point is invalid.
Understand the Bindon Aiming Concep, non dominant eye sees the entire engagement area, dominant eye sees reticle, brain super-imposes what the dominant eye sees over to the engagement area.
This goes against traditional fundamentals as you are more focused on the target than the reticle. Wierd? A little at first but that's why you practice. Field of View on these sights is not a thing if you use the sight properly.
And the thing about the square view of the holosight when clearing rooms is about the dumbest FUCKING thing I've ever heard. You don't clear while being sucked in to your sights, this is called tunnel vision and likely to miss something important like a threat area or shooting the wrong person who may not be a threat. The sight is just below your Mark1 eyeball line of sight(weapon at the high ready to allow you to cover/clear all of your sector while gaining PID and determining who is a threat based on hands, eyes waist and demeanor.
If I missed any Mil or LE responses that stated the same thing, my bust but I was way too Pissed at seeing some of the responses addressing/fomenting on things that are non issues with these sights.
But what do I know, I've only done this shit for about the last eight years.
Another thing I've noticed, is that guys with old eyes, like mine, have a hard time with Red Dots. The well defined dot actually looks like a Lightning Bolt. My solution has been to use the rear BUIS that co-witnesses with the optic, I don't raise the front BUIS unless shooting for distance. The small aperture really crisps-up the dot nicely.
Now that I have your attention, let me explain. My AR-15 collection is divided into 3 categories: Close Range, Medium Range, and Long Range set ups.
For close range I have used Aimpoints for more then 10 years. For medium range set ups I have used Aimpoints with Magnifiers. For long Range I currently use US Optics (SR-8C).
If I could grab only one of these set ups I would use the rifle with the Aimpoint/ magnifier for its versatility. This combo has worked well for me for years. When I looked at the US Optics SR-4C (1-4X with Red Dot) at SHOT Show i knew instantly this optic would replace my Aimpoint/ Magnifier combo. I purchased an SR-4C as soon as I could and mounted it on one of my Colt 6940's. Playing around with this optic set on 1X in my home I noticed something- a huge field of view!
I compared the field of view of the USO 1-4X to my T1s and realized the T1 is like trying to look through a straw! I never really noticed how bad the field of view is on the T1 until this point.
When I looked around for data to compare the EOtech and the Aimpoint I realized no tier one Military team was using Aimpoints. ALL of them (CAG, Dev Group, MeuSOC) use EOtechs…
I started asking around to military people that i know to find out why. Here is what they told me- The EOtech is preferred to the Aimpoint with teams for 3 reasons: 1. Field of view is much greater then Aimpoint making it much easier to identify threats and watch the "Battle Space" during CQB. 2. The square shape for the EOtech housing matches up perfectly to the geometry of rooms and buildings making it harder to miss corners and generally "own the room" more effectively. 3. The reticle of the EOtech performs better with Night Vision.
After getting some range time with the EOtech I can say I'm faster, and more accurate then I was with the Aimpoints. I also feel I have better situational awareness with the EOtech because of the big field of view.
At this point my short range carbines use EOtech EXP3s and my medium and long range Carbines and Rifles use US Optics SR-4Cs and SR-8Cs. I could not be any happier!
Now that I have your attention, let me explain. My AR-15 collection is divided into 3 categories: Close Range, Medium Range, and Long Range set ups.
For close range I have used Aimpoints for more then 10 years. For medium range set ups I have used Aimpoints with Magnifiers. For long Range I currently use US Optics (SR-8C).
If I could grab only one of these set ups I would use the rifle with the Aimpoint/ magnifier for its versatility. This combo has worked well for me for years. When I looked at the US Optics SR-4C (1-4X with Red Dot) at SHOT Show i knew instantly this optic would replace my Aimpoint/ Magnifier combo. I purchased an SR-4C as soon as I could and mounted it on one of my Colt 6940's. Playing around with this optic set on 1X in my home I noticed something- a huge field of view!
I compared the field of view of the USO 1-4X to my T1s and realized the T1 is like trying to look through a straw! I never really noticed how bad the field of view is on the T1 until this point.
When I looked around for data to compare the EOtech and the Aimpoint I realized no tier one Military team was using Aimpoints. ALL of them (CAG, Dev Group, MeuSOC) use EOtechs…
I started asking around to military people that i know to find out why. Here is what they told me- The EOtech is preferred to the Aimpoint with teams for 3 reasons: 1. Field of view is much greater then Aimpoint making it much easier to identify threats and watch the "Battle Space" during CQB. 2. The square shape for the EOtech housing matches up perfectly to the geometry of rooms and buildings making it harder to miss corners and generally "own the room" more effectively. 3. The reticle of the EOtech performs better with Night Vision.
After getting some range time with the EOtech I can say I'm faster, and more accurate then I was with the Aimpoints. I also feel I have better situational awareness with the EOtech because of the big field of view.
At this point my short range carbines use EOtech EXP3s and my medium and long range Carbines and Rifles use US Optics SR-4Cs and SR-8Cs. I could not be any happier!