Trijicon Acog vs. EOtech Holo...

inherentlyNOOB · February 14, 2014, 09:41 PM

Okay, so i'm sorry if this topic has already been posted - tried using the search function but was unable to find anything similar to what I am asking.

Lets start with some brief background:

I just bought myself a SR-15 E3 Knights Armament chambered in 5.56x45 and *absolutely* LOVE IT. However, my next decision is what optics I want to put on it. I dont see myself using the rifle anywhere out past 200-300 yards (as i dont think anyone should with a 5.56), with the primary number of targets being within the 50-150 yard range. I am primarily concerned with durability and the reliability/accuracy of the product. My main concern with the Trijicon Acog scopes is quick target acquisition and using a 4x magnification at close range. I absolutely love the Triji acogs with the holo sight on top, but I dont really want to spend more than $1200 on the sights. Inevitably, during my search I have encountered the EOtech G33 but have heard some mixed reviews about these.

So I guess i'm wondering if you guys should shed some light on the EOtech G33 (the normal holo with a flip up magnifier) regarding its durability, and how helpful the 3x magnifier actually is - IE: does it actually make a difference thats worth the extra $500.

I'd also be curious to see what those of you who have used the 4x trijicon acog think about close range target acquisition.

Of course, other suggestions are always welcome. For example, right now I am leaning towards the EOtech (though I am concerned with its durability) and maybe getting a more powerful magnifier from another company...any suggestions here?

Anyways, I think you guys get the idea and I can't wait to hear what you have to say.
Thanks for the input,

-Dave

Sharkbite · February 14, 2014, 10:22 PM

If you are planning close range and i define that as 150-200 and CLOSER, id go Eo-tech.

I had a Mini ACOG on my DoS issued M4 as a "outside" guy. Might have had to stretch the range a bit. Once i went to a 10.5 and would be using the gun inside potentially i had em issue an Eo-tech

From 0- 150 its easy and FAST. Beyond that the dot starts to get a little big for precsion work. Fine for center chest type stuff to about 200 or so. I guess you could stretch that a bit but given a choice id rather have the ACOG to cover the 150-300 yd ranges

The other advantage to Eo-techs is the unlimited eye relief. You can get into some pretty odd positions that dont allow you to see thru an AGOG as easily.

Strange.... But true

arizona98tj · February 14, 2014, 11:35 PM

The ACOG works well as designed. It is the correct height off the receiver to get a proper cheek weld for accurate shooting.

Now....put a reflex sight on top of it. Looks cool....that is about it. You now need a chin weld to use the reflex sight. Also, it is SOOOOO high above the bore, you get some really clumsy hold overs/unders when shooting at distances where the reflex sight was not zeroed in for.

I've been running a 3.5x ACOG on my M&P 15 for several years. My buddy has a 4x ACOG with the reflex sight on his Rock River AR-15. He never uses the reflex sight for the reason I just explained. It's cute but not functional, IMO.

That being said, you do realize that the ACOG was designed to be effective at close range in regards to quick target acquisition. I've put thousands of rounds down mine while attending training courses....it works for close up just fine....hostage taker head shots at 5~7 yds under time pressure, no problem.

I run an EOTech on my shotgun and an ACOG on my AR-15. For me, those two setups make for a very optimized firearm/optic combination.

NCummins · February 16, 2014, 02:59 PM

See if any of your friends have a 1-4x scope. Everybody writes these off but I love mine. Eye relief to me is kind of a moot point because if you have proper cheek weld then you also have the right eye relief. It is worth using one and seeing if you like it. I bought a red dot and immediately realized I didn't like it. I have an Acog on my M16 in Afghanistan and I knew I didn't really like that. But I'm super happy with my Bushnell PCL Throwdown. I can still use it up close and personal with both eyes open.

Theohazard · February 18, 2014, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by inherentlynoob

I dont see myself using the rifle anywhere out past 200-300 yards (as i dont think anyone should with a 5.56)

You might want to tell the Marine Corps this. They require everyone to qualify with their rifle up to 500 yards.

JimDandy · February 19, 2014, 09:28 AM

Quote:

You might want to tell the Marine Corps this. They require everyone to qualify with their rifle up to 500 yards.

The Marine Corps, as with all branches, requires a lot of things they don't want to happen on a regular basis.

Sharkbite · February 19, 2014, 10:30 AM

"Eye relief to me is kind of a moot point because if you have proper cheek weld then you also have the right eye relief."

My point is you dont always have the ability to get a perfect check weld. An example of this is shooting supine. Lying on ones back and shooting past your feet in a semi sit-up does not allow a check weld with the proper eye relief. It CAN be done with a magnified optic but is MUCH easier with an unlimited/ paralax free red dot type scope.

BTW... How do you bring quotes down on this forum? Im on an Iphone 99% of the time

NCummins · February 20, 2014, 10:17 PM

The Marine Corps has you shooting a pretty big target at 500 meters too.

Theohazard · February 21, 2014, 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimDandy

The Marine Corps, as with all branches, requires a lot of things they don't want to happen on a regular basis.

My point is that he said nobody should shoot past 300 yards with a 5.56, and that's ridiculous.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCummins

The Marine Corps has you shooting a pretty big target at 500 meters too.

The 500 meter target is the size of a human torso. I wouldn't call that "pretty big".

Sharkbite · February 21, 2014, 01:17 AM

Easy Devil Dog..

He know not of what he speaks....

Theohazard · February 21, 2014, 01:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sharkbite

Easy Devil Dog..

He know not of what he speaks....

This is true, my friend.

And for quotes, here's a good thread on how to do it.

Wyosmith · February 21, 2014, 11:35 AM

I have mounted many dozens of each, both EOTechs and ACOGs.
I have shot using many of them.

What do I use myself?
1X to 5X or straight 4X scopes!

I find that I do better shooting and do it faster with a standard scope than I do with either the EOtech or the ACOG.

Many of my customers and students have found the same thing.

And just to insert 2 cents worth.
I also am a former Marine and the 5 ring of the 500 yard target is not all that large. I don't have the dimensions written down, but as I recall the 5 ring is about 12-14 inches wide and about 18" tall. Shooting an M-16 at that range you'd better know how to hold and squeeze. I did it many times with both M16s and M14s.

Today I have lost most of my abilities shooting irons compared to how I could shoot when I was young, but even now, I doubt anyone would be really safe from me at 500 yds. I may not hit an enemy standing at 500 with an iron sighted rifle..........but then again I might. If I miss I bet I’d be close enough to make the enemy decide not to stand up and give me a 2nd shot.

Even a Marine “Marksman” is NOT someone you’d want to have shooting at you out to 500 yards.

A Martine “Sharpshooter” is a very dangerous adversary at that distance, and a Marine “Rifle Expert” is someone that will make them try to get REAL SMALL, even at 500.

There a high possibility they might not be able to get small enough.

Sharkbite · February 21, 2014, 11:49 AM

Quote:

. Even a Marine “Marksman” is NOT someone you’d want to have shooting at you out to 500

AMEN....
And i always found the 500 to be the easiest stage, baring a lot of wind

Now what that little 22cal bullet is actually doing at that distance is a whole different story

colbad · February 21, 2014, 10:07 PM

I have used the EOT extensively on an M4 platform as an entry long gun. It is incredibly fast for target acquisition and accurate for CQB. I find it very useful as well within the 25-50 yard range which is where most long range gun fights occur in LE situations. Once I get out further and want to take a concentrated sniper like shot a bit of magnification makes a big difference. Our teams had ACOG optics in AF and they worked very well overall for other than room clearing.

For the ranges you are shooting I think either would work. However if you are looking for a more precise shot placement I would go with magnification of the ACOG.

z7.jled · February 23, 2014, 10:50 PM

Red dots are fast, I have an aimpoint pro. I live the 3 year battery life, my HD rifle sits in the safe with the red dot on.

Acog/low power illuminated scopes can be fast too, but are not as intuitive from my experience, they require a higher level of training, you still need proper cheek weld, both eyes open, for example.
Magnified optics can be just as fast but more accurate/ user friendly beyond 100 yds. Look at options beyond eotech and trij. You can get great products for less, the 1-4x scopes are pretty neat, vortex PST for example with illuminated reticle. Just my 2cents

ronl · February 27, 2014, 06:28 PM

For quick target acquisition, I prefer the Eotech, just what I like. As stated by a few people, you should consider a 1-4 scope with an illuminated reticle. You get the best of both worlds. The Vortex PST, as mentioned before, is a very good choice, as is the Burris MTAC. I,personally, went with a Horus Vision Talon because of the crystal clear optics and the excellent reticle.

btmj · March 13, 2014, 02:29 PM

I will probably put a red dot on my next AR, I am leaning toward aimpoint pro.

having said that, my current AR has a 1x-4x scope... I am with Wyosmith on this point.. I really like the scope, and at the 1x setting, it is fast and very intuitive. at the 1x setting, the FOV is big, eye-relief is very generous, and head position is non-critical.

My shooting buddy has a red dot sight on his AK, and comparing the two sights, the red dot has almost no advantage in speed over the 1x-4x scope. for precision work, push the scope up to 3x or 4x and the red dot is outclassed.

Nathan · March 13, 2014, 04:36 PM

What do you want to shoot?

An EOTech was built to shoot human size targets from 0-50 yards quick, with a small enough dot to engage effectively out to 300 yds. It is dumbass durable.

An ACOG was built to engage human size targets from 25-600 yards. 25 may be almost too close. It is also indestructible.

Many standard variable scopes would work much better shooting at the ranges you mention on large and small targets. Extreme durability can be had from companies like S&B, USO, etc.

I personally like my Nikon 2-8 BDC. I can engage 5-600 yards relatively effectively, but I can't throw it off a cliff or run it over without expecting damage. It is also pretty lightweight.

February 14, 2014, 09:41 PM	#1
inherentlyNOOB Junior Member Join Date: October 11, 2013 Posts: 5	Trijicon Acog vs. EOtech Holo... Okay, so i'm sorry if this topic has already been posted - tried using the search function but was unable to find anything similar to what I am asking. Lets start with some brief background: I just bought myself a SR-15 E3 Knights Armament chambered in 5.56x45 and absolutely LOVE IT. However, my next decision is what optics I want to put on it. I dont see myself using the rifle anywhere out past 200-300 yards (as i dont think anyone should with a 5.56), with the primary number of targets being within the 50-150 yard range. I am primarily concerned with durability and the reliability/accuracy of the product. My main concern with the Trijicon Acog scopes is quick target acquisition and using a 4x magnification at close range. I absolutely love the Triji acogs with the holo sight on top, but I dont really want to spend more than $1200 on the sights. Inevitably, during my search I have encountered the EOtech G33 but have heard some mixed reviews about these. So I guess i'm wondering if you guys should shed some light on the EOtech G33 (the normal holo with a flip up magnifier) regarding its durability, and how helpful the 3x magnifier actually is - IE: does it actually make a difference thats worth the extra $500. I'd also be curious to see what those of you who have used the 4x trijicon acog think about close range target acquisition. Of course, other suggestions are always welcome. For example, right now I am leaning towards the EOtech (though I am concerned with its durability) and maybe getting a more powerful magnifier from another company...any suggestions here? Anyways, I think you guys get the idea and I can't wait to hear what you have to say. Thanks for the input, -Dave

February 14, 2014, 11:35 PM	#3
arizona98tj Senior Member Join Date: December 10, 2007 Location: Arizona Posts: 980	The ACOG works well as designed. It is the correct height off the receiver to get a proper cheek weld for accurate shooting. Now....put a reflex sight on top of it. Looks cool....that is about it. You now need a chin weld to use the reflex sight. Also, it is SOOOOO high above the bore, you get some really clumsy hold overs/unders when shooting at distances where the reflex sight was not zeroed in for. I've been running a 3.5x ACOG on my M&P 15 for several years. My buddy has a 4x ACOG with the reflex sight on his Rock River AR-15. He never uses the reflex sight for the reason I just explained. It's cute but not functional, IMO. That being said, you do realize that the ACOG was designed to be effective at close range in regards to quick target acquisition. I've put thousands of rounds down mine while attending training courses....it works for close up just fine....hostage taker head shots at 5~7 yds under time pressure, no problem. I run an EOTech on my shotgun and an ACOG on my AR-15. For me, those two setups make for a very optimized firearm/optic combination. __________________ stu-offroad.com Largest Jeep TJ project site on the web! (now with guns)

February 19, 2014, 10:30 AM	#7
Sharkbite Senior Member Join Date: November 4, 2013 Location: Western slope of Colorado Posts: 3,679	From above post "Eye relief to me is kind of a moot point because if you have proper cheek weld then you also have the right eye relief." My point is you dont always have the ability to get a perfect check weld. An example of this is shooting supine. Lying on ones back and shooting past your feet in a semi sit-up does not allow a check weld with the proper eye relief. It CAN be done with a magnified optic but is MUCH easier with an unlimited/ paralax free red dot type scope. BTW... How do you bring quotes down on this forum? Im on an Iphone 99% of the time

February 14, 2014, 10:22 PM	#2
Sharkbite Senior Member Join Date: November 4, 2013 Location: Western slope of Colorado Posts: 3,679	If you are planning close range and i define that as 150-200 and CLOSER, id go Eo-tech. I had a Mini ACOG on my DoS issued M4 as a "outside" guy. Might have had to stretch the range a bit. Once i went to a 10.5 and would be using the gun inside potentially i had em issue an Eo-tech From 0- 150 its easy and FAST. Beyond that the dot starts to get a little big for precsion work. Fine for center chest type stuff to about 200 or so. I guess you could stretch that a bit but given a choice id rather have the ACOG to cover the 150-300 yd ranges The other advantage to Eo-techs is the unlimited eye relief. You can get into some pretty odd positions that dont allow you to see thru an AGOG as easily. Strange.... But true

February 16, 2014, 02:59 PM	#4
NCummins Member Join Date: February 9, 2014 Posts: 92	See if any of your friends have a 1-4x scope. Everybody writes these off but I love mine. Eye relief to me is kind of a moot point because if you have proper cheek weld then you also have the right eye relief. It is worth using one and seeing if you like it. I bought a red dot and immediately realized I didn't like it. I have an Acog on my M16 in Afghanistan and I knew I didn't really like that. But I'm super happy with my Bushnell PCL Throwdown. I can still use it up close and personal with both eyes open.

February 20, 2014, 10:17 PM	#8
NCummins Member Join Date: February 9, 2014 Posts: 92	The Marine Corps has you shooting a pretty big target at 500 meters too.

February 21, 2014, 01:17 AM	#10
Sharkbite Senior Member Join Date: November 4, 2013 Location: Western slope of Colorado Posts: 3,679	Easy Devil Dog.. He know not of what he speaks....

February 21, 2014, 11:35 AM	#12
Wyosmith Senior Member Join Date: December 29, 2010 Location: Shoshoni Wyoming Posts: 2,713	I have mounted many dozens of each, both EOTechs and ACOGs. I have shot using many of them. What do I use myself? 1X to 5X or straight 4X scopes! I find that I do better shooting and do it faster with a standard scope than I do with either the EOtech or the ACOG. Many of my customers and students have found the same thing. And just to insert 2 cents worth. I also am a former Marine and the 5 ring of the 500 yard target is not all that large. I don't have the dimensions written down, but as I recall the 5 ring is about 12-14 inches wide and about 18" tall. Shooting an M-16 at that range you'd better know how to hold and squeeze. I did it many times with both M16s and M14s. Today I have lost most of my abilities shooting irons compared to how I could shoot when I was young, but even now, I doubt anyone would be really safe from me at 500 yds. I may not hit an enemy standing at 500 with an iron sighted rifle..........but then again I might. If I miss I bet I’d be close enough to make the enemy decide not to stand up and give me a 2nd shot. Even a Marine “Marksman” is NOT someone you’d want to have shooting at you out to 500 yards. A Martine “Sharpshooter” is a very dangerous adversary at that distance, and a Marine “Rifle Expert” is someone that will make them try to get REAL SMALL, even at 500. There a high possibility* they might not be able to get small enough.*

February 21, 2014, 10:07 PM	#14
colbad Senior Member Join Date: December 3, 2012 Posts: 506	I have used the EOT extensively on an M4 platform as an entry long gun. It is incredibly fast for target acquisition and accurate for CQB. I find it very useful as well within the 25-50 yard range which is where most long range gun fights occur in LE situations. Once I get out further and want to take a concentrated sniper like shot a bit of magnification makes a big difference. Our teams had ACOG optics in AF and they worked very well overall for other than room clearing. For the ranges you are shooting I think either would work. However if you are looking for a more precise shot placement I would go with magnification of the ACOG.

February 23, 2014, 10:50 PM	#15
z7.jled Junior Member Join Date: February 22, 2014 Posts: 2	Red dots are fast, I have an aimpoint pro. I live the 3 year battery life, my HD rifle sits in the safe with the red dot on. Acog/low power illuminated scopes can be fast too, but are not as intuitive from my experience, they require a higher level of training, you still need proper cheek weld, both eyes open, for example. Magnified optics can be just as fast but more accurate/ user friendly beyond 100 yds. Look at options beyond eotech and trij. You can get great products for less, the 1-4x scopes are pretty neat, vortex PST for example with illuminated reticle. Just my 2cents

February 27, 2014, 06:28 PM	#16
ronl Senior Member Join Date: December 2, 2007 Posts: 1,100	For quick target acquisition, I prefer the Eotech, just what I like. As stated by a few people, you should consider a 1-4 scope with an illuminated reticle. You get the best of both worlds. The Vortex PST, as mentioned before, is a very good choice, as is the Burris MTAC. I,personally, went with a Horus Vision Talon because of the crystal clear optics and the excellent reticle.

March 13, 2014, 02:29 PM	#17
btmj Senior Member Join Date: November 1, 2011 Location: Near St. Louis, Missouri Posts: 864	I will probably put a red dot on my next AR, I am leaning toward aimpoint pro. having said that, my current AR has a 1x-4x scope... I am with Wyosmith on this point.. I really like the scope, and at the 1x setting, it is fast and very intuitive. at the 1x setting, the FOV is big, eye-relief is very generous, and head position is non-critical. My shooting buddy has a red dot sight on his AK, and comparing the two sights, the red dot has almost no advantage in speed over the 1x-4x scope. for precision work, push the scope up to 3x or 4x and the red dot is outclassed.

March 13, 2014, 04:36 PM	#18
Nathan Senior Member Join Date: July 1, 2001 Posts: 6,333	What do you want to shoot? An EOTech was built to shoot human size targets from 0-50 yards quick, with a small enough dot to engage effectively out to 300 yds. It is dumbass durable. An ACOG was built to engage human size targets from 25-600 yards. 25 may be almost too close. It is also indestructible. Many standard variable scopes would work much better shooting at the ranges you mention on large and small targets. Extreme durability can be had from companies like S&B, USO, etc. I personally like my Nikon 2-8 BDC. I can engage 5-600 yards relatively effectively, but I can't throw it off a cliff or run it over without expecting damage. It is also pretty lightweight.