Red Dot vs. Holographic?

[The Quiet Man]

I didn't know they were the same technology. My question was more of the difference between the styles (tube vs. the little window looking thingy).

Thanks for the replies.

Yeah, I'm a little "gay" too because I have never looked through an Eotech and don't completely understand the term holographic as applied to sighting devices. I shoot with red dots but my experience ends there on this issue. I'll have to learn more about the whole subject to get myself "straight".

 

[spengo]

The way they work is slightly different. Their purpose is exactly the same. To confuse things further there's another term, reflex sight. That includes the things like the trijicon doctor and the good ol' C-More as well as the Aimpoints and EOTechs. If you wanna be specific I think only the EOTech counts as "holographic." I guess because EOTech uses a laser to draw the reticle rather than an LED (or fiber optics and tritium I suppose...) to just illuminate it makes the difference.

There's also the old school reflex before we had all these fancy floating reticles--OEGs! (occluded eye gunsight)

 

[The B]

They aren't. The Aimpoint works like a regular red dot basically. The eotech is the holographic sight. It is done differently. They are not the same.

wow. that was super insightful.

---

ahhh.... i get it now. i just went to the Eotech website, and sure enough- they've got the word "holographic" squeezed in everywhere they can. trying to make it sound like it means something, and is some kind of advantage.

it doesn't mean anything. there's no advantage, nor disadvantage, to the way they display their reticle.

there ARE, however, many many disadvantages to the eotech platform in general- awful battery life, auto off, and their general delicacy (falling apart at bad times), not least of all.

 

[The B]

The way they work is slightly different. Their purpose is exactly the same. To confuse things further there's another term, reflex sight. That includes the things like the trijicon doctor and the good ol' C-More as well as the Aimpoints and EOTechs. If you wanna be specific I think only the EOTech counts as "holographic." I guess because EOTech uses a laser to draw the reticle rather than an LED (or fiber optics and tritium I suppose...) to just illuminate it makes the difference.

There's also the old school reflex before we had all these fancy floating reticles--OEGs! (occluded eye gunsight)

and up until about a year ago, the terms "reflex, "holo" and "RDS" were all used absolutely interchangeably, without prejudice or distinction.

i guess we can thank eotech for adding one more piece of worthless minutia for people to peck at, fruitlessly.

 

[mistershipwreck]

wow. that was super insightful.

---

ahhh.... i get it now. i just went to the Eotech website, and sure enough- they've got the word "holographic" squeezed in everywhere they can. trying to make it sound like it means something, and is some kind of advantage.

it doesn't mean anything. there's no advantage, nor disadvantage, to the way they display their reticle.

there ARE, however, many many disadvantages to the eotech platform in general- awful battery life, auto off, and their general delicacy (falling apart at bad times), not least of all.

Actually, there are several advantages. I don't want to sound like a salesman for EOtech - but, the reticle will still be useable if the glass is partially broken/cracked, or if part of the glass gets broken. You also have a metal cage over the unit, which protects it. I had a 511 model that I bumped pretty hard once - in a doorframe. Had it not had the cage, I think I would have broken it. An aimpoint isn't built that sturdy.

Also, I LOVE the 1 MOA center dot for longer distance shooting. I shoot 1/2" groups with my PS90 with it. And finally, with the larger reticle portion, I know EXACTLY where the round will hit at close quarters. In fact, I sighted in a laser at indoor ranges on my carbine, using the very bottom edge tip of the large EOtech reticle. I then went and checked it at an indoor range a couple of months later.

because I had sighted in a laser with an eotech once before, I knew about where to do it using th eeotech. When I did it this last time, the laser was sighted in perfectly. At the actual range, I didn't have to make ANY adjustments. So, at 7-10 yards, I KNOW that the round will hit at the bottom of my reticle. Using a red dot, ya sorta have to guess where 2 inches low of your point of aim is at. Not that hard to do admittedly, but I can pinpoint where the point of impact will be exactly by using my EOtech (which has been sighted in at 50 yards with the center dot).

So, I personally see several advantages. Also, in CQC, I find the larger reticle MUCH faster to get on target than a regular red dot.

Many of these things can be put to personal preference. Some guys like Aimpoints, and some people prefer Trijicon scopes. I prefer EOtechs - but those are my reasons why. Nothing wrong with either type - and you should get what ya like. But, no reason to dis one over the other really.

 

[spengo]

Had it not had the cage, I think I would have broken it. An aimpoint isn't built that sturdy.

WEEEEEEELL I disagree there. Aimpoints are pretty bomb-proof. Many top quality optics these days can take a ton of abuse without even losing zero, it's not limited to just red dots either. ACOGs are where it's at for durability in magnified optics. The ability to see the reticle even when the glass is broken is nice, but broken glass is not usually the issue you hear about when people have trouble with their optics. Usually it is the mounting system (optic popping off the rifle at a bad time) or in the case of some older EOTech models, the battery case popping open. When you've got your glass encased in a solid hunk of machined aluminum, it's not going to break too easily.

Also, I LOVE the 1 MOA center dot for longer distance shooting. I shoot 1/2" groups with my PS90 with it. And finally, with the larger reticle portion, I know EXACTLY where the round will hit at close quarters. In fact, I sighted in a laser at indoor ranges on my carbine, using the very bottom edge tip of the large EOtech reticle. I then went and checked it at an indoor range a couple of months later.

because I had sighted in a laser with an eotech once before, I knew about where to do it using th eeotech. When I did it this last time, the laser was sighted in perfectly. At the actual range, I didn't have to make ANY adjustments. So, at 7-10 yards, I KNOW that the round will hit at the bottom of my reticle. Using a red dot, ya sorta have to guess where 2 inches low of your point of aim is at. Not that hard to do admittedly, but I can pinpoint where the point of impact will be exactly by using my EOtech (which has been sighted in at 50 yards with the center dot).

So, I personally see several advantages. Also, in CQC, I find the larger reticle MUCH faster to get on target than a regular red dot.

Many of these things can be put to personal preference. Some guys like Aimpoints, and some people prefer Trijicon scopes. I prefer EOtechs - but those are my reasons why. Nothing wrong with either type - and you should get what ya like. But, no reason to dis one over the other really.

Yeah, as I said before mostly what you should worry about is personal preference. They are all nice optics. Which style controls you like better, which style reticle, how it operates and so on. Personally I find the EOTech reticle grainy and distracting and I much prefer constant-on and knob adjustment to auto-off and button adjustment. I can see how the ring would be helpful in estimating hold-overs though.

For a little girl who isn't going to be going to competitions or anything, just plinking around, pretty much nothing matters all that much except reticle preference anyway. As such, if she likes the EOTechs I'd recommend the Bushnell Holosight (basically an N-battery EOTech without the protective cover) which is possibly a bit less durable but much cheaper than EOTech-brand sights. If you like the micro red dots (or fullsize I guess...) better, Bushnell, Primary Arms, and Vortex all make decent inexpensive sights. Or if you don't like either you could try the other 1-window style reflex. Real C-Mores are actually pretty inexpensive or if you prefer the tiny trijicon doctor style, Burris and Primary Arms make decent inexpensive versions of that.

 

[mistershipwreck]

Yes, I concede that it is personal preference.

I have read that the Bushnell clone has been discontinued, but I cannot confirm this. Had I owned the Bushnell clone (without the metal cage) the time I banged my eotech, I would have cracked the plastic housing. I know I would have. And, I think I would have broken some of the other designs of optics I have seen, had I had some other brand.

Anyway, I had the N battery Eotech once - it was my first Eotech. It got me hooked, but I willa dmit that battery life was abysmal in that 1 particular model. But, I think the 511 may have been discontinued in favor of the XPS.

In my experience, XPS battery life is more realistic to the factory's projected battery life. I am very happy with mine. And, I like the single 123 battery form very well. I have like 23 different LED flashlights, so I have tons of 123 batteries. I keep at least 24 on hand all the time. But, I have had the same one in my XPS for the past 12 months and have not changed it yet.

I have tried to like red dots, but I do not like looking thru that "tube". The FOV is larger on the EOtech. And, I didn't care for the Trijicon RX30 reflex sight either. I do like the mini acog with the red donut. But, it's over $800, and using it up close is a little strange with the 1.5x magnification. It's kinda funky with 2 eyes open, although I suppose you'd get used to it.

But, unmagnified, I haven't found anything I like more than the EOtech.

 

[The B]

Actually, there are several advantages. I don't want to sound like a salesman for EOtech - but, the reticle will still be useable if the glass is partially broken/cracked, or if part of the glass gets broken.

if the piece of glass that the reticle reflects off of breaks, the reticle is no more usable than any other optic which has it's reflective lens broken.

You also have a metal cage over the unit, which protects it. I had a 511 model that I bumped pretty hard once - in a doorframe. Had it not had the cage, I think I would have broken it. An aimpoint isn't built that sturdy.

i'm pretty offended at this statement... you apparently think i'm an idiot, with no real-world experience, and that nobody else reading this thread is either. this is a ridiculously unqualified statement. how many aimpoints have you broken? is a "bumped pretty hard in a doorframe" the worst you've ever given it? LOL. in but ONE example, i went down with my weapon from 3 feet to concrete, SMACK onto it's side. the impact gouged my brass deflector, bent the handguard, and bent the aimpoint mount.. i thought i might have finally broken an aimpoint, until i stuck it in a different mount and needed no more clicks than usual to re-zero.

just one example of countless cracks, whacks, drops and smashes my aimpoints have endured. surviving all. it's a very well established fact that in the durability category, aimpoint definitely wins. if you're not willing to put your equipment to use and find out for yourself, you should at least read around and get this info from people who do. you can get away with this bullbubblegum make-up-anything-that-sounds-good bit when it's just you and some dude at a gunshow, but in an open public arena, people who have actual experience WILL see it, and they will not be polite.

 

[mistershipwreck]

i'm pretty offended at this statement... you apparently think i'm an idiot, with no real-world experience, and that nobody else reading this thread is either. this is a ridiculously unqualified statement. how many aimpoints have you broken? is a "bumped pretty hard in a doorframe" the worst you've ever given it? LOL.

Actually, what is more amazing is that a simple conversation about the eotech versus other sights gets someone so worked up. Instead of simply stating that you have a different experience, and then offering it. It suddenly has become an argument and insultive. No where in my post did I insult, talk down to, or say anything bad about someone. I simply posted my experience.

I have actually been the admin (not moderator) of two large gun forums in the past, and have been on numerous gun forums for years (I'm not insinuating anything by that, I'm just stating that I have a lot of forum experience and am on several websites). Every once in a while, there is just "the arguer" that must come and turn everything into THE ARGUMENT. There is someone right now on 2 forums that I currently frequent who seems to do this to every single thread he gets on. It hasn't effected me personally there, as that "arguer" seems to like me. But, it is annoying...

I just joined this forum and am trying to enjoy it. I hope this is not the tone of the entire site. If you want to consider yourself an "idiot" (since you are insulting yourslelf - I did not) - that is up to you. But you said it, not I... If my post "offends" you, then wow... You must have a heart attack when someone with more than 10 items gets ahead of you at the checkout... Geeze...

There are a handful of responses that are pretty rude, just on this thread alone... I was surprised at 1 or 2, when they occurred, and figured that there was some really sarcastic, rude people here....

But.............

I am zipping back thru this thread as I type this, though... zip... zip...zip.... And, I am coming to realize that ALL of these instances are by you. By golly... So, I guess YOU are the resident rude guy on the site.

I'm sure there will be a witty retort and more arguments and combativeness on your part in response to my post now (why wouldn't you - given your modus operandi). But, I simply came to this site to enjoy further conversations about firearms on a new site I just discovered with a somewhat fair amount of traffic. Too bad you had to come along and ruin it.

And, in all fairness, I am not so thin skinned to run off and never come back - at least not yet. But now I see that there is simply no point in any further discussions of any topics that you participate in. You gotta turn everything into something it isn't.

 

[spengo]

Yes, I concede that it is personal preference.

I have read that the Bushnell clone has been discontinued, but I cannot confirm this. Had I owned the Bushnell clone (without the metal cage) the time I banged my eotech, I would have cracked the plastic housing. I know I would have. And, I think I would have broken some of the other designs of optics I have seen, had I had some other brand.

Anyway, I had the N battery Eotech once - it was my first Eotech. It got me hooked, but I willa dmit that battery life was abysmal in that 1 particular model. But, I think the 511 may have been discontinued in favor of the XPS.

In my experience, XPS battery life is more realistic to the factory's projected battery life. I am very happy with mine. And, I like the single 123 battery form very well. I have like 23 different LED flashlights, so I have tons of 123 batteries. I keep at least 24 on hand all the time. But, I have had the same one in my XPS for the past 12 months and have not changed it yet.

I have tried to like red dots, but I do not like looking thru that "tube". The FOV is larger on the EOtech. And, I didn't care for the Trijicon RX30 reflex sight either. I do like the mini acog with the red donut. But, it's over $800, and using it up close is a little strange with the 1.5x magnification. It's kinda funky with 2 eyes open, although I suppose you'd get used to it.

But, unmagnified, I haven't found anything I like more than the EOtech.

Oh, I didn't know the bushnell version was discontinued. Aimpoint housing is entirely aluminum, no worries about anything plastic that would crack. You could drop it out of a helicopter onto concrete and it probably wouldn't even lose zero. As far as optic durability goes, Aimpoint is pretty much king. If you are still open to aimpoints, I recommend trying out the T-1/H-1 micro series. The smaller housing eliminates the "looking through a tube" feeling of the larger aimpoints and you get a nice big field of view with very little junk on the outside of the optic to obstruct your vision. Possibly even better FOV than EOTechs, but I'm not too sure about that. EOTechs have pretty minimal "outer edge junk" too. I'm glad to see optics moving in that direction.

Here's a pretty impressive one, not Aimpoint or EOTech, but Trijicon. This ACOG was shot and still functions just fine!

They are also made out of a solid hunk of aluminum just like Aimpoints.

 

[The B]

Actually, what is more amazing is that a simple conversation about the eotech versus other sights gets someone so worked up. Instead of simply stating that you have a different experience, and then offering it. It suddenly has become an argument and insultive. No where in my post did I insult, talk down to, or say anything bad about someone. I simply posted my experience.

I have actually been the admin (not moderator) of two large gun forums in the past, and have been on numerous gun forums for years (I'm not insinuating anything by that, I'm just stating that I have a lot of forum experience and am on several websites). Every once in a while, there is just "the arguer" that must come and turn everything into THE ARGUMENT. There is someone on 2 forums I frequent now that seems to do this to every single thread. It hasn't effected me personally there, as thata rguer seems to like me. But, it is annoying...

I just joined this forum and am trying to enjoy it. I hope this is not the tone of the entire site. If you want to consider yourself an "idiot" (since you are insulting yourslelf - I did not) - that is up to you. But you said it, not I... If my post "offends" you, then wow... You must have a heart attack when someone with more than 10 items gets ahead of you at the checkout... Geeze...

There are a handful of responses that are pretty rude, just on this thread alone... I was surprised at 1 or 2, when they occurred, and figured that there was some really sarcastic, rude people here....

But.............

I am zipping back thru this thread as I type this, though... zip... zip...zip.... And, I am coming to realize that ALL of these instances are by you. By golly... So, I guess YOU are the resident rude guy on the site.

I'm sure there will be a witty retort and more arguments and combativeness on your part in response to my post now (why wouldn't you - given your modus operandi). But, I simply came to this site to enjoy further conversations about firearms on a new site I just discovered with a somewhat fair amount of traffic. Too bad you had to come along and ruin it.

And, in all fairness, I am not so thin skinned to run off and never come back - at least not yet. But now I see that there is simply no point in any further discussions of any topics that you participate in. You gotta turn everything into something it isn't.

i have no tolerance for affectation, and when the OP is about to spend hundreds of dollars on a piece of kit, i would imagine he feels the same.

so you're not going to address the fact that you're here acting like you have some kind of insight on a topic you obviously have no experience with?

 

[mistershipwreck]

Oh, I didn't know the bushnell version was discontinued. Aimpoint housing is entirely aluminum, no worries about anything plastic that would crack. You could drop it out of a helicopter onto concrete and it probably wouldn't even lose zero. As far as optic durability goes, Aimpoint is pretty much king. If you are still open to aimpoints, I recommend trying out the T-1/H-1 micro series. The smaller housing eliminates the "looking through a tube" feeling of the larger aimpoints and you get a nice big field of view with very little junk on the outside of the optic to obstruct your vision. Possibly even better FOV than EOTechs, but I'm not too sure about that. EOTechs have pretty minimal "outer edge junk" too. I'm glad to see optics moving in that direction.

Here's a pretty impressive one, not Aimpoint or EOTech, but Trijicon. This ACOG was shot and still functions just fine!

They are also made out of a solid hunk of aluminum just like Aimpoints.

I don't know everything about everything. My main experiences are with the EOtech. I have used the aimpoint a few times. If it is sturdier than I thought - then that is a good thing. I have not been impressed with C more sights and several other red dots I have seen. The trijicon reflex sight is pretty sturdy, but I still didn't like the washout that occurs so easily, and that tiny dot takes me longer to pick out (as with most red dots). That's why I like the eotech so much.

But, as I mentioned above, I did sorta like the mini ACOG after playing with it in the gunstore 3x now. With that outer rubber type coating on the ACOGs, I didn't know what was underneath. But, I just can't bring myself to pay that much for an optic.

 

[mistershipwreck]

i have no tolerance for affectation, and when the OP is about to spend hundreds of dollars on a piece of kit, i would imagine he feels the same.

Actually, I'm not going to waste my time debating things with you any further.

 

[mistershipwreck]

Incorrect. Aimpoints are incredibly sturdy. They will take as much and probably more abuse than an EOTech.

Ok, I believe ya. As I stated above, I have only used an aimpoint a few times. To me, the eotech seemed sturdier - but that was just my opinion from a short term use. I've used an eotech for almost 5 years. But, I realize that they are built pretty well in order to meet military specs for field use.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

I wish someone would just do a side by side aimpoint vs eotech torture test.

I read stuff like this all the time:

I have seen more broken Aimpoint Comp M2s over here than Eotechs. I got one sitting at home that I need to get fixed someday. The M2 has a history of broken rotatory switches.

Then it's countered by:

I've seen more broken EOTechs on one deployment that the total number of broken Aimpoints I've ever seen total.

It's all conjecture. I want to see a torture test... but i'm not willing to fork over the money to do one myself.

These pissing contests are getting old.

 

[spengo]

But, as I mentioned above, I did sorta like the mini ACOG after playing with it in the gunstore 3x now. With that outer rubber type coating on the ACOGs, I didn't know what was underneath. But, I just can't bring myself to pay that much for an optic.

Heh, you think ACOGs are expensive... take a look at some of the scopes where you're paying more for the ultra-nice glass than compactness/sturdiness. Nightforce, Swarovski, Schmidt and Bender... you start getting in the $2500+ range pretty darn quick.