A little late to tihs thread, but her eis my 2 cents:
-I dont like co witnessing since it busies up the sight picture.
- Used to like guns with fixed FSP but now all my AR's except one are flip ups in front also for this reason.
- I run both AImpoint PRO and EOtech 512.
An older review of mine here:
I own both the Eotech 512 and the Aimpoint Pro.
Their price point is almost identical and depending on whichever sale is going on hovers around $400
The Aimpoint Pro is a highly developed red dot and on the high end as far as red dots go.
The Eotech 512 is a Holographic sight which is a superior technology to red dots but it is one of the more affordable holographics, almost an entry level as far a holographics go, which are a more expensive technology to make.
The Aimpoint PRO however has some significant practical features the EOtech does not (flip up lens covers . the all around body is more rugged , 50,000 hr battery life out of a lighter battery)
But the EOtech does work for me better in target acquisition, especially at ranges over 150 yards.... the EOtechs reticle with the 1 MOA point in the middle setup is superior performance wise and in general Holographics are an optically cleaner and more precise technology to boot.
Also the EOtechs reticle can be used to assist in estimating range and/or windrift a potentially invaluable feature that the aimpoint redot simply cannot match
And 1000 hours battery life w/ the EOtechis nothing to sneeze at either, especially since it uses the most common battery in the world: the AA.
If your requirements set is essentially Close Quarters only I would say the Aimpoint wins hands down because its only 2 weaknesses relative the Eotech mean nothing at under a 100 yards, while offering a more practical all around setup in many ways.
if you want a setup up that is good at short range and will perform in a pinch to 200 or more yards the Eotech is better.
And when it comes to ruggedness its defintly not a fragile unit either and the aluminum armor protecting the primary optics unit (only) is almost certainly even tougher than the body of the Aimpoint.
The AIMpoint however protects everything under aluminum, the EOtech armors the main optics unit only but the battery compartments is protected by hard plastic.
So if CQB is your near exclusive game, such as urban self defense, HD or urban SHTF, Aimpoint PRO wins IMO due to all its practical features.
If you also want to go hunting and want/need a little bit better long range capability on top of the good CQB , than the Eotech is your choice.
- Both cost roughly same
- Both are practical but Aimpoint gets the nod in practical features and a little extra ruggedness (though the Eotech is not impratcial and not unrugged)
- both work well but EOtech performs a bit better IMO for target acquisition especially at longer ranges
IMO they are essentially equivalent, buy whichever one is on sale
I took out my only Eotech 512 fitted gun (DRM, designated rifleman setup) and also fitted my 2nd Aimpoint PRO on another flattop (CQB set up).
I own : - one ancient Eotech with manuf. date 2000 w/ a crude reticle, one 512 manuf date 2012 with the nice current reticle and 2 AIMpoint PROs for my CQB setups.
Keep in mind I recently had ICL surgery on my eyes and the right eye having that extra lens added now has its focal point moved further out so I am now farsighted as a trade off.
My focal point has moved past the front sight post actually, which makes using (blurry) Irons more challenging (tho my long distance vision in fantastic in the right eye).
I hadn't practiced my DRM set up for a while since I had been focusing on CQB but now as i compare the effect the different optics have on my eyes I noticed that my left-over astigmatism (ICL sadly only corrects myopia) on the right eye distorts the largish 4 MOA redot on the AImpoint PRO affecting my aim.
But my aim with the EOtech 512 is unperturbed as the full reticle helps to perfectly place my perception of the smaller dot,
Also the smaller dot seems un-affected by astigmatism distortion which I find helpful in aiming