Aimpoints: M68 vs. T1

[wild_wild_wes]

As a general-purpose AR optic, which do you prefer: the M68 or the T1?

I'm undecided. The M68 offers a larger window, but the T1 is much smaller and lighter.

So, which did you decide on?

[decodeddiesel]

I used an M68 for about 5 years in the Army, yet I am willing to spend nearly 2x as much for a T1 on a personal weapon now. They are that much better to me.

ETA: and if it influences your decision at all, I am a Wes too

[halmbarte]

I don't even see the tube anymore. Just the target and the dot.

The T1 is fricken' tiny and light. The M4 is probably more robust.

H

[Alaskapopo]

I personally see no reason to buy a full size red dot when a T1 can do all the same things at less weight. If I want more weight I want something with magnification. (ie low power variable scope)
Pat

[GeorgiaBoy]

I would prefer the H-1 as I don't need NV capability.

I would probably rather take the C68 (CompM4) into battle, but would use the micro for most other uses.

[bsmith_shoot]

Fwiw, in my experience, the size of the optic doesnt make much differance. I focus on the target. The dot just "appears" in my sight picture when I press the trigger. I have used a wide variety of optics, and the T1 is close to perfection. The T1 is compact, light, tough, simple, and effective. The only advantage the M4 has is in battery life, and its not very much.
Take this advise for what its worth, but the T1 is far more capable than I am.
Brandon

[Failure2Stop]

I don't know why, but I see the dot in the M4 as a clearer dot than the T1. My eyes have been pretty scratched up though, so it might just be me.

Moving the T1 toward the rear sight makes the tube size difference negligable.

I do prefer the adjustment method of the M4 over the T1, especially in low light. I also prefer the Bobro M4 mount over the current T1 mounts. AAs are also easier to find in a pinch than the 2032s.

They are both great optics, and there is very little you have to give up with the smaller optic now that the 2MOA T1s are available, given the optimal performance envelope of RDSs.

[SteadyUp]

I don't even see the tube anymore. Just the target and the dot.

The T1 is fricken' tiny and light. The M4 is probably more robust.

H

The Aimpoint T-1, small as it is, is still pretty damn tough. Google the Daniel Defense M4 torture test with Larry Vickers. That Aimpoint took one hell of a beating, and still kept going.

[Iraqgunz]

You know. We actually have an optics and mounts area.

[ICANHITHIMMAN]

I have an M4 and 2 H1 aimpoints. I like the weight and size of the H1 optic but the M4 is much faster due to the larger feild of view.

[halmbarte]

The Aimpoint T-1, small as it is, is still pretty damn tough. Google the Daniel Defense M4 torture test with Larry Vickers. That Aimpoint took one hell of a beating, and still kept going.

GET OUT OF MY MIND!

JK, I was actually thinking about the DD test when I wrote that. The M4, with the protective ears for the adjusters and decoupled knob and switch, is still probably tougher than the T1.

But I'm not going to blow up and throw 2 dozen rifles with a dozen M4's and a dozen T1's attached to prove it.

H

[kmrtnsn]

I have an M4 and 2 H1 aimpoints. I like the weight and size of the H1 optic but the M4 is much faster due to the larger feild of view.

Stop looking through the tube and start "seeing" the dot with both eyes open. Tape over the objective (front glass) with the Aimpoint turned on, then reacquire a target and you'll understand what I am talking about.

[ICANHITHIMMAN]

Stop looking through the tube and start "seeing" the dot with both eyes open. Tape over the objective (front glass) with the Aimpoint turned on, then reacquire a target and you'll understand what I am talking about.

I hear what your saying and thanks for the advice. I think it has more to do with the diffrent setups of the rifles. But I do find my larger aimpoint faster. I ran ACOGs for the 10 years I was in the Army and I shoot with both eyes open.

[BCmJUnKie]

I ran the M68 (M2) for a couple years.

I recently got the T-1 for my SBR's and its more suitable for my needs being so low profile.

There is nothing wrong with either.

I love them both

[quirino21]

I have both, you cant go wrong it either...

[seb5]

My personal red dot odyssey started with an EOtech. As my department issued us M2's I went with that on my personal weapon for about 6 years. After trying a T-1 I sold both my M-2's and have owned 3 T-1's for the last 3-4 years. We end up with so much stuff on our weapons that the weight was a factor. After adding Surefires BFG slings and rails the weight does add up. It's not that I can't carry it. it's that I don't prefer to. I also like pencil barrels for the most part.

I had one fog up several years ago at an EAG class and had it repaired. Since then I have had no issues. I leave them on and change the battery every New Years when I clean the rifles. FWIW I had to send in 2 M-2's from the department over the years as well.

I mount them on the front of the receiver and can't say the tube issue has ever been noticed. With 2 eyes open it doesn't matter. I recently bought a new 2 MOA for use with the magnifier but have been somewhat underwhelmed. There's nothing wrong with it, it's just not that much difference. So, for me T-1's are my answer. YMMV.

[Tennesseevolz]

I switched from a Comp M3 2 moa to the T1 4 moa- I am as accurate with both units and much prefer the T1- my only complaint is the lack of flip up lens caps-

[cbr]

I switched from a Comp M3 2 moa to the T1 4 moa- I am as accurate with both units and much prefer the T1- my only complaint is the lack of flip up lens caps-

So do you feel the T1 is a big enough improvement to justify ditching a perfectly good Comp ML3?

[jaxman7]

I don't know why, but I see the dot in the M4 as a clearer dot than the T1. My eyes have been pretty scratched up though, so it might just be me.


I've noticed this as well. The dot appears (to my eyes) to be more circular with slightly less flaring on the outer edges.

-Jax