View Full Version : Dear Aimpoint,
As you well know, more Aimpoints reside atop more ARs than any other type of rifle- and for good reason- ARs & Aimpoints go together like peanut butter & jelly. They are rugged, batteries last forever and that little red dot makes aiming so much easier. Just park that little red dot where you want the bullet to go.
However, ARs have a high line of sight over the bore. That means, when sighted in for 100 yards, POI is a good inch and a half below POA at common CQB ranges. With training, shooters can compensate for that, but I was thinking, as much as I love my micro, I'd love it even more if it had two dots. One would be for zeroing at 100 yards and the second one for bad breath ranges. No guessing, just bottom red dot & bang.
So, whaddya say- have'm ready by Christmas? At least a prototype by Shot Show? I bet you'd sell them by the bushel full- I'd buy one.
Thanks!
Do not want.
Train enough and the Aimpoint hold-over becomes a non-issue.
gearedforacure
11-05-15, 22:30
Do not want.
Train enough and the Aimpoint hold-over becomes a non-issue.
Agreed. I think the OP is looking for a precision BDC reticle optic rather than a cqb sight. There are optics out there for when you need more data. I love the aimpoint for its simplicity.
"Train Enough" is sometimes a euphemism for "Spend More Time & Money To Learn How To Do Something The Hard Way". A second dot is more precise than the imaginary distance from dot to a lower POI, especially when tracking a fast moving target. That's why reticles with multiple elevation marks have taken over the market.
I am not looking for a BDC, I want a faster, more versatile Aimpoint and a second dot would do just that
gearedforacure
11-05-15, 22:54
A second dot "could" be more accurate with proper training. All these ranged optics are only as accurate as the distance you are guessing the target to be at.
I personally don't want any more data in my optic.
To me this just screams "I want adjustable sights on my glock" when all the shooting you do is within 15yds and you should be point shooting anyways.
echo5whiskey
11-05-15, 23:39
Mist, I get what you're saying, and I think I get your rationale. I also think I understand the other two posters as well. I understand that having a precise POA/POI dot may seem advantageous, but the dot is not necessarily meant for precise aiming at CQB distances. At that close, it is better as a reference point. Through training, you should be able to get to where you don't need to "aim" with the dot (see point shooting mentioned above).
In a CQB environment, you shouldn't be taking the time to lay the dot exactly where you want to hit anyway. That's a good way to get shot. On top of that, 1.5" shouldn't throw your shot outside the lethal zones. If it does, then you do need more training.
I know it's tough not being able to get all the training you want, the way you want--especially with the price of ammo (at least here, locally).
A cheap method, may be to get an inexpensive LBS (the kind that inserts into the chamber), and practice presentation until you don't need to actually aim when that close.
...but then hey, if Aimpoint decides to harken to your request, more power to you and all those who buy it.
Stay safe.
One of the reasons I sight my Aimpoints in at 50 and my variables in at 100. Less POA/POI deviation. But you know that, Wolf...;)
Yes. Yes I do.
Take your AR out and try it on a smaller, fast moving target like a jackrabbit. Let one bust out from your feet and try your red dot on it while trying to remember how much hold over you gotta use. Maybe this has nothing to do with fighting your rifle (I am by no stretch of the imagination a face shooter) as there is no incoming fire, but it is dynamic shooting in its purest form, with both shooter and target on the move. And when switching from target to target from close in to out to 100 yards or so, I find myself wishing I had dual dots. This is an idea that's come to me after sending a bit a ammo down range and I think I have an idea how to test it
echo5whiskey
11-06-15, 00:39
My apologies. I thought since you mentioned CQB distances, you were specifically referring to CQB applications. I'm positive you have vastly more experience with jackrabbits than I do, since I've never shot one :P I can see your point more with shooting at something that size.
No apologies necessary. Sometimes it's easy to forget that while we share common interests on this board, we all still have differing views. I'm guilty of that all too often.
I rarely use any firearm for just a single purpose. I have a10.5 shorty AR I set up for HD but that doesn't stop me from taking it plinking or stretching it out to 200 or 300 yards and when I find a good place to hunt (we just moved to a new area) I'll take it out to the field. I really do think that a two dot sight would make for a versatile RDS from in close to, say 200 yards or so
Others may disagree but I think you're on to something, thought I'm not sure that I would want two exact size dots. In this circumstance the reticle is the one advantage I see to the Eotech. It really is very quick to use the bottom of the circle for about 15 yards and in. Our patrol rifle qualifier requires brain box shots (on DEA Q? targets) while moving from 10 to 5 yards and it really does work pretty well for that. I think if I could have all the advantages of an Aimpoint with an approximation of that reticle that would be pretty great.
Coal Dragger
11-06-15, 02:55
This might be a good time to think about the Leupold D-EVO....
Sight your red dot sight in for 50 yards, and just use it for close stuff and then use the 6X as needed for those 100 yards and beyond shots.
Someone else beta test this for me, so I don't have to risk buying an optic that might be a turd...
It looks like Eotech makes a 2 dot version.
http://www.eotechinc.com/holographic-weapon-sights/model-exps3
It looks like Eotech makes a 2 dot version.
http://www.eotechinc.com/holographic-weapon-sights/model-exps3
Yes but the top dot is for 50/200 yards. The bottom dot is for 500 yards.
The bottom of the ring is 7 yards.
Yes but the top dot is for 50/200 yards. The bottom dot is for 500 yards.
The bottom of the ring is 7 yards.
Or you can get a one dot Eotech and utilize that. Zero the dot for whatever distance you want and figure out what kind of hold you're using at CQB. Not very complicated.
I don't believe the OP is an EOTech guy anyway so it's all probably a moot point.
Yea, maybe a bdc rds.
Or just zero at 300 and accept that its a cqb optic.
I'll open by saying I work for Aimpoint as a Prostaff member, now onto the answer.
It is not at all likely given how Aimpoint optics are designed. The dot is produced by an LED emitter and for two dots you would need two emitters and thus cost would be higher. This could also create problems for zeroing...do both dots move at the same time and hope for the best as far as the close range offset dot zero? If not are there two sets of turrets? You're looking for a solution to a training problem...
Train, train, train. Once you get accustomed to working with offset it becomes second nature.
I'll open by saying I work for Aimpoint as a Prostaff member, now onto the answer.
Joe, thank you for taking your time to respond.
It is not at all likely given how Aimpoint optics are designed. The dot is produced by an LED emitter and for two dots you would need two emitters and thus cost would be higher.
With all due respect, I'm well aware that adding a second dot will be adding to cost
This could also create problems for zeroing...do both dots move at the same time and hope for the best as far as the close range offset dot zero? If not are there two sets of turrets?
Adding hash marks to a reticle doesn't require adding turrets and neither should adding a dot. Pick a good distance between the two that will give the offset needed and let shooters run with it
You're looking for a solution to a training problem...
Train, train, train. Once you get accustomed to working with offset it becomes second nature.
I used to say the same thing about the RDS. Train with your open sights and it will become second nature.
However, after spending a few hundred rounds (and dollars) trying to use the offset with a single dot, it still hasn't become second nature. I am not satisfied with being able to place the shot where I want on demand using the offset. It's actually easier for me to use the iron sights up close because I can bury the front sight to the right height. Why? Because I have a real visual reference. I'm not saying the FOV of an Aimpoint should be cluttered with multiple dots. I just want one extra and even of the offset of the second dot isn't perfect, it's a more solid reference point than trying to imagine where the invisible dot should be.
I like simple. A second dot will make training for offset simpler and skill will be acquired faster so more time can be spent on other aspects. That's why many experts like the RDS- it simplifies training
I don't believe the OP is an EOTech guy
I couldn't afford the batteries
I couldn't afford the batteries
http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/11/06/21bc736d0b3eedba77c6800eab5f88af.jpg
$17 & last you a lifetime. :)
I have been using an Aimpoint ML2 for over 15 years and I think it is top shelf. We always want to develop a better mousetrap, so why not think outside the box?
As long as we are asking for new products, I wouldn't mind seeing a RDS with two illuminated rings. The lower ring would be for conversational distances and the upper ring for 100-300 yards. If calibrated properly the lower ring could also be used at 600 yards.
At close ranges, headshots get aimed at the hairline, otherwise aim clavicle height for an upper torso hit. One dot works for me. Even if there were two dots, your hits would be somewhere in between the two dots in almost all situations, right? You would still be guesstimating.
How close are those jack rabbits? We are only talking a 2" holdover at 10 yards and less than an inch at 25. I can't even hold that accurately on a snap shot, so I don't worry about it. I run fixed DD front sights or FSB's on my rifles. I find that with my normal cheek weld, the red dot sits above the front sight image by about 1 1/2" at 10 yards. If I have time to take a slow shot at those distances, I use this little space for precision head shots on grouse, ptarmigan and squirrels.
I honestly find that I subconsciously/habitually look under the dot at short distances and have to consciously aim the dot at 100. That's fine to me since you should be concentrating harder on those 100+ yard shots anyway. It certainly can be trained because I do the majority of my carbine training at less than 25 yards with a 50 yard zero. My mind has been trained to automatically hold over on "close" shots, but it does so subconsciously.
On the brightest setting of my Aimpoint Pro, one dot set for zero at 10 yards and the other dot set for zero at 50 yards would look like a figure eight to me.
As I said, the way we hunt jackrabbits, range can vary from way the heck out there, to breaking out from right under your feet. It's a lot of fun.
While guesstimating may still be needed, having a second dot would allow a reference point for a better guesstimate. Otherwise, why bother with hash marks & mildots instead of just a plain crosshair in a scope?
gearedforacure
11-07-15, 00:16
Otherwise, why bother with hash marks & mildots instead of just a plain crosshair in a scope?
Those reticles are designed for a whole different purpose than a CQB optic.
Im confident an optic already exists for the type of shooting you do, and an aimpoint is likely not the best fit.
steyrman13
11-07-15, 09:28
Why not use a lower mount? If you don't have a fixed FSP or a light/laser in the way, then you can go with a low mount
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Do not want.
Train enough and the Aimpoint hold-over becomes a non-issue.
Well said. The simpler something is, the easier it will be to use especially during extreme stress.
daddyusmaximus
11-13-15, 09:14
However, ARs have a high line of sight over the bore. That means, when sighted in for 100 yards, POI is a good inch and a half below POA at common CQB ranges.
Thanks!
Who gives a *#@* about an inch and a half at CQB ranges?
daddyusmaximus
11-13-15, 09:41
Jumped the gun... didn't read you were talking about rabbit hunting. For me that's a 10/22 or shotgun deal, (suckers are quick) but if you were out during a SHTF and got hungry, I can see where an AR would be a rabbit gun. (anything gun)
Do not want.
Train enough and the Aimpoint hold-over becomes a non-issue.
This.
I have been this way with pistols for quite some time, however I feel that I am finally getting to the point where I don't need to use my rifle sights or RDS from "bad breath" distances and not shoot any worse. It's taken me a lot of rounds to get there, but I am very pleased with the results I am seeing.
ad_infinitum
11-15-15, 06:40
No, no two dots for me. Confusing.
What I want is for AP to introduce more battery options, namely add the CR123A to the M4 model. In the low position a la M4s.
CR123A is such a popular cell used in Surefire flashlights, even Eotech has it. For users who standarsize on 123s, it should be an option. So then you don't have to deal with both AA and 123 chemistries. And they need to drop the weird and uncommon 3N bullshyte with a lower runtime than either 123 or AA Lithium.
Don't hold your breath on a cr123 battery for the M4s. The reason it has a AA battery is due to an Army request.
Defaultmp3
11-16-15, 07:38
There is a military issued red dot with the EOTech reticle of 1 MOA dot with a 65 MOA ring: https://shieldpsd.sharepoint.com/Pages/ShieldCQS.aspx
Battery life is not up to the Aimpoint's, but is still substantially longer than any EOTech, since it's a true red dot and not a HWS. My understanding is that it has been issued by MoD, and has held up well under use, though it's all third hand info. Not quite the same as having a second dot, but does give more reference versus the standard single dot.
ad_infinitum
11-16-15, 15:12
Aimpoint can issue different models in AA and 123.
With CR123, they can tap into the market of those who standardize on 123 and buy eotech xps.
123 is a very popular cell, they have a gazillion flashlights that run on it.
No way to 2 dots. Hells no, actually.
misanthropist
12-09-15, 00:51
There is a military issued red dot with the EOTech reticle of 1 MOA dot with a 65 MOA ring: https://shieldpsd.sharepoint.com/Pages/ShieldCQS.aspx
Battery life is not up to the Aimpoint's, but is still substantially longer than any EOTech, since it's a true red dot and a HWS. My understanding is that it has been issued by MoD, and has held up well under use, though it's all third hand info. Not quite the same as having a second dot, but does give more reference versus the standard single dot.
Sorry to drag up a thread from a few weeks back, but I happened to be reading this thread and saw the mention of Shield optics.
I work for a gun magazine (well, the only gun magazine) up here in Canada and we beat on a Shield pretty hard.
http://calibremag.ca/shield-red-dot-torture-test/
I don't get paid for clicks or anything so if you want the tl;dr version, they're really tough. I didn't write the article but I was there when the optic got beaten on. It was pretty harsh. The optic itself is still running, and riding on a Valtro PM-5 shotgun of mine.
Anyway not really a solution to the Aimpoint issue, if you consider it an issue, but since I noticed the Shield get a mention I thought I'd comment on the durability because I'm one of probably a very small number of people here who would have beaten on one.
Full disclosure: I don't get paid by Shield but they might advertise in my magazine, I don't know. I have met the owners of Shield. They are good people. I once owned a company which tried to make a business deal with them, but they turned us down. So I have some vague ties but nothing that would make me particularly inclined to astroturf for them.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.