Need some red dot education.

[R. Johnson]

When it comes to optics, like anything else, I'm aware you get what you pay for. However, I'd like to know how red dot sights from Primary Arms, Vortex, and Bushnell stack up against EOTech and Aimpoint. Can anyone fill me in?

 

[Barnney Fife]

Eotech

 

[uncle money bags]

When it comes to optics, like anything else, I'm aware you get what you pay for. However, I'd like to know how red dot sights from Primary Arms, Vortex, and Bushnell stack up against EOTech and Aimpoint. Can anyone fill me in?

They fill a need that does not require the best. That is about as diplomatic as I can put it. Its not an indictment of cheaper optics as an option for many, if not most shooters. However, the quality of Aimpoints and most Eotechs in terms of their construction and materials is a definite cut above.

 

[SMS]

However, I'd like to know how red dot sights from Primary Arms, Vortex, and Bushnell stack up against EOTech and Aimpoint. Can anyone fill me in?

How they stack up? They lag behind in terms of clarity, durability, accuracy, quality of construction, repeatability, amount of off center parallax, field of view, and ability to handle recoil...

So many factors to consider, including intended use/need.

 

[aviator41]

Umb is right. I would be hard pressed to be a better shot with an eotech than I am with my bushnell. If I had to bet my life on it, I would spend whatever it took to get the best though, and that is eotech and aimpoint.

 

[Shadowrider]

UMB pretty much nailed it. Are they equal to Aimpoint/Eotech? Nope.

But they are fine for hunting in the Oklahoma woods and fun on the range. They are several cuts above NCStar and BSA and whatever other clones are out there that come from the same Chinese counterfeiters producing absolute crap. I wouldn't even put those on an air soft. All those mentioned along with Burris and Millet I'd say are fine and will be good for hobby type use, but for serious use stick with the best.

 

[jmike314]

I've got a Sightmark red dot & magnifier on my AR and they work for my recreational range shooting - they were not the cheapest but far from expensive.

One of our OSA members was nice enough to let me put some rounds downrange using his Eotech equipped M&P 15 and I can truly say the difference is night and day. The Eotech is by far a better optic.

Until I'm ready to drop the cost of a rifle on optics, my entry level Sightmark setup will serve me just fine.

 

[ASP785]

I have first hand experience with the Sightmark, Bushnell, Aimpoint and Eotechs only. I cannot recommend the Sightmark at all. The one I was sighting in suffered from a wandering zero and during sight in, the adjustment screw stripped out. The Bushnell worked fine but was obviously not built to the same quality standards as an Aimpoint. For hunting or recreational use, I see no problems using one. If you are going to use it hard, it may or may not hold zero.

Personally I keep a T1 on my home defense firearm and Eotechs on everything else. I much prefer the Eotech and reticle, but it simply cannot compete with the battery life of a T1.

 

[jakerz]

I have found that some of the cheaper red dots have a greenish tint to them. The micros is what I am referencing. Out of those available, I think the TRS-25 by bushnell is the best bang for your buck, with the Primary Arms a close second. I personally wasn't a fan of the Vortex Sparc, although I love their PST line.

With all that being said, none of these will replace the Aimpoints I run. I have the "cry once" mentality.

 

[CastleB]

Umb is right. I would be hard pressed to be a better shot with an eotech than I am with my bushnell. If I had to bet my life on it, I would spend whatever it took to get the best though, and that is eotech and aimpoint.

^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^
To add to it though, I really like my "cheap" Bushnell especially for the bullpup I have it on. No problems at all holding zero so far.