LooseRounds.com
5.56 Timeline
Weaponsman.com

First thoughts on the Aimpoint T1 iO Cover.

Aimpoint T1 IO Cover

The plastic iO covers for the Aimpoint T1 are shipping.  This slips right on an Aimpoint T1 and offers a front and rear lens cover for the T1.

2013-02-25 17.09.47

The caps can easily be snapped open by one hand, but they don’t always move completely move out of the way.

2013-02-25 17.10.01 2013-02-25 17.10.07

The caps can snap to each other to get them out of the way.  This can easily be done one handed, and shows off a Tango Down logo when nested together.

2013-02-25 17.10.14

 

The caps stay on the left, they are in the field of view but are out of the way.  While the caps can be opened and nested one handed, closing them takes me both hands.

If you are looking for lens covers for your Aimpoint T1, I would recommend the iO Cover.

Aimpoint VS. Eotech VS. ACOG. VS Aimpoint – Updated.

Aimpoint Eotech ACOG

An upper with no bolt carrier group was rested on wooden blocks.  Pictures were taken with a Samsung SIII.

100 Yards:

Eotech 552Eotech 552.  Reticle was hard to see.  Set to max brightness.

Aimpoint PROAimpoint PRO.  Reticle appeared clearer than in image.

Aimpoint T1Aimpoint T1

Trijicon ACOG TA01

ACOG TA01  Front sight base shadow was less visible then what the photograph shows.

200 Yards:

Eotech 552

Eotech 552.  At max brightness (with week old batteries) I could barely see the reticle at max brightness.

Aimpoint PRO

The Aimpoint PRO looked better then what the photo shows.

Aimpoint T1

Except for my finger in the picture, this photo well depicts the view thru the Aimpoint T1.

Trijicon ACOG TA01

The ACOG reticle was crisper then what the photo shows, and the front sight base shadow less apparent.

Tech Specs:

Aimpoint PRO – $400
11.6 oz
2 MOA Dot
One 3V 2L76 or DL1/3N
30,000 hours – about 3.4 years (@ setting 7 out of 10)
½ MOA clicks

Aimpoint T1 with mount LT660 – $650

3.7oz (not including mount)
4 (or 2) MOA Dot
One 3V CR2032
50,000 hours – about 5.7 years (@ setting 8 out of 12)
½ MOA clicks

Eotech 552 – $579

10.9 oz
1 MOA Dot, 65 MOA Ring
Two AA batteries
1,000 hours Lithium @ 12, 600 with alkaline (About 42 days) (@settings 12)
½ MOA clicks
 
Trijicon ACOG TA01
9.9 oz
Bullet Drop Calibrated Crosshair
No batteries
Tritium half-life ~12 years.
1/3 MOA click

Aimpoint VS. Eotech VS. ACOG VS. Aimpoint

I rounded up an Aimpoint PRO, Aimpoint T1 (4 MOA), an Eotech 552, and a Trijicon ACOG TA01 for a side to side comparison.  To try and get an unbiased opinion, I had a friend use all 4 optics on the same firearm, shooting both groups and assorted drills.

Comparing reflex sights to magnified optics is like comparing motorcycles to semi-trucks, but the subject is of much debate online.  The simple answer is that you need to select the optic that best suits your needs.

I had my friend start off by shooting groups at 25 yards.  His groups with iron sights and all the reflex sights were about the same.  However when he used the ACOG the group tightened up considerably.  I believe that because of having magnification and a crosshair that he slowed down and focused on the shooting fundamentals.

At this point my friend most preferred the ACOG.  After using the ACOG my friend stated, “This is more of a traditional scope, not a reflex or an ACOG.”  I proceeded to tease my friend about this statement for the rest of the day.

As for the reflex sights, my friend preferred the Aimpoint T1 the most, and the Eotech the least.  This Eotech had week old batteries and even at max brightness was hard to see in the Florida sunlight.  I must note that this is an older Eotech and newer ones may be brighter.

After the grouping exercise I had my friend practice bringing a rifle up from a ready position and engaging multiple locations on a target at 10 yards.  I started my friend with iron sights, then had him try the various optics.  I was surprised that for my friend, he found the ACOG faster and more comfortable for quick shooting.  Both the Aimpoint PRO and T1 were about the same, and the Eotech was still disliked due to it being dim and the reticle being cluttered.

Tried variations of multiple targets, and shooting left handed.  All the same results.  Trying to shoot left handed for my friend was awkward regardless of optic, but the reflex sights seemed to help.

While I was at the range, I got the chance to talk to a former Army officer and had him look over the various optics.  Without shooting with them, he came to the same conclusion that my friend did.  The Aimpoint T1 was the preferred optic, with the PRO being second choice.  The Eotech was disliked due to being dim.  My friend thought the Eotech reticle was cluttered and preferred just the dot in the reflex sights.  While they both liked the ACOG, both would have taken an Aimpoint over it.

When I asked about the difference in dot sizes or window size preferences, neither my friend nor the former Army officer noticed a difference, but they both liked the Aimpoint T1 better.

Personally, I used to be a big Eotech fan but then I had mine fail me.  Eotech’s record of failures keeps me from being able to like them anymore.  While I much prefer the Aimpoint T1, I highly recommend the Aimpoint PRO as the economical optic choice.  There are few bigger ACOG fans then myself, but I don’t believe that the ACOG is the right optic for most shooters, and that for the majority of people who plan to use their carbine as a home defense or close range firearm are better suited with a good Aimpoint over a magnified optic ACOG.

Light Comparison

Article Submitted by M

I thought I’d do a quick and informal comparison of the lights I have on hand.  Distance to the trash can was 25 yards.

 

First up is a 80 lumen Surefire 6P LED

 

Surefire 6P

 

 

Surefire G2Z with a drop in 220 lumen Q5 Cree LED lamp

 

Surefire G2Z

 

 

Surefire 6P with the 65 lumen incandescent bulb

 

Surefire 6P

 

 

Surefire X200A 60 lumen pistol light

 

Surefire X200A

 

 

Finally a 200 lumen Surefire M600C Scout Light

 

Surefire Scout Light M600C

 

 

 

So what conclusions can be drawn?

 

Well, the more light the better.  Revolutionary idea I know.

 

I would consider 200 lumens to be the minimum necessary for a rifle mounted weapon light.  Anything less isn’t going to allow for positive target ID at any real distance.

 

If anyone is still running a 65 lumen incandescent light on their rifle I would strongly urge them to upgrade as there are far better and more capable options out there nowadays.

 

If found for the right (low) price on the used market, the now discontinued X200 could still be useful as a light on a home defense bed side pistol, otherwise spring for the far more capable X300.

 

The Q5 Cree drop in LED lamp is a viable option for upgrading older 6P and G2 lights.  It dramatically increases the light output with hardly any decrease in battery life.  I’ve been using one in the G2Z light I carry at work for a year now and have no complaints.  It’s held up well to the everyday wear and tear and occasional drops that come with being a work tool.  It’s also given me a far brighter light in a far smaller package than the Streamlights most of my co workers carry.