Aimpoint vs. aimpoint: PRO vs. CompC3 vs. CompM3?

[rhino]

Most people find larger dots (larger than 4 MOA) allow faster acquisition of the necessary visual cues at close ranges. For instance, the really fast Open Division shooters at the Steel Challenge will all use dots significantly larger than 4 MOA.

Keep in mind that the dots on Aimpoints are about as close to perfectly circular as you will find in the industry, with little or no "bloom" unless you turn the power higher than you need it. For that reason, they appear a little smaller than lesser competitors' products with the same spec for dot size. So, it's a little easier to use them precisely when you need to do so.

For instance, the 1 MOA dot in the middle of my EOTech reticle appears larger than the 2 MOA dot in an Aimpoint (to my eyes) because of the fuzziness around the outside of the dot (bloom). The Aimpoint dot is clearly defined and very easy to see and use.

I've never used a 2 MOA, so I'm curious. If the 2 MOA is more accurate for longer distance, why would you want the 4MOA?

Is it just easy to see at 100 yards?

What would the difference be at, say, 25 yards?

 

[ultraspec]

Two very different optics for two very different missions. Its apples to oranges.

An Aimpoint fills all of my needs.

explain the diff to me please. Im a complete noob to optics.

 

[rhino]

explain the diff to me please. Im a complete noob to optics.

If Evan doesn't mind . . .

An Aimpoint is a scope that displays a red dot to show where you are aimed and there is no magnification. Its illumination is provided by a battery powered LED emitter.

An ACOG is a low power, fixed power telescopic sight. Depending on the model, the magnification varies, but I believe the most common is 4X. Aiming is aided by a reticle pattern etched into the glass, which is illuminated by fiber optics gathering available light (I don't know if it also has tritium for illumination or not).

In general, red dots like the Aimpoint excel at closer distances, whereas magnified optics (especially non-adjustable) excel at middle to longer distances.

 

[shooter521]

The Aimpoint PRO doesn't have the high efficiency electronics. That's a pretty expensive feature but otherwise, the PRO is the same. If you don't need 2 year battery life, why spend the extra money?

The Aimpoint PRO has the CET diode, while the M3 and ML3 have the ACET diode. The difference in battery life is 30,000 hours (3+ years of continuous use) and 50,000 hours (5+ years of continuous use), respectively. I would say both are "high efficiency," especially when comparing to something like an EOTech.

 

[esrice]

If Evan doesn't mind . . .

Not at all.

What Joe said.

 

[Clay]

The Aimpoint PRO has the CET diode, while the M3 and ML3 have the ACET diode.

this is another point where I'm confused. On the Aimpoint website, all three of these optics are shown as having ACET.