Burris MTAC 1-4 or Eotech

Finally got my MOE I in FDE, LOVE it. Now its time for optics. I have been weighing Aimpoint or EOTech mostly. But with my eyes the Aimpoint RD has a comma when I look thru it. I liked the EOTech AA battery types and its bulls eye style reticle. But you have lots of weight added if I had to add a magnifier. THEN I saw WA101's pic of his MOE with the Burris MTAC in the T vs MOE thread. After lots of online research especially Johns site Mountain Guerrilla and his review.It seems to be a better choice, some magnification which will help in low light conditions and target ID for these slightly older eyes and great field of view and a reticle that draws you to the target both illuminated an no Illum. I'm looking for input from EOtech and MTAC users on pros/cons. Hey WA101, is that a PEPR mount on yours? Also is it a QD or the screw type? Looks like it gives a 1/3 co witness which is the type I prefer. Is it really that clear as in the pic and would you do the scope and mount the same if you had to do it all over again.?

I'm just an Eo-Tech user. I own the AA battery type Eo-Tech. I thought it would be heavy, but it's not. The Eo-Tech 512 is lighter than it looks. It does have a big rail footprint.

Pro: Big sighting window, common AA batteries, 1 MOA dot unmagnified. 1 MOA dot under 3X Magnification.

Con: Laser Holographic projection sucks down batteries like a hog as compared to LED dots.

Other than that, I say take a look down an Eo-Tech and a Burris MTAC. Whichever one your eye perceives better, go for that one.

As always, what is your primary purpose? If it's close quarters stuff, then the EOTech is the right answer. If you'll mostly be at the range shooting paper targets, then a scope is better.

So, what's your game?

My old agency used various models of the Eo Tech on our M4's. You would think a holo sight might be fragile, but these sights were not, and they held up very well. Great sight for close range combat type use, and I keep one of my own AR equipped with one for that purpose.

That said, unless the gun is specifically for the above purpose, I like a low magnification, vari powered scope with an illuminated reticule for an all arounder. Helps you be able to take advantage of the range and accuracy of the AR platform, and still works well at 1 or 2x for close range speed work.

Larry

OP what distances we talking about?

I prefer Aimpoints but nothing wrong with the Eotech.

Also I consider red dots good out to 200 yards whereas most seem to think they are limited to 100 yards.

If you've convinced yourself that you need magnification, I would go with the MTAC or similar optic (there are a lot of good choices in that 1-4x category) rather than an 1x optic with a separate magnifier.

Yea, I was waiting for the what are you going to use it for question. It will be a all purpose rifle setup. Close to medium range up to probably 250-300. I don't like a 5.56 for reach out and touch someone ranges from personal bad experiences. I like the HWS and its reticle and it excels in close ops and was originally my choice but magnification options is a big help in low light and target ID and adding the magnifier to EoTech just pushes cost up to near ACOG standards and adds clutter. I know you aren't suppose to use the scope for target ID and threat assessment because its a loaded puppy.But after multiple vacations in the sandbox, That's what you use it for when on patrol, convoy and checkpoints. It helps you decide on if the person coming is a threat and is gonna get lit up or just carrying something innocent that just happened to look like a weapon. A scope does help a lot in low light like early evening. The issue came up when I found the MTAC had a reticle like the EoTech, Dam them I cant justify multiple same weapons setup for different missions to a spouse. So it will be a all purpose weapon setup. My issue is finding folks with experience with the MTAC to tell me what they like and may now not like with their choice and if they would change or tweak something on it.

SoCoRuss,

Congrats on the new MOE Mid!

As for your questions....

Yes, I have the Burris MTAC 1-4X24 mounted on my MOE Mid with the QD version of the Burris PEPR Mount. The mount came as a package with the scope, and it was a good deal for the combo. That being said, I'd recommend PEPR regardless of the scope it's mounting. The PEPR mount seems to be well designed and built.



I got my MID MOE earlier this year and only added the scope a couple of weeks ago, so I don't have a lot of experience with it yet.

Initially, I ought I'd like an Eotech, but my eyes see all the dots that make up an Eotech reticle and I found it very distracting when I got a chance to look at one in person. Further, after a few range visits and a class I took using the basic iron sights, I came to the conclusion that I'd have more fun if I had an optic with some magnification. That's the short version of how I ended up with the 1-4X MTAC, and I'm happy with my decision so far.

Everybody's eyes are different and all optics are a compromise, so choosing the right optic can be a very personal thing. I looked at quite a few optics before settling on the MTAC. At least to my eyes, the MTAC has good glass and a useful reticle for both long and short range shots.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Thanks for the Input WA101.
Thats my issue too, the eyes are getting older and I really like that reticle. Question, In the pic on the other thread it looks like the scope is a 1/3 cowitness or is it a full cowitness and it was just the angle you took the pic at?

SoCoRuss said:

Question, In the pic on the other thread it looks like the scope is a 1/3 cowitness or is it a full cowitness and it was just the angle you took the pic at?

Click to expand...

I don't know what thread you're referring to, but it doesn't matter. There are very few magnified optics that will co-witness. Due to eye relief being a critical aspect of magnified optics, they tend to be too far back to allow the rear sight to be used while the optic is mounted.

This is obvious in WA101's pic.

This is how you co-witness with a magnified scope:

That isn't co-witness either. It's just a red dot that happens to be mounted on a scope.

SoCo, If you are thinking that an MTAC at 1x will co-witness with irons like a 1x red dot (even if you could somehow mount a rear sight) it won't, not well anyway. There's enough magnification at 1X to make irons about useless.

If you are just wondering where the center of the scope will be when mounted in the PEPR (in comparison to an AR rear sight aperture) it will be a bit higher. The center of an AR rear sight aperture will be around 1.4in. The PEPR is 1in to the bottom of the ring, then add half the diameter of the MTAC tube, 15mm (.59in) = 1.59in. There are lots of choices with one-piece mounts, some higher and some lower. This is the most informative and detailed I have ever seen regarding AR one-piece scope mounts. http://www.maxicon.com/guns/optics/one_piece/ar15_onepiece_mounts.htm

ChattanoogaPhil said:

That isn't co-witness either. It's just a red dot that happens to be mounted on a scope.

Click to expand...

Yes, I know. I was being facetious, but I guess I forgot my [sarcasm] tags.

I saw that pic on the T vs MOE thread and figured it was a low Co witness which is what I want. I had already sent an email to Burris earlier and they said Full Co witness and that thru me for a loop. You call a customer service number 3 times and you get 5 different answers

In my set up with the scope mounted such that the ocular bell is above the folded down MBUS, it is not possible to co-witness in terms of aligning the scope reticle with the front and rear iron sights since I'd have to remove the scope to get the rear MBUS up.

I shoot with the stock fully extended so I have the scope mounted with the ocular lens just forward of the charging handle to give me 4" of eye relief relative to my cheek weld on the extended stock.

If you shoot with your nose closer to the charging handle, it would be possible to mount the scope further forward so that it doesn't interfere with the MBUS in the up position. Here's a video discussing co-witness with an MTAC mounted in a forward position on an AR-15

http://youtu.be/PdoIZiR6f0o

I curious as to why you want to co-witness with a scope? The scope reticle is etched into the rear focal plane glass and is black when the illumination is off, so you'll never lose the reticle even if the illumination fails. The illumination is really only needed for low light conditions or to provide contrast against a dark background. Further, with the reticle etched into the glass I'm not sure if it is really practical to align the scope reticle with the front and rear sights since you can't just move it to align with irons like you can with a projected red dot or halo graphic image on those types of optics. I would think that it would probably be necessary to have the scope mounted such that the centerline is nominally 2.6" above the bore like iron sights if you want to truly co-witness the scope with irons. The Burris PEPR mount is probably too high since it puts the centerline of the scope about 2.75" over the bore, so you may have to find a different mount if you want true co-witness with the irons. My guess is that this is what the Burris rep may have been referring to when you spoke to them. It's probably possible to co-witness if the scope centerline is reasonably aligned with the irons but you can't throw it on any mount and move the reticle down to the lower 1/3 of the tube like you can with a red dot or other fully projected type sighting optic.

As already noted, co-witnessing was never going to be practical with my scope set-up so it's not something I've put a lot go thought into, so I may not be the best resource on this topic.

WA101-I understand, what I should have said was I just dont want the front sight in the way i.e full co-witness. I like it lower than the retical, less clutter in the field of view.

Ok, that makes since.

If you use the PEPR mount, the scope centerline will be about 2 3/4" above the bore. At 1x, the reticle will appear above the front post as shown in my photo on the T vs MOE thread. Basically, the front sight post will appear in about the lower 1/3 of the scope window, so it would be like lower 1/3 co-witness except the reticle will not be aligned with the post; therefore, it's not a true co-witness. The reticle will be above the post at 1x and the post will completely disappear from the field of view at any magnification greater than 2.5x.

If you're going to use a different mount, you'll need to check the mounting height to make sure it will put the scope centerline at least 2 3/4" above the bore so that the front sight post will not interfere with the reticle at 1x. Scope centerline at 1.55" above the rail should also work since I believe the standard rail is 1.2" above the bore.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SoCoRuss said:

WA101-I understand, what I should have said was I just dont want the front sight in the way i.e full co-witness. I like it lower than the retical, less clutter in the field of view.

Click to expand...

You can always replace the gas block and ditch the co-witness altogether. Co-witness is nice if the batteries ever fail, but that's usually not an issue with a magnified scope.

The issue I have with a lower 1/3rd co-witness is scope height. To get the best accuracy the scope should be as close to the bore as possible. The AR design already requires the scope to be really high. So, getting a 1/3rd co-witness with standard A2/3 sights is just adding to the problem.

Also, the whole idea of co-witnessing is to keep you in the fight. Are you planning on using the gun in the revolution?

Possibly, the way the Supreme Court keeps putting out really stupid rulings and avoiding decisions to stop this insanity going on.

But I really do apprciate all the advice and help though.

I have an EOTech on a LaRue QD mount, an Aimpoint on a LaRue QD mount, and an MTAC 1x4 also on a LaRue QD mount. I like LaRue. All are on different rifles. I also have a Sig red dot, but it has been mounted on a M&P 15/22 until recently. I like the Aimpoint better than the EOTech, but both are very good, tough, reliable, and accurate for quick and close work. The MTAC is better suited, in my view, to the 3 gun games. Although I like it, and is mounted on a very good LWRC rifle, it is not my go to gun/scope combo. As said above, it depends on your intended use.