>>28594184 Then how come we have not heard more about it? How come Russian SF (Who operate in the temperature shifts that supposedly cause the most obvious problems) use them so much? Why has this not been a common issue in reviews? How come nobody from SOF has brought this up before for causing lethal errors in marksmanship?
>>28594201 >Then how come we have not heard more about it? Eotech themselves admitted to the problem and it's only open news now.
>How come Russian SF (Who operate in the temperature shifts that supposedly cause the most obvious problems) use them so much? Because they got lied to as well.
>Why has this not been a common issue in reviews? Reviewers are generally fat, lazy bastards who don't know much about guns and certainly aren't willing to do an actual controlled battery or tests in freezing temps.
>How come nobody from SOF has brought this up before for causing lethal errors in marksmanship? They have, it was just under the radar until now and SOF don't generally have any obligation to discuss their going ons with the public.
I have a strange feeling it was only the milspec ones that had the issue, cause I've spoken with a number of people in the gun retail business and they've never heard of any issues with EOTechs, and they also recommend them over Aimpoints, particularly for the advantage in visibility.
>>28594247 Pretty much this. /k/ loves to pick up on any defect in a product and act like it's undeniable proof the product is nothing but shit.
The truth is this won't affect 99% of the shooting public. If you like EOtechs go and buy one- I personally think they have the best CCO reticule out there- just be aware of the issues you may run into.
Inb4 >you're just an eotech fanboy I use an eotech on my service rifle and it's just fine. On my personal rifle I use an Aimpoint micro, mostly because I could get it for cheaper then an eotech.
>>28594352 the company are trying to market it to the Force the same optic was mount on this Zihamsh experimental rifle( the one on top) their other produce, the BI-focal sight EE 39×30 d have been seen operated with SF > a company i know shit about you should watch their promotion video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rJG08ht1AI
>>28594397 >for now I'm told there was a memo put out directing us to switch out our EOtechs till the issues got solved out. But seeing as how our armorers don't have enough Elcans to switch out everybody's optics, it hasn't really happened. I've kept mine because it's lighter, I like the reticle more, and nobody is making me change it yet.
>>28594415 Not a clue. I was kind of hoping prices would drop with all this coming out, but I haven't seen anything yet.
Eotechs are good fun and easy to use but they aren't so reliable when abused and the effects are latent. I put one on my benelli M4 and it were great for about a year. Then my asshole friend dropped it when he borrowed it for 3 gun. It worked fine for 2 months after than and then it ceased to function entirely.
Still bought another since they are stupid easy to use.
>>28595026 I hate to be "that guy", but... CITATION NEEDED
I see many people who got authorization and returned it in early Dec still haven't actually received anything. I am unable to find any thread or blog post or other indication (other than your comment) that anyone has received a refund yet.
>>28594011 They're fucking garbage m8. Loss of zero in high or low temps, nitrogen leaks, delaminating holographic array etc.. Total shit and anyone who owns one should send it back for a full refund before they out tits up.
>>28595478 Reports like that are slow honestly, let's face it, russian special ops types aren't REALLY special ops types, they just make a few propaganda videos and don't even have enough training to raid a building and kill specific targets.
Likely they wouldn't go outside in extreme conditions to train save for maybe once in a blue moon, and any errors caused by drift may just be chalked up to being cold and shaky.
>>28594688 >optics being nearly prohibitively expensive is a good thing No.
>Gun ownership is a hobby Yuropoor detected. Gun ownership and weapons ownership in general is the right of any man. If you decide to take that responsibility then practicing with your firearm is what's important. Upgrades being so expensive that it's almost not worth indulging in is worth complaining about.
>>28594359 It wont be long till the COC says you are not permitted to use this on your weapon. I had one too. Its tough when you like something to admit its bad. But you need to junk it and get your refund, it might one day fail you on combat.
Battery life can be terrible. I hear they start good enough, but eventually start eating batteries fairly quickly.
While they aren't exactly frail like cheap optics, they aren't tough as nails like an Aimpoint.
It hasn't been a huge deal up until a few months ago. Because Bribes? Because the issues described are worst case scenarios, while actual field use isn't quite as severe. I guess SOF really wouldn't want to go around telling everyone their shit sucks. Maybe they just replace the shit after every mission?
As far as a range or home defense gun, I'd say that an EOtech would be fine. You likely aren't going to expose it to enough abuse to affect it. At home defense ranges, you should still be on target even if you experience the max drift. You don't have 100 yard hallways, do you?
If you are in the market for a good red dot, I'd go with Aimpoint, Meprolight, and Trijicon before EOTech. Some people really like the EOtech reticule. It is cool I guess, if it shows up in the right spot. Or a all.
I've honestly never had a problem with my 512 I got in 2007 but then again I'm not running it in extreme combat conditions. I have had it out shooting in sub freezing for a few hours only to go right into a 70 degree house a few times with no ill effects. POI has never really changed more than an inch or two at 100 rested. Maybe I'm just lucky, idk.
I have an Eotech 554 that I purchased from a guy who lives in my neighborhood. I've had it for 6 years and it's still going strong. My friend accidentally dropped it off my second level and it held zero. I don't abuse my equipment but I figure that's a decent drop test.
On another note, I can't seem to find much about the 554 model. It takes AA's, looks like a 512 but is NV compatible.
This thread makes me not want to ever sell it though:
>>28600464 Mine delaminated, so I put that down as the reason along with a note that researching my problem lead me to the reports that they don't have a permanent fix and plz gib refund.
The only reason I waited so long was I wanted to fit another optic before I gave the eotech up. My fear is that they accept all these returns and scrap the aluminum for cash, then declare bankruptcy. I've already pretty much written it off, but I would like to get my money back.
If they do release and updated product and someone can show that they've fixed the problem. I would probably buy another.
>>28600534 So long as I get it, I mean I could use more practice with my irons anyway. I've been spoiled with the optic. And realistically I could see a couple month wait though, probably not a full year though.
>>28600551 I beat mine to hell and back because I'd assumed it could take it. It's on my brush gun and while I know a lot of this probably won't effect me I'd rather not give it the chance to. Been considering replacing it anyway and figured this was my chance to get something more than $300 for it.
Also, I'm pretty sure if L-3 for some reason shuts down EOTech (which I don't see happening) they'll be forced to reimburse people directly. L-3 owns chunks of Lockheed and Raytheon is memory serves. They aren't gonna go down any time soon.
>eotech >the second most popular non-mag'd sight in use, period >literally millions of them out there >no one could figure out this issue for over a decade >took a lawsuit by SOF doing extreme testing like zeroing the optic in the arctic and bringing it to the desert and seeing it if holds zero >ignoring the fact no optic holds zero in extreme temperature changes because many reasons including literally the laws of physics
I have heard many examples of people saying "If you leave it in your truck on a hot day it'll lose zero" despite this situation occurring every single day for the past ten years on countless duty weapons, not a single fuck on AR15 thought to do any "tests" on these optics for an issue that is reportedly so common it could happen if you sneeze.
So, basically, for the average person in average use? eotechs are most likely fine. There are real issues with eotechs that are bigger than this, like the delamination, the 552's destroying themselves by turning the AA's into battering rams under recoil, the loss of brightness making them useless on sunny or snowy days, poor battery life, and others.
If you still owned an eotech before the lawsuit, you should still continue to own it. You hve all these other, tested, common knowledge issues you have accepted, the circumstances in the lawsuit will quite literally never affect you.. Your HD Weapon will not go 100 MOA off target and be useless because you set your thermostat to 76 instead of 72.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.