Posted: 12/2/2015 7:42:52 AM EDT
|
Original Article Link
An Ann Arbor, Mich.-based weapons contractor agreed to pay the government $25 million last month for having knowingly delivered flawed holographic rifle sights to the FBI and the Defense and Homeland Security departments. EOTech, according to the government’s complaint released Monday by the Defense Department inspector general, knew during seven years of sales that there were deficiencies in its weapon sights -- designed to allow users to find a target and return fire -- in environments with extreme heat or cold. The subsidiary of L3 Communications Corp. has long manufactured and sold “combat optical sights” that can be mounted on weapons used by special operations forces, primarily at the U.S. Naval Surface Warfare Center in Crane, Ind. Company president Paul Mangano and others “became aware that design defects in EOTech's sights caused them to fail in cold temperature and in humid environments,” said the complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Yet the manufacturer was required to alert the government of “any and all performance related data that would positively and negatively impact the reliability, maintainability, availability and/or supportability” of the device. The problems were not caught until the FBI did tests in May 2015. |
|
Quoted:
Original Article Link An Ann Arbor, Mich.-based weapons contractor agreed to pay the government $25 million last month for having knowingly delivered flawed holographic rifle sights to the FBI and the Defense and Homeland Security departments. EOTech, according to the government’s complaint released Monday by the Defense Department inspector general, knew during seven years of sales that there were deficiencies in its weapon sights -- designed to allow users to find a target and return fire -- in environments with extreme heat or cold. The subsidiary of L3 Communications Corp. has long manufactured and sold “combat optical sights” that can be mounted on weapons used by special operations forces, primarily at the U.S. Naval Surface Warfare Center in Crane, Ind. Company president Paul Mangano and others “became aware that design defects in EOTech's sights caused them to fail in cold temperature and in humid environments,” said the complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Yet the manufacturer was required to alert the government of “any and all performance related data that would positively and negatively impact the reliability, maintainability, availability and/or supportability” of the device. The problems were not caught until the FBI did tests in May 2015. Lots of threads on this already. 
|
|
Quoted:
It shouldn't do that 
My eotech 512 has never gone bang.  Quoted:
Quoted:
Mine goes bang very time I pull the trigger. It shouldn't do that
My eotech 512 has never gone bang. I was simply offering the typical Arfcom response that's given when a particular piece of equipment or type of ammo is found by legitimate sources to be wanting. I bought a Holosight back in 2005 and it's still perfectly reliable but now, due to the recent revelations, I'm afraid to take it into battle in the event that the Lizard Men finally attack. |
|
Quoted:
I was simply offering the typical Arfcom response that's given when a particular piece of equipment or type of ammo is found by legitimate sources to be wanting. I bought a Holosight back in 2005 and it's still perfectly reliable but now, due to the recent revelations, I'm afraid to take it into battle in the event that the Lizard Men finally attack. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Mine goes bang very time I pull the trigger. It shouldn't do that
My eotech 512 has never gone bang. I was simply offering the typical Arfcom response that's given when a particular piece of equipment or type of ammo is found by legitimate sources to be wanting. I bought a Holosight back in 2005 and it's still perfectly reliable but now, due to the recent revelations, I'm afraid to take it into battle in the event that the Lizard Men finally attack. They are pretty scary 
|
| So the military has been successfully using the sight for 20 years and then the FBI comes along and determines it is unfit for service? Lol. The same FBI that helped handgun ammo and cartridge development and then went back to saying mid bore pistol rounds are best (because their recruits are apparently not proficient with larger rounds). Piss on them, my 552 has lived up to expectations. It has been an awesome sight. |
|
Odd, when I wrote them about my XPs wandering zero they explained how that was impossible with their sight. Moved 2-3 moa @ 200 yards off the bench 2 or 3 times a year. Shooting at 8 inch plates at 200 in 3G competition it was frustrating. The FBI information explains it perfectly.
For CQ it would be fine. But for accuracy work not so much. |
|
Quoted:
Odd, when I wrote them about my XPs wandering zero they explained how that was impossible with their sight. Moved 2-3 moa @ 200 yards off the bench 2 or 3 times a year. Shooting at 8 inch plates at 200 in 3G competition it was frustrating. The FBI information explains it perfectly. For CQ it would be fine. But for accuracy work not so much. Just out of curiosity, what kind of conditions are you shooting in? I've had an EXPS on my rifle for almost 3 years now and I can easily and repeatedly smack the 200 yd steel, still using the original zero from when I put the sight on. And it gets pretty damn hot n' muggy here in N. Florida. |
|
Quoted:
I perused the court document, and even the delamination issue on newer ones is mentioned lol. Quite a mess I don't really understand why people get so emotionally involved with a mass-produced object, indistinguishable from thousands of others. It's not like grand pappy carried it al El Alemein and it has sentimental value. If it works to your satisfaction, then great. But there's no reason to get emotionally defensive about it like I see some do. I mean these documents are pretty damning and conclusive. I guess some are afraid of feeling like a rube, but there's no shame in admitting you made a mistake. I bought three of them and every one failed, and I also used Fireclean exclusively on a couple guns. No big deal, I just learned the lesson, moved on, and won't buy any more of either. |
|
Quoted: I don't really understand why people get so emotionally involved with a mass-produced object, indistinguishable from thousands of others. It's not like grand pappy carried it al El Alemein and it has sentimental value. If it works to your satisfaction, then great. But there's no reason to get emotionally defensive about it like I see some do. I mean these documents are pretty damning and conclusive. I guess some are afraid of feeling like a rube, but there's no shame in admitting you made a mistake. I bought three of them and every one failed, and I also used Fireclean exclusively on a couple guns. No big deal, I just learned the lesson, moved on, and won't buy any more of either. Quoted: Quoted: I perused the court document, and even the delamination issue on newer ones is mentioned lol. Quite a mess I don't really understand why people get so emotionally involved with a mass-produced object, indistinguishable from thousands of others. It's not like grand pappy carried it al El Alemein and it has sentimental value. If it works to your satisfaction, then great. But there's no reason to get emotionally defensive about it like I see some do. I mean these documents are pretty damning and conclusive. I guess some are afraid of feeling like a rube, but there's no shame in admitting you made a mistake. I bought three of them and every one failed, and I also used Fireclean exclusively on a couple guns. No big deal, I just learned the lesson, moved on, and won't buy any more of either. When people spend $400+ on an optical product, and it's a turd, they have a right to become emotionally involved. |
|
Quoted: I don't really understand why people get so emotionally involved with a mass-produced object, indistinguishable from thousands of others. It's not like grand pappy carried it al El Alemein and it has sentimental value. If it works to your satisfaction, then great. But there's no reason to get emotionally defensive about it like I see some do. I mean these documents are pretty damning and conclusive. I guess some are afraid of feeling like a rube, but there's no shame in admitting you made a mistake. I bought three of them and every one failed, and I also used Fireclean exclusively on a couple guns. No big deal, I just learned the lesson, moved on, and won't buy any more of either. Quoted: Quoted: I perused the court document, and even the delamination issue on newer ones is mentioned lol. Quite a mess I don't really understand why people get so emotionally involved with a mass-produced object, indistinguishable from thousands of others. It's not like grand pappy carried it al El Alemein and it has sentimental value. If it works to your satisfaction, then great. But there's no reason to get emotionally defensive about it like I see some do. I mean these documents are pretty damning and conclusive. I guess some are afraid of feeling like a rube, but there's no shame in admitting you made a mistake. I bought three of them and every one failed, and I also used Fireclean exclusively on a couple guns. No big deal, I just learned the lesson, moved on, and won't buy any more of either. Because they're $500-fucking-dollars a piece, new! How the hell can you say, "don't really understand how people can get emotionally involved?" If you have $2000 worth of them sitting in your safe you wouldn't be concerned or pissed? Oh, just go get a new Aimpoint, or MRO... You must have thousands to throw away on "making mistakes." Mistake? No mistake about it as you bought something you believed to be of quality and reliable. Most bassackwards post yet on this subject... |
|
Quoted:
Were all of the cops installing them correctly? https://s17-us2.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http:%2F%2Fmodernserviceweapons.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F03%2F20130323-EOTech-IMG_1281.jpg&sp=e416a4a4f91eade67f4e00fbfde12a45 That's how all the "tier one" guys do it. Yo...... 
|
|
Quoted:
That's how all the "tier one" guys do it. Yo...... Quoted:
Quoted:
Were all of the cops installing them correctly? https://s17-us2.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http:%2F%2Fmodernserviceweapons.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F03%2F20130323-EOTech-IMG_1281.jpg&sp=e416a4a4f91eade67f4e00fbfde12a45 That's how all the "tier one" guys do it. Yo...... You should see the looks on people's faces when I show them this photo. |
|
Quoted:
When people spend $400+ on an optical product, and it's a turd, they have a right to become emotionally involved. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I perused the court document, and even the delamination issue on newer ones is mentioned lol. Quite a mess I don't really understand why people get so emotionally involved with a mass-produced object, indistinguishable from thousands of others. It's not like grand pappy carried it al El Alemein and it has sentimental value. If it works to your satisfaction, then great. But there's no reason to get emotionally defensive about it like I see some do. I mean these documents are pretty damning and conclusive. I guess some are afraid of feeling like a rube, but there's no shame in admitting you made a mistake. I bought three of them and every one failed, and I also used Fireclean exclusively on a couple guns. No big deal, I just learned the lesson, moved on, and won't buy any more of either. When people spend $400+ on an optical product, and it's a turd, they have a right to become emotionally involved. I was referring to those that defend them in the face of overwhelming evidence, but then again you've never displayed a propensity to properly reading and comprehending my posts any way. |
|
Quoted:
You should see the looks on people's faces when I show them this photo. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Were all of the cops installing them correctly? https://s17-us2.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http:%2F%2Fmodernserviceweapons.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F03%2F20130323-EOTech-IMG_1281.jpg&sp=e416a4a4f91eade67f4e00fbfde12a45 That's how all the "tier one" guys do it. Yo...... You should see the looks on people's faces when I show them this photo. I would guess it looks like
Because most people won't know what's wrong |
|
Quoted:
Because they're $500-fucking-dollars a piece, new! How the hell can you say, "don't really understand how people can get emotionally involved?" If you have $2000 worth of them sitting in your safe you wouldn't be concerned or pissed? Oh, just go get a new Aimpoint, or MRO... You must have thousands to throw away on "making mistakes." Mistake? No mistake about it as you bought something you believed to be of quality and reliable. Most bassackwards post yet on this subject... Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I perused the court document, and even the delamination issue on newer ones is mentioned lol. Quite a mess I don't really understand why people get so emotionally involved with a mass-produced object, indistinguishable from thousands of others. It's not like grand pappy carried it al El Alemein and it has sentimental value. If it works to your satisfaction, then great. But there's no reason to get emotionally defensive about it like I see some do. I mean these documents are pretty damning and conclusive. I guess some are afraid of feeling like a rube, but there's no shame in admitting you made a mistake. I bought three of them and every one failed, and I also used Fireclean exclusively on a couple guns. No big deal, I just learned the lesson, moved on, and won't buy any more of either. Because they're $500-fucking-dollars a piece, new! How the hell can you say, "don't really understand how people can get emotionally involved?" If you have $2000 worth of them sitting in your safe you wouldn't be concerned or pissed? Oh, just go get a new Aimpoint, or MRO... You must have thousands to throw away on "making mistakes." Mistake? No mistake about it as you bought something you believed to be of quality and reliable. Most bassackwards post yet on this subject... And another one. Sometimes I don't know why I compose posts of more than two sentences on this site... Hint: you're not trying to find a way to defend them and excuse your purchase in the face of evidence, so you're not who I'm talking about. And I bought two of them when I first got into ARs and didn't know better, then in a moment of weakness a newer one later to see for myself if they had improved(and it was a clonish build) Oh well. And yes, I'm financially stable. |
Join the Community
Your next conversation starts here.
Create your free account to join discussions, share your experience, save topics, and connect with the AR15.COM community.
- Join discussions
- Follow topics and replies
- Connect with fellow enthusiasts
Already a member? Sign in
Stay informed by subscribing to our Newsletter