Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Posted: 6/9/2003 3:46:15 AM EDT
I see more and more of these new but used sights for sale! Wonder why? LMK

Chris
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 4:32:19 AM EDT
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 4:42:43 AM EDT
Perhaps the longer battery life of the "E" models is one reason, "folks are upgrading." Mike
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 5:40:07 AM EDT
Originally Posted By mr_wilson: Perhaps the longer battery life of the "E" models is one reason, "folks are upgrading." Mike
View Quote
Exactly [:D] If I ever sell my first 552, it will be to get a version E 552.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 5:46:12 AM EDT
I think its real bulky looking! How durable is it and what's the warranty like? Will it sustain a hard impact or fail? LMK I have been shopping for months now and cant seem to make up my mind. [thinking]
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 7:09:22 AM EDT
[url]http://groups.msn.com/TheMarylandAR15ShootersSite/eotech1.msnw[/url] Read the review, it is a bit long but very detailed. Hope this helps.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 7:12:07 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/9/2003 7:20:28 AM EDT by Yojimbo]
Originally Posted By dcobra23: I think its real bulky looking! How durable is it and what's the warranty like? Will it sustain a hard impact or fail? LMK I have been shopping for months now and cant seem to make up my mind. [thinking]
View Quote
I just got a 552 and I don't think it's all that bulky. Considering that it's mounting hardware is built in, it's a nice and compact package. As far a toughness goes I believe a board member, Pincopalla, has seen one take a 20 meter fall from a helicopter! The MP5 it was mounted on was trashed but the EOTech was still working and put back into service! If it's tough enough for Delta and the SEAL Teams it should be tough enough for anyone. [:D]
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 7:15:02 AM EDT
Thats what I was looking for. Is that true for the 511 as well?
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 7:23:36 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/9/2003 7:24:59 AM EDT by Yojimbo]
Originally Posted By dcobra23: Thats what I was looking for. Is that true for the 511 as well?
View Quote
Are you asking about the toughness? I believe the 511 also has the protective hood like the 552 and the only real difference is the NV capability and longer battery life. So I would say yes, the 511 should be as tough as the 552. I'm sure Chen will correct me if I'm wrong. [;)]
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 2:39:22 PM EDT
I have a 511 and I agree with Yojimbo.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 4:13:20 PM EDT
" Will it sustain a hard impact or fail?" Yes, I beat the crap out of mine, and it has never lost its zero or failed in any manner. I replace my batteries every few months whether I need to or not, and carry a supply of them with me. I real world use mine and can't afford for it to go out. I was laying in sticker bushes for almost an hour on a baricaded suspect call where he had been shooting at people (last night). I had 100% confidence in my equipment that if I needed to make the shot that I would get the hit. A buddy of mine just came back from Iraq (SF team leader), where he was using the Aimpoint. He commented that the guys on the teams felt they were old technology and liked their EOTechs better. To each their own, but for CQB up to 100 yard engagements, I feel the EOTech is the better tool.
Link Posted: 6/9/2003 11:32:06 PM EDT
amen to Stick's comment. my department got a bunch of BMs and put them in service, a bean counter ordered 4x 20 scopes for them. then they sent us to rapid response (active school shooter, type stuff) training. the optics are useless in a school. anyway...i trust my Eotech for anything out to 100 yrds, moving, or shooting on the move too!!
Link Posted: 6/10/2003 5:29:10 PM EDT
I just ordered a 511 for my A3 carbine. Does it take very long to zero these sights?
Link Posted: 6/10/2003 5:42:21 PM EDT
I had my personal 552 dialed in after about 6-8rounds...pretty easy to sight in!
Link Posted: 6/10/2003 5:50:25 PM EDT
EoTech is supreme. 0-200 yards, IMHO there is no better sight. Mines a 512 cause I'll never own NV. Love that sight.
Link Posted: 6/10/2003 8:16:53 PM EDT
Originally Posted By mr_wilson: Perhaps the longer battery life of the "E" models is one reason, "folks are upgrading." Mike
View Quote
Yep, folks are upgrading for the new rubber control panel, better waterproofing, and a little more battery life. I have a 551 Rev. E.
Link Posted: 6/10/2003 10:26:25 PM EDT
I just received my 551 from SWFA today, looks really good and is so much faster than iron sights (I have never used an aimpoint so I can't compare the two) I believe one of the main differences between the 510 series and the 550 series is the 550 is submersible. Some people gripe about the battery life being only that of 70hrs for average use. I'll take the weight savings and have to replace my batteries more often thank you very much. My only complaint is the sight doesn't retain the last brightness setting that was used when you turn it on.
Link Posted: 6/11/2003 4:20:11 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Nickster: I just received my 551 from SWFA today, looks really good and is so much faster than iron sights (I have never used an aimpoint so I can't compare the two) I believe one of the main differences between the 510 series and the 550 series is the 550 is submersible.
View Quote
Actually, all Holosights are waterproof and submersible. The 510 series are good down to 10 feet and the 550 series are good down to 33 feet.
Some people gripe about the battery life being only that of 70hrs for average use. I'll take the weight savings and have to replace my batteries more often thank you very much.
View Quote
The "N" batteries will last approx. 100 hours and the AA lithiums will last 500 hours. The weight difference between the 510 and 550 series is only 2.7 ounces!!! Do you really consider that a weight savings? How much other gear are you humping around? I think I'd rather not wear underwear if 2.7 ounces mattered that much. [;)]
My only complaint is the sight doesn't retain the last brightness setting that was used when you turn it on.
View Quote
I don't know how useful this would be. How often would you be shooting in the same ambient light? Aimpoints don't offer this feature either. I think the way it works now (booting up in middle of the brightness range) makes sense.
Link Posted: 6/11/2003 5:37:22 AM EDT
My main reason for choosing the 511 was size. I've got a few hundred N batteries in the garage, so battery cost/life wasn't an obstacle. I really wanted to make sure that my sight and BUIS would fit on my flattop, so I chose the smaller unit.
Link Posted: 6/11/2003 3:49:04 PM EDT
I think I'd rather not wear underwear if 2.7 ounces mattered that much.
View Quote
[lol] seriously.
Link Posted: 6/11/2003 4:49:28 PM EDT
Yep like, EOTECH, no probs here.
Link Posted: 6/11/2003 10:00:03 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Calvert1: I just ordered a 511 for my A3 carbine. Does it take very long to zero these sights?
View Quote
Nope, as posted by others, it is very easy. I would call it as easy or easier than dialing in your irons. Don't even worry about it.
Link Posted: 6/12/2003 12:02:38 PM EDT
Calvert - I boresighted my 511 on my dining room table using a plant stand and a pillow on a object which i guessed was 50 yards up the street - we'll leave it that . But i went to the range and it was the first time out for my 511 and the A.R.M.S #40 flip up and at 50 yards tore the center up pretty i was very much impressed i made no adjustments but felt if i had i could have made some very tight groups , from a '16 m4-gery RRA , i was quite satisfied and i didn't mention it was the first time i had that upper out as well !!
Link Posted: 6/12/2003 12:36:02 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Hokie:
I think I'd rather not wear underwear if 2.7 ounces mattered that much.
View Quote
[lol] seriously.
View Quote
2.7 oz is .17 lbs, that's a pair of undies with a load! [:D] it all adds up (or should I say piles up).
Link Posted: 6/12/2003 9:39:00 PM EDT
[LOLabove] DUDE, that is so wrong. [ROFL]
Link Posted: 6/13/2003 4:30:23 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Ridge:
Originally Posted By Hokie:
I think I'd rather not wear underwear if 2.7 ounces mattered that much.
View Quote
[lol] seriously.
View Quote
2.7 oz is .17 lbs, that's a pair of undies with a load! [:D] it all adds up (or should I say piles up).
View Quote
Sorry, I failed to mention that I was referring to Kevlar briefs. [:D]
Top Top