AR Sponsor
Posted: 3/13/2017 8:51:11 PM EDT
|
Are these good to go? Going on a 10.5" pistol build.
http://www.eotechinc.com/holographic-weapon-sights/model-exps3 |
|
Quoted:
Every eotech ever made is defective. I had three of these exps3. 2 out of the 3 had to go back because the nitrogen leaked out. Returned them years later and used the money for an ACOG. I would not buy another. But I did wish they worked.  Who was it that L3 basically called a liar at SHOT? |
|
Quoted:
Who was it that L3 basically called a liar at SHOT? Here is the one I still have. Still going strong. I guess if you count a 75% failure rate strong. Attached File Not my picture but this is the early stages of the nitrogen leaking. Dims on the sides then soon you can only see it in the exact center. If you did not look into it dead on you can't see it. Attached File |
|
Quoted:
Every eotech ever made is defective. I had three of these exps3. 2 out of the 3 had to go back because the nitrogen leaked out. Returned them years later and used the money for an ACOG. I would not buy another. But I did wish they worked. Just out of curiosity, if they're that bad, why buy more? Sounds like if I do get a bad one, they're customer service will take care of it? |
|
Quoted:
Just out of curiosity, if they're that bad, why buy more? Sounds like if I do get a bad one, they're customer service will take care of it? |
|
Quoted:
I have had one 512. Â For a few years now. Â It has worked everytime. Â I like it. Â YMMV. Â They are NOT all defective. Â Exactly this.... I have three 512's. Two of which I've had for 10 years or so. I've shot in all conditions possible in Wisconsin. They have never failed me. Anyone that say's that all EOTech's are bad, is simply full of shit. |
|
Quoted:
Exactly this.... I have three 512's. Two of which I've had for 10 years or so. I've shot in all conditions possible in Wisconsin. They have never failed me. Anyone that say's that all EOTech's are bad, is simply full of shit. |
|
I had an EXPS3-2 TAN. I loved the thing. Remember, EOTechs were the go-to optic around here for everyone for ages until the news came about the POI shift and the refunds. Now everyone loves to hate on them.
My EXPS3 was great. It was everything I was looking for and more in a red dot style optic. Unfortunately, I couldn't get it sighted in. I'm not sure if this was my fault, or the fault of the optic, but I wasn't able to get it onto paper at 50 yards after two trips to the range. I think it was my fault because one time it was raining and the other time it was about 10 degrees out and my hands were ice cold, but I can't be too sure. Regardless, I sent it back for a refund and I bought a TA31-G-ACSS. The ACOG is much more suited to my style of shooting and my goals with the rifle. Knowing that it could fail because of a manufacturer defect isn't really an option on my current defense/SHTF rifle. If I ever build a pistol, I will buy another EXPS3. That gun will be a range toy, so if the optic gets all wonky it won't matter. Next time, I'll go for the EXPS3-0 TAN however. |
|
Quoted:
please read the reports that eotech themselves made. I wish they would work without issues. But they don't. Eotech even rebranded themselves at shot show trying to wash their hands of this mess.Here is my thread from shot show Quoted:
Quoted:
Exactly this.... I have three 512's. Two of which I've had for 10 years or so. I've shot in all conditions possible in Wisconsin. They have never failed me. Anyone that say's that all EOTech's are bad, is simply full of shit. I have no doubt that you believe strongly in your belief. I can only go by my experience with them. I've not had one malfunction. In fact, they operate as well today as they did when I bought them. So I have to stand by my personal experience. That being said, I don't support or condone what L3 did. But I purchased my sights prior to that ever happening, and I'm not going to dispose of three working sights because of that. However, my next sight purchase will be the Hartman MH-1. |
|
Quoted:
they only have a two year warranty. I kept buying them because I was a hardcore fanboy. Loved the laser retical. They were really the only one doing it. I even defended them on this site even after mine had problems. I guess them getting caught with shit on their hands was the straw that broke the camels back for me. I kinda figured it'd be that way for a lot of people. That being said, I wouldn't really be using mine in that extreme of an environment, so I think that's something I shouldn't need to worry about too much. |
|
Quoted:
I had an EXPS3-2 TAN. I loved the thing. Remember, EOTechs were the go-to optic around here for everyone for ages until the news came about the POI shift and the refunds. Now everyone loves to hate on them. My EXPS3 was great. It was everything I was looking for and more in a red dot style optic. Unfortunately, I couldn't get it sighted in. I'm not sure if this was my fault, or the fault of the optic, but I wasn't able to get it onto paper at 50 yards after two trips to the range. I think it was my fault because one time it was raining and the other time it was about 10 degrees out and my hands were ice cold, but I can't be too sure. Regardless, I sent it back for a refund and I bought a TA31-G-ACSS. The ACOG is much more suited to my style of shooting and my goals with the rifle. Knowing that it could fail because of a manufacturer defect isn't really an option on my current defense/SHTF rifle. If I ever build a pistol, I will buy another EXPS3. That gun will be a range toy, so if the optic gets all wonky it won't matter. Next time, I'll go for the EXPS3-0 TAN however. I like the ACOG's, but they don't really suit me. I've become a fan of the 1-4,1-6 type optics. Being a pistol build the ACOG really doesn't suit me there either. I've been looking for a couple months and keep coming back to the EO Tech. |
|
I did play with the new vortex uh1 while I was at shot show this year. I think if I want another holographic I would get this when it comes out.
Attached File |
|
Quoted:
I did play with the new vortex uh1 while I was at shot show this year. I think if I want another holographic I would get this when it comes out. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/296004/IMG-0709-165392.JPG I was about to mention this. I have one on pre-order with Optics Planet and intend to do my own unscientific thermal drift test seeing as how I'm in Alaska. Unfortunately this year the snow is already melting and I think the cold weather will be gone by the time I receive it. |
|
Quoted:
Exactly this.... I have three 512's. Two of which I've had for 10 years or so. I've shot in all conditions possible in Wisconsin. They have never failed me. Anyone that say's that all EOTech's are bad, is simply full of shit. Their own internal emails and documentation admit that every single one is defective (the basic design being at issue here). Read the lawsuit filing and findings before proclaiming someone "full of shit." |
|
Quoted:
I kinda figured it'd be that way for a lot of people. That being said, I wouldn't really be using mine in that extreme of an environment, so I think that's something I shouldn't need to worry about too much. Their sights lost their nitrogen purge and delaminated in every environment, to include climate controlled warehouses. They now claim to have fixed those particular issues, but they also lied to DoD and the general public for a decade+. You're free to believe what you like, but I have no idea how anyone could trust what they say at this point. ETA: I had a 50% failure rate with the 6 I owned at one point in time or another. All the broken ones lost their purge and suffered from a faded/near invisible reticle. On the flip side, of a personal sample size of nearly 10 Aimpoints I haven't seen a single failure. Of a professional sample size of 400+ Aimpoints I've seen probably about 10-20 failures (all of which being 10+ year old Comp M2s with broken rheostat knobs). You do the math on which is better. |
|
Quoted:
I like the ACOG's, but they don't really suit me. I've become a fan of the 1-4,1-6 type optics. Being a pistol build the ACOG really doesn't suit me there either. I've been looking for a couple months and keep coming back to the EO Tech. You sound like you have your mind made up (and I don't blame you). If an EOTech is what you want, nothing else will satisfy you. I originally bought an MRO and besides the fact that it was an unusable and unsatisfactory optic, it wasn't what I really wanted it. That and a high quality QD mount are what I traded to get the EOTech. My best advice, search around for an EOTech that was manufactured before Nov 2015. If you like it, keep it. If you end up hating it or it fails, fill out the refund paperwork and get your money back. You can't lose in that situation. |
|
Quoted:
Their own internal emails and documentation admit that every single one is defective (the basic design being at issue here). Read the lawsuit filing and findings before proclaiming someone "full of shit." Quoted:
Quoted:
Exactly this.... I have three 512's. Two of which I've had for 10 years or so. I've shot in all conditions possible in Wisconsin. They have never failed me. Anyone that say's that all EOTech's are bad, is simply full of shit. Their own internal emails and documentation admit that every single one is defective (the basic design being at issue here). Read the lawsuit filing and findings before proclaiming someone "full of shit." My FiL had a battery drain completely in a 512 sitting in a safe. We're now at 25% failure in four examples. Coupled with admitted deception and stated issues after, I wouldn't touch them. |
|
Quoted:
I have had one 512. Â For a few years now. Â It has worked everytime. Â I like it. Â YMMV. Â They are NOT all defective. Â Actually they are. And I'm in no way trying to be inflammatory saying that. It's a design failure they can't fix. Hopefully some day. There isn't a 1x optic that looks as good as these particular offerings from EOtech imo. |
|
Quoted:
Exactly this.... I have three 512's. Two of which I've had for 10 years or so. I've shot in all conditions possible in Wisconsin. They have never failed me. Anyone that say's that all EOTech's are bad, is simply full of shit. They admitted it themselves. |
|
Look at it this way guys. Pretend that instead of the new Huey from Vortex it was EOtech. Brand new with that awesome reticle.
Except back then there was really nothing like it. So imagine it's in development and is getting released soon. Everyone has a huge boner over it and they sell out the day it hits the shelves. Then the complaints start rolling in. Delamination. Bad battery terminals. Zero drift. Not super durable. Everyone would say awesome idea but no thanks. And every time a noob would come and ask about them everyone would say stay away. but instead EOtech lied and people bought them and formed emotionalll attachments. We alll know how that goes. Funny enough those same few people will claim we are the ones with an emotional investment. How they reach that conclusion is beyond me since we have the facts on our side and the only argument I seem to consistently get out of them is "cool guys use them"  an argument that has been ripped to shreds a hundred times.
|
|
Quoted:
I prefer aimpoint reticles, but Eotech has taken steps to fix all of the issues people had with them that are voiced above. I cannot vouch for the improvements personally, as I'm an aimpoint guy because of the single aiming dot. Yes, we know, the people who lied to everyone for 10 or so years now claim to have fixed the shit they were lying about. Sorry, but their credibility is shot. |
|
Quoted:
Why wouldn't they put this much time and effort after they internally knew if the issues? The question is rhetorical and just another reason I won't touch them From the internal stuff I read, they DID put a lot of time and effort into fixing the issues, but the flaws are inherent to the basic design of the sight and would have necessitated a complete "from the ground up" redesign to fix. |
|
I think the EOT window/lens, what ever you call it, is one of the easiest to use, period. I had a 512 and a EXPS3 at one time. As much as I would like to have another one, I will not. I sold my EXPS to a friend, before all of this crap came out and he is still using it, no issues
I really liked the EXPS very much, sold it to him with the rifle. |
|
Quoted:
Hartman MH-1 I don't know if that's the same Israeli company under a different name that was advertising a similar product a couple years ago, but if it is, they outright lied about and sabotaged their competitors' products on their Youtube video. Just as one example, the EOTech was turned up to maximum brightness (enough to be so blinding it kills your night vision and you can't see what's beyond the reticle) in a dark room and then showing it from the front at that brightness level and claiming the red glow being emitted is normal for indoors shooting. Anybody who's used one knows you can't get that kind of forward-facing glow without turning up the brightness up to "way too bright for summer outdoors in Texas" nevermind indoors shooting. I forget what it was because it's been too long, but they sold a line of BS regarding either the Trijicon or Aimpoint product in the "test" as well. Won't touch anything someone tries to sell me by blatantly sabotaging their competitors and showing the sabotaged product off as "normal" function. If that's not them, then disregard. |
|
Quoted:
I don't know if that's the same Israeli company under a different name that was advertising a similar product a couple years ago, but if it is, they outright lied about and sabotaged their competitors' products on their Youtube video. Just as one example, the EOTech was turned up to maximum brightness (enough to be so blinding it kills your night vision and you can't see what's beyond the reticle) in a dark room and then showing it from the front at that brightness level and claiming the red glow being emitted is normal for indoors shooting. Anybody who's used one knows you can't get that kind of forward-facing glow without turning up the brightness up to "way too bright for summer outdoors in Texas" nevermind indoors shooting. I forget what it was because it's been too long, but they sold a line of BS regarding either the Trijicon or Aimpoint product in the "test" as well. Won't touch anything someone tries to sell me by blatantly sabotaging their competitors and showing the sabotaged product off as "normal" function. If that's not them, then disregard. Are you talking about that 4 way red dot test video on YouTube? In which the Israeli red dot one every competition they put them in except for 1 or 2? If so I'm pretty sure that was Meprolight. |
|
Quoted:
Yes, we know, the people who lied to everyone for 10 or so years now claim to have fixed the shit they were lying about. Sorry, but their credibility is shot. The irony is that Aimpoint is "still lying" by your definition (they suffer thermal drift and parallax), and you trust their credibility. Like I say, I prefer AP as well, but credit (good and bad) where it's due. |
|
Quoted:
The irony is that Aimpoint is "still lying" by your definition (they suffer thermal drift and parallax), and you trust their credibility. Like I say, I prefer AP as well, but credit (good and bad) where it's due. Quoted:
Quoted:
Yes, we know, the people who lied to everyone for 10 or so years now claim to have fixed the shit they were lying about. Sorry, but their credibility is shot. The irony is that Aimpoint is "still lying" by your definition (they suffer thermal drift and parallax), and you trust their credibility. Like I say, I prefer AP as well, but credit (good and bad) where it's due. This is why I like Trijicon. They did their own testing and owned up to thermal drift without the spotlight ever being on them. I only own one Trijicon optic, but the way they conduct business makes me want to use them more. Aimpoint is still lying whenever they make a claim of being free of drift and parallax. Aimpoint is just as dishonest as L3 in that regard, they just haven't gotten bitten yet. |
|
Quoted:
This is why I like Trijicon. They did their own testing and owned up to thermal drift without the spotlight ever being on them. I only own one Trijicon optic, but the way they conduct business makes me want to use them more. Aimpoint is still lying whenever they make a claim of being free of drift and parallax. Aimpoint is just as dishonest as L3 in that regard, they just haven't gotten bitten yet. |
|
Quoted:
yep trijicon for the win Quoted:
Quoted:
This is why I like Trijicon. They did their own testing and owned up to thermal drift without the spotlight ever being on them. I only own one Trijicon optic, but the way they conduct business makes me want to use them more. Aimpoint is still lying whenever they make a claim of being free of drift and parallax. Aimpoint is just as dishonest as L3 in that regard, they just haven't gotten bitten yet. |
AR Sponsor