2018 Eotech [Archive] - pistol-forum.com

EMC

08-12-2018, 05:35 PM

Wasn't the problem not necessarily the thermal drift but rather losing zero after the change(s) in temperature?

Sent from my SM-G930P using TapatalkThe problem was actually the coverup to try and salvage government contracts and the surreptitious way they quietly changed the manuals to change operating parameters and click values. To me it was more of an ethics/leadership problem than an engineering one. I was one of the unknowing joes issued a 552 and had the zero drift in the extreme temp swings of the ME. I was kind of ticked that these guys knew about it and covered it up.

I will give them props for the buy back refund program for civilian owned optics though.

Clusterfrack

08-12-2018, 05:46 PM

Glad to hear about this. It’s a very versatile optic, and I’m faster with it on close targets than anything I’ve tried. If I were in the market for a new one, I’d try it.

einherjarvalk

08-12-2018, 05:54 PM

Was the battery drain issue with EOTechs addressed as well? I had a 512 on my AR for a fairly long time until I happened upon a pair of clearanced Aimpoint H-1s. One of the major reasons I haven't considered an EOTech since, despite preferring the reticule design and never experiencing issues with thermal drift, was that I had to replace the batteries in my 512 every 4-5 months regardless of whether I turned it on at all in that time or I'd show up at the range with a dead optic.

El Cid

08-12-2018, 06:15 PM

Even if they fixed all their issues, I’m not giving a dime to a company that lied about their flaws to LE/Mil about it.

Peally

08-12-2018, 06:26 PM

Even if they fixed all their issues, I’m not giving a dime to a company that lied about their flaws to LE/Mil about it.

Pretty much my opinion. Made a crappy ass product, lied to sell it to people, and now they're finally making it less crappy.

Fuck em. Too many good optics to bother buying one of these.

Clusterfrack

08-13-2018, 10:20 AM

EOTech has some pretty special optical technology compared to other RDS, as we might expect from L3. For example the center dot remains the same size while using a 3x magnifier.

I don’t currently own an EOTech, but do appreciate the tech.

psalms144.1

08-13-2018, 10:31 AM

Guys who I trust implicitly tell me that the latest generation EoTech is as good as anything on the market right now. The fiasco with the earlier HWS showed that there were several relatively simple QA/QC and design changes that would have made the old ones work as advertised, but the company chose not to go that route, because, you know, profit...

Still not sure if I'd trust my life to one, but that's COMPLETELY an emotional stance on my part.

Shipwreck

08-13-2018, 10:35 AM

Well, the EOtech used to be my favorite. But, I think they've done too many things in the past. To have to pay to have the unit fixed because of nitrogen purge every few years is annoying.

I've since moved on. 4 MOA red dots always looked like a blob to me. Years ago, I tried 4 MOA aimpoints, and they would never work for me...

But, my 2 MOA aimpoint micro works well enough. And, I can leave it on all the time for up to 5 years, and the gun can grab and go. It was always a pain to grab your rifle with the EOtech and have to press the button several times if you needed it in a hurry during daylight hours.

I think I've moved on....

breakingtime91

08-13-2018, 10:36 AM

So I fall into the camp of multiple companies and big organizations doing things that benefit themselves and not the consumer. Anyone who was in the military has probably experienced the same thing as me.. I am a huge fan of L3 in general because I used a lot of their stuff in country and it always worked great (PEQ 16, PEG 15, thermals, etc) so when they say they went in and fixed eotech I am inclined to believe them.

GJM

08-13-2018, 04:10 PM

If I kept a grudge list of all the firearms manufacturers that screwed up over the years, I wouldn’t have a thing left to shoot.

Tokarev

08-13-2018, 04:21 PM

If I kept a grudge list of all the firearms manufacturers that screwed up over the years, I wouldn’t have a thing left to shoot.Best response I've read in awhile. Thanks!

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

CS Tactical

08-13-2018, 04:24 PM

If I kept a grudge list of all the firearms manufacturers that screwed up over the years, I wouldn’t have a thing left to shoot.

https://lonewolfsaga.files.wordpress.com/2018/06/tenor3.gif?w=446&h=218

spinmove_

08-13-2018, 05:16 PM

If I kept a grudge list of all the firearms manufacturers that screwed up over the years, I wouldn’t have a thing left to shoot.

True story.

Given my budget, job (IT dude, non-LE, non-MIL), eye issues (astigmatism), and propensity to shoot, carry, train, and compete with pistols, optics that I can replicate on two or three carbines can’t eat that much cash if I also have to put a light and sling on them as well as feed them.

Given their price point and the fact that they’re actually usable to my eyes without glasses on I may end up giving an EXPS 2-0 a shot within a year or two.

Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

WobblyPossum

08-13-2018, 07:17 PM

If I kept a grudge list of all the firearms manufacturers that screwed up over the years, I wouldn’t have a thing left to shoot.

The man does have a point. Ruger and S&W, for example, make all sorts of cool stuff that I like a lot. If I held the decisions of old leaders from back in the day against the current companies, I wouldn’t be able to buy M&P 2.0s or GP100s. My concern with eotech has always been the battery life and auto shut off. I love being able to keep my Aimpoint on for years at a time. It’s truly grab and go. I pick up the rifle and it’s ready to use. I don’t want to have to grab a rifle with an eotech on it after suddenly being awoken by someone booting in my front door and having to remember to turn the optic on. I think they’re an awesome sight for direct action/swat kind of stuff where you jock up for a mission, toss in a fresh battery, go out and do your thing for 8-12 hours and then go back to base/the station. I don’t want to have to deal with the battery and auto shut off issues when the rifle the sight is mounted on has to pull double duty as my HD rifle.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Odin Bravo One

08-13-2018, 07:27 PM

The problem was actually the coverup to try and salvage government contracts and the surreptitious way they quietly changed the manuals to change operating parameters and click values. To me it was more of an ethics/leadership problem than an engineering one.

Also my problem with them.

They were also made aware of the issues (all of them) repeatedly for years and years before the common problems were wide spread enough that even the fan boys could no longer defend them. They also misused the NDA’s in place during RDT&E to keep end users who knew from speaking out publicly, and threatened legal action. Even though it was unlikely they would have won a lawsuit, how many E-6’s with kids at home have the discretionary funds to mount a defense against a corporation with major government contracts?

I’ve got zero use for anything they make.

The only thing I’d give EOTech an opportunity to do is wipe my ass.

Trukinjp13

08-13-2018, 08:16 PM

True story.

Given my budget, job (IT dude, non-LE, non-MIL), eye issues (astigmatism), and propensity to shoot, carry, train, and compete with pistols, optics that I can replicate on two or three carbines can’t eat that much cash if I also have to put a light and sling on them as well as feed them.

Given their price point and the fact that they’re actually usable to my eyes without glasses on I may end up giving an EXPS 2-0 a shot within a year or two.

Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

The astigmatism thing is big for me. I tried a t2 and it bloomed like my pa did. I have not shot the new exps2 but have shot the older one. My eyes really liked it. Next time optics planet has a good sale on for red dots I may pick one up.

critter

08-13-2018, 08:30 PM

I kept two of my Eotechs. I did send four in for the refund. I simply shoot no other 1x RDS faster or better. I'll definitely be looking at the new stuff, more in support of myself than them, though.

Magsz

08-13-2018, 09:05 PM

Ive been running one for a year now on my duty rifle with no issues to report. I change the battery every three months regardless of use despite the rifle being taken out of the cruiser quite frequently as we have alot of gun and weapon related hot calls in my district.

Having to turn it on and then roll is a non issue as its done as I'm slinging the rifle. Do I wish it had better battery life? Absolutely but that is the one trade off that you have to accept if you want the superior (subjective) reticle.

opmike

08-13-2018, 10:36 PM

Astigmatism makes most traditional red dot sights a non-starter for me as even with 2 MOA, the "dot" looks like a cluster of berries. The 1 MOA EOTech dot is about a clear as I could ask. I'd happily spend my money elsewhere if Trijicon or Aimpoint actually had a similar product on the market...but they don't.

Default.mp3

08-13-2018, 11:19 PM

EOTech has some pretty special optical technology compared to other RDS, as we might expect from L3. For example the center dot remains the same size while using a 3x magnifier.What do you mean by "the same size"? Why would the size change for any other red dot? A 1 MOA dot remains a 1 MOA dot on the EOTech, and a 2 MOA dot remains a 2 MOA dot on a CompM5 or T-2.

Clusterfrack

08-14-2018, 12:16 AM

I believe the EOTech uses diffractive optics to keep the dot from being magnified. 1/3 moa at 3x.

rob_s

08-14-2018, 05:57 AM

Guys who I trust implicitly tell me that the latest generation EoTech is as good as anything on the market right now.

Here’s the problem with that, at least for me...

For over a decade, maybe two now, we have had dozens of otherwise very switched on Super ninjas that have proclaimed the Eotech to be as good or even better than the Aimpoint. Then every few years there is some new problem or fiasco with Eotech and that generation of ninjas just quietly slips away and after the dust settles there’s some new generation of highly credentialed folks touting the Eotech again, until the next scandal.

For me, it’s the snowflake optic. People claim it’s better, or that they are better with it, but you rarely see quantification of either, and when you do it’s something like “I shoot bill drills faster with an Eotech”, which ultimately doesn’t mean a thing. Mostly it’s the gun equivalent of the guy that puts a K&N filter in their car and feels the increase the first time they touch the gas. They’re always looking for some new ray of hope (all the way back to the XPs turning the battery sideways so they stopped crushing battery terminals... no, before that they added little rubber cups under the terminals to reduce the crushing) but at the end of the day it’s always the also-ran. The great red(dot) hope that’s going to knock out the champ, but Aimpoint just keeps coming out on top.

Couple all that with the fact that you can now buy a pretty decent fakepoint for half the money or less, and the rise in popularity of the LPV, and the Eotech just further becomes the “why bother” optic.

rob_s

08-14-2018, 06:01 AM

If I kept a grudge list of all the firearms manufacturers that screwed up over the years, I wouldn’t have a thing left to shoot.

Says pretty much every guy that is willing to trade their principles for new hotness. Just look at the replies below this. “If I stayed mad at s&w I wouldn’t be able to buy an m&p”. Most people stay indignant right up until it’s inconvenient.

That said, the firearms community does tend to get triggered by a lot of minuscule offense, especially in the internet age.

But I’d say that what Eotech did is a bit more egregious than Bill Ruger supposedly being to blame for the ten round mag limit. At least on my scale. Ymmv.

Wayne Dobbs

08-14-2018, 07:29 AM

Here’s the problem with that, at least for me...

For over a decade, maybe two now, we have had dozens of otherwise very switched on Super ninjas that have proclaimed the Eotech to be as good or even better than the Aimpoint. Then every few years there is some new problem or fiasco with Eotech and that generation of ninjas just quietly slips away and after the dust settles there’s some new generation of highly credentialed folks touting the Eotech again, until the next scandal.

For me, it’s the snowflake optic. People claim it’s better, or that they are better with it, but you rarely see quantification of either, and when you do it’s something like “I shoot bill drills faster with an Eotech”, which ultimately doesn’t mean a thing. Mostly it’s the gun equivalent of the guy that puts a K&N filter in their car and feels the increase the first time they touch the gas. They’re always looking for some new ray of hope (all the way back to the XPs turning the battery sideways so they stopped crushing battery terminals... no, before that they added little rubber cups under the terminals to reduce the crushing) but at the end of the day it’s always the also-ran. The great red(dot) hope that’s going to knock out the champ, but Aimpoint just keeps coming out on top.

Couple all that with the fact that you can now buy a pretty decent fakepoint for half the money or less, and the rise in popularity of the LPV, and the Eotech just further becomes the “why bother” optic.

This...

For me the bottom line is that the EO is a great concept that is not well executed with regard to engineering or manufacture. It is full of fleas with regard to emitter design, battery usage, battery connectivity, hologram delamination, switch convenience, predictability/integrity of adjustments and day to day loss of zero. I didn't put that out because of whom I work for, but based on tons of actual use and training on the sights. A good day in that very professional training operation was 20% of the EOs down. A bad day approached 40% down. As Darryl Bolke later characterized them, "they're an aquarium for your iron sights." As a positive, they've likely conducted the very best subliminal marketing campaign of any piece of tactical firearms gear by their pervasive "free gear" programs to various movie, TV and video game production companies over the past 20 years or so, which helped sales tremendously. It also tells you that most males will buy it because they've seen it on TV or in a movie and not because of objective reasons of performance in hard use. I can make an EO work for me, but I quit seeing the reason to try several years ago based on experience, not advertising or Internet forum discussions.

GJM

08-14-2018, 07:34 AM

What do you mean by "the same size"? Why would the size change for any other red dot? A 1 MOA dot remains a 1 MOA dot on the EOTech, and a 2 MOA dot remains a 2 MOA dot on a CompM5 or T-2.

This is covered in the video linked on page one.

WobblyPossum

08-14-2018, 07:42 AM

Says pretty much every guy that is willing to trade their principles for new hotness. Just look at the replies below this. “If I stayed mad at s&w I wouldn’t be able to buy an m&p”. Most people stay indignant right up until it’s inconvenient.

That said, the firearms community does tend to get triggered by a lot of minuscule offense, especially in the internet age.

But I’d say that what Eotech did is a bit more egregious than Bill Ruger supposedly being to blame for the ten round mag limit. At least on my scale. Ymmv.

I don’t appreciate your implications as to what my principles are so don’t project your issues on me. What I care about is performance. Manufacturers don’t stay the same in perpetuity. The leaders responsible for unethical decisions leave and are replaced eventually. It’s up to you if you want to hold people responsible for the sins of their fathers, so to speak (although I guess that’s literal in Ruger’s case).

The Eotech optics sucked before based on several performance metrics. The big wigs tried to hide it. They eventually got called out and got their peepee slapped, being hit with several law suits and having to eat a metric ton of refunds. Supposedly the optic has now been fixed. It’s up to everyone to decide for themselves if they care more about past unethical behavior by the company leadership or the performance of the item. Another example from the past couple of years is the Sig P320. There were several very concerning issues with the performance of the design. There’s a lot of reason to believe that Sig knew about the issues and tried to hide it. Supposedly the gun works properly now. It’s up to everyone to decide whether or not the gun meets their needs and how they want to weigh things.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

spinmove_

08-14-2018, 07:43 AM

This...

For me the bottom line is that the EO is a great concept that is not well executed with regard to engineering or manufacture. It is full of fleas with regard to emitter design, battery usage, battery connectivity, hologram delamination, switch convenience, predictability/integrity of adjustments and day to day loss of zero. I didn't put that out because of whom I work for, but based on tons of actual use and training on the sights. A good day in that very professional training operation was 20% of the EOs down. A bad day approached 40% down. As Darryl Bolke later characterized them, "they're an aquarium for your iron sights." As a positive, they've likely conducted the very best subliminal marketing campaign of any piece of tactical firearms gear by their pervasive "free gear" programs to various movie, TV and video game production companies over the past 20 years or so, which helped sales tremendously. It also tells you that most males will buy it because they've seen it on TV or in a movie and not because of objective reasons of performance in hard use. I can make an EO work for me, but I quit seeing the reason to try several years ago based on experience, not advertising or Internet forum discussions.

So for those of us with pesky astigmatisms in both eyes, are the newer Aimpoints (H-2/T-2, CompM5) friendlier in that arena or should I just seriously consider relegating myself to an LPVO? I haven’t been able to find one locally to look through.

For reference an Aimpoint PRO gives me a comet with a tail that spills right and the Trijicon MRO gives me a lovely starburst on more usable levels.

Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

Wayne Dobbs

08-14-2018, 07:56 AM

So for those of us with pesky astigmatisms in both eyes, are the newer Aimpoints (H-2/T-2, CompM5) friendlier in that arena or should I just seriously consider relegating myself to an LPVO? I haven’t been able to find one locally to look through.

For reference an Aimpoint PRO gives me a comet with a tail that spills right and the Trijicon MRO gives me a lovely starburst on more usable levels.

Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

I have an astigmatism in my left eye that was somewhat corrected by LASIK back in 2001, so I'm a sample of one. I find some distortion in the legacy Aimpoints (PRO, CompM2/3/4) and in the first generation Micros (T-1/H-1). If I focus on the dot or magnify the dot on these, it can be distracting. If I use the sight like I'm supposed to with a target focus and operational speed superimposition of the dot followed by the trigger press, I don't notice the distortion.

On the second generation Micros and the CompM5, all the distortion is gone (for me). My advice to folks with this eye issue is first to GET GLASSES to correct it. Next, it's not to look for distortion, but simply see the dot and take the shot. Your wobble/error zone is lots bigger than the dot's distortion area anyway. Try a second gen Micro (I recommend the T-2 highly) and see what you get. Let me know if I can help you out with any Aimpoint matters!

GJM

08-14-2018, 07:57 AM

What is interesting, is while Aimpoint owns the tactical market for red dots, I can’t remember seeing a single Aimpoint being used by a PCC competitor at a USPSA match.

Rob, please elaborate on this principle thing, and what you think it means for what companies you will and will not do business with, and for how long.

texasaggie2005

08-14-2018, 08:03 AM

spinmove_

08-14-2018, 08:40 AM

I have an astigmatism in my left eye that was somewhat corrected by LASIK back in 2001, so I'm a sample of one. I find some distortion in the legacy Aimpoints (PRO, CompM2/3/4) and in the first generation Micros (T-1/H-1). If I focus on the dot or magnify the dot on these, it can be distracting. If I use the sight like I'm supposed to with a target focus and operational speed superimposition of the dot followed by the trigger press, I don't notice the distortion.

On the second generation Micros and the CompM5, all the distortion is gone (for me). My advice to folks with this eye issue is first to GET GLASSES to correct it. Next, it's not to look for distortion, but simply see the dot and take the shot. Your wobble/error zone is lots bigger than the dot's distortion area anyway. Try a second gen Micro (I recommend the T-2 highly) and see what you get. Let me know if I can help you out with any Aimpoint matters!

Thanks, Wayne. I’ll see if I can find a LGS that’s got a T-2/CompM5 that I can look through. I already have glasses that help correct the astigmatism, but if I’m responding to a “bump in the night” I may or may not have the time/presence of mind to throw those glasses on before grabbing a gun and/or light to investigate. Being able to use the dot sans glasses (as my eyes aren’t that terrible from an overall clarity standpoint) would be super helpful.

Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

Shipwreck

08-14-2018, 08:46 AM

I used the Mepro21 with the triangle reticle for years. I did not like the bullseye version. But with the triangle, you use the tip of the triangle for precision shots, and cover the target with the triangle for quick shots.

If you have issues with a red dot and your eyes, you will have no problems with the Mepro21

spinmove_

08-14-2018, 08:48 AM

spinmove_

In my experience in the last couple of years buying & selling optics to see which is best for my astigmatisms; the M5/T2 is significantly better than the ACO/PRO and the T1/H1. The MRO kinda fell in the middle of that heap.

FWIW, I now have a LPVO and pretty much plan on never running an RDS again until the next evolution occurs.

I love the LPVO concept in that it gives me an etched reticle, generous eye relief, and an illuminated reticle. The problem is that most LPVOs are either ridiculously expensive or they’re constantly being upgraded. So I can get a 1-4 or 1-6 now being relatively afford able, but later I’ll have something different available to me for my backup/training carbine with more magnification and/or different reticle. Matched pairs are handy as it makes the transition seamless.

Heaven forbid if my wife decides she actually wants to give a crap about her own personal defense. Then I’ll be looking at a 3rd and possibly 4th sample of equipment. Then instead of one $1,000-$2,000 optic I’m looking at 3-4 of them. No bueno when I run pistols more than anything. I’d rather keep the unit price lower and rely on it as long as possible for what it is than chase the upgrade train.

Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

rob_s

08-14-2018, 09:30 AM

Rob, please elaborate on this principle thing, and what you think it means for what companies you will and will not do business with, and for how long.

that's up for you, and danm apparently, to decide for yourselves. I think you were both already pretty clear.

Default.mp3

08-14-2018, 09:42 AM

This is covered in the video linked on page one.Garand Thumb didn't explain it at all either, so I just wasted 5 minutes of my life clicking though and being forced to watch him chuckle at the word "thot".

Pretty sure it's just a misconception/marketing spin. Yes, EOTech's marketing claims as such, but it makes no sense if taken literally and not based off of some hack that deals with the limits of human perception.

My searches indicate this is exactly the bullshit being pulled, that the center dot is actually much smaller than 1 MOA, but due to how the human eye perceives point light sources, it appears to be about 1 MOA to the human eye without a magnifier. Under a 3x magnifier, it will appear about the same size as an unmagnified 1 MOA dot; under a 6x magnifier, it will appear about the same size as an unmagnified 2 MOA dot.

texasaggie2005

08-14-2018, 09:45 AM

I love the LPVO concept in that it gives me an etched reticle, generous eye relief, and an illuminated reticle. The problem is that most LPVOs are either ridiculously expensive or they’re constantly being upgraded. So I can get a 1-4 or 1-6 now being relatively afford able, but later I’ll have something different available to me for my backup/training carbine with more magnification and/or different reticle. Matched pairs are handy as it makes the transition seamless.

Heaven forbid if my wife decides she actually wants to give a crap about her own personal defense. Then I’ll be looking at a 3rd and possibly 4th sample of equipment. Then instead of one $1,000-$2,000 optic I’m looking at 3-4 of them. No bueno when I run pistols more than anything. I’d rather keep the unit price lower and rely on it as long as possible for what it is than chase the upgrade train.

Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

I hear you, it all adds up quick when doing duplicates. I lucked out and traded my CompM5 for a Trijicon Accupoint 1-6. It's not a popular optic now days, but I really like it for my purposes.

Odin Bravo One

08-14-2018, 10:00 AM

If I kept a grudge list of all the firearms manufacturers that screwed up over the years, I wouldn’t have a thing left to shoot.

Yeah, I hear ya!!

The list of companies that threaten lawsuits that will “bankrupt your family and destroy your career” against people making $32k a year for speaking the truth about their products is long and distinguished.

Clusterfrack

08-14-2018, 10:09 AM

Garand Thumb didn't explain it at all either, so I just wasted 5 minutes of my life clicking though and being forced to watch him chuckle at the word "thot".

Pretty sure it's just a misconception.

I have no idea how diffractive optics would some how change the basic physics of magnification.

It's not a misconception. I have verified this using my (now sold) EXPS-3 and EOTech 3x magnifier.

The physics of magnification isn’t basic. Collimated light does not behave with constant magnification.

http://military.wikia.com/wiki/EOTech
"Unlike reflector sights, the holographic weapon sight does not use a reflected reticle system. Instead a representative reticle is recorded in three-dimensional space onto holographic film that is part of the optical viewing window. Like the reflector sight, the holographic sight's reticle uses collimated light and therefore has an aim-point that can move with eye position. This is compensated for by having a holographic image that is set at a finite distance, in this case around 100 yards. The sight's parallax due to eye movement is the size of the optical window at close range and diminishes to zero at the set distance.[5] Since a laser is used as the light source, the aiming reticle can be an infinitely small dot whose perceived size is given by the acuity of the eye. For someone with 20/20 vision, it is about 1 MoA."

Also see:
https://patents.google.com/patent/US6490060B1/en?oq=6490060

Default.mp3

08-14-2018, 10:25 AM

It's not a misconception. I have verified this using my (now sold) EXPS-3 and EOTech 3x magnifier.

The physics of magnification isn’t basic. Collimated light does not behave with constant magnification.

http://military.wikia.com/wiki/EOTech
"Unlike reflector sights, the holographic weapon sight does not use a reflected reticle system. Instead a representative reticle is recorded in three-dimensional space onto holographic film that is part of the optical viewing window. Like the reflector sight, the holographic sight's reticle uses collimated light and therefore has an aim-point that can move with eye position. This is compensated for by having a holographic image that is set at a finite distance, in this case around 100 yards. The sight's parallax due to eye movement is the size of the optical window at close range and diminishes to zero at the set distance.[5] Since a laser is used as the light source, the aiming reticle can be an infinitely small dot whose perceived size is given by the acuity of the eye. For someone with 20/20 vision, it is about 1 MoA."

Also see:
https://patents.google.com/patent/US6490060B1/en?oq=6490060 That's just a trick of perception, as the last part quoted explicitly states. The dot most certainly does actually change in size under magnification. Use a camera, and it should be immediately obvious; even EOTech's own marketing images appears to bear this out.

Unobtanium

08-14-2018, 10:33 AM

Even if they fixed all their issues, I’m not giving a dime to a company that lied about their flaws to LE/Mil about it.

So many entities lie and cheat and steal and harm the public that we literally couldn't boycott them all without living in mud huts. Why harm yourself with virtue signalling when it won't matter one bit to L3?

Clusterfrack

08-14-2018, 10:34 AM

That's just a trick of perception. The dot most certainly does actually change in size under magnification. Use a camera, and it should be immediately obvious; even EOTech's own marketing images appears to bear this out.

Damn those tricks of perception! Now the lasers in my lab don’t work right anymore. [emoji53]

Default.mp3

08-14-2018, 10:43 AM

Damn those tricks of perception! Now the lasers in my lab don’t work right anymore. [emoji53] If it wasn't a perception issue, why does the 65 MOA ring appear larger and thicker when under a magnifier? Why does the center dot appear larger on EOTech's own marketing images?
http://www.eotechinc.com/sites/default/files/products/Reticles_1x-3x_large_new.jpg

psalms144.1

08-14-2018, 10:53 AM

Here’s the problem with that, at least for me...SNIP
I'm not pushing EoTech. I'm still befuddled by some of what folks tried to teach me about holography and temperature variations - so I'm not sure how the thermal drift could ever be "fixed." I'm just reporting what guys who are paid to test optics have told me. And, just in case you're wondering, the Government learned A LOT about testing optics from the last EoTech investigation - and they're applying all those tests to new optics (including the newest EoTech, which my sources are giving a clean bill of health).

Like GJM said, I can't keep a grudge list on firearms/accessories manufacturers, or I'd be carrying a sharp stick...

Clusterfrack

08-14-2018, 10:54 AM

Dagga Boy

08-14-2018, 11:13 AM

Take this for what it’s worth. Reports I have gotten are the issues are not eliminated. Even when pointed out for years E/O Tech fans (and I was one) kept going back to “mine is perfect”. Right up till it isn’t. We generally see organizational problems at places that issue a lot of them and are not a sample of one. At this point....go ahead and keep using them. They are the safe cigarette of optics. This comes down to trust. If you believe the company now, spend your dollars and take the ride.

Default.mp3

08-14-2018, 11:39 AM

Good question. This gets at the difference between EOTech and conventional RDS and etched reticle optics. The EOTech reticle is composed of dots, each of which does not magnify very much. The angles between the dots do change with magnification. (Because collimators aren’t perfect, there’s always some small amount of dot magnification). Why would the dots not magnify with a magnifier? They're just a part of a static hologram. Once the light from the image of the reticle leaves the hologram, it should be susceptible to magnification like any other image.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1834/43984926032_e7ccba0ed6_b.jpg

Clusterfrack

08-14-2018, 12:02 PM

I’m going to pull out of this discussion after this post. See this:

https://www.newport.com/n/focusing-and-collimating

Default.mp3

08-14-2018, 12:24 PM

I’m going to pull out of this discussion after this post. See this:

https://www.newport.com/n/focusing-and-collimating I'm not sure I see the relevance of the URL. The collimating light is used to generate the image of the reticle, that I understand, but the image of the reticle itself, as seen by the human eye and the magnifier, is not consisting of collimated light, AFAIK, i.e., the circled area in the image from my last post is not collimated light. If I am wrong about that, then I can see why a magnifier would not magnify the alleged 1 MOA dot; I guess this is the source of our conflict, whether the hologram itself is projecting collimated light to the shooter's eye.

FWIW, the technical support guy at EOTech that I spoke to did say that it was indeed a perception issue, and that the dot is in actuality smaller than 1 MOA, while the guy at Vortex was befuddled as to how a holographic sight might be able to maintain the same preceived dot size with and without a magnifier. Not staff from the engineering team, but still something to keep in mind.

Clusterfrack

08-14-2018, 05:10 PM

The light coming out of the diffraction grating and the hologram image should still be highly collimated.

Digging into the EOTech patent, I discovered the mechanism of temperature sensitivity. It's pretty interesting!

"As taught in U.S. Pat. No. 5,483,362, the emission wavelength of a laser diode changes with temperature, and the angle of diffraction is a function of wavelength. By simply illuminating a reticle image hologram with a laser diode, the angular position of the reconstructed image will not be stable. The reticle position will shift with a change in the case temperature of the laser diode. To produce a stable reticle image over a wide temperature range, the illuminating beam is diffracted first by a grating. The wavelength dependency can be removed by matching the dispersions of the grating and the reticle hologram. In the sight described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,483,362, a transmission grating bonded onto a prism is used to produce a dispersion equal to, but with the opposite sign of, the dispersion of the image hologram. In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, a reflection grating is used to compensate for the wavelength dependency of the diffraction by the image hologram. The reflection grating is lighter and more compact than the prism/transmission grating combination..."

El Cid

08-14-2018, 08:54 PM

So many entities lie and cheat and steal and harm the public that we literally couldn't boycott them all without living in mud huts. Why harm yourself with virtue signalling when it won't matter one bit to L3?

Virtue signaling? Lol! Whatever sport.

I could care less whether my refusal to give them my money affects their bottom line. They don’t deserve my money and I can’t possibly trust my life or that of my loved ones to them. Even before their conspiracy to hide their issues came to light, the EOTech was a mediocre optic. I had 2 or 3 fail on my duty rifle. Countless more in my agency failed and there were boxes of them shipped back for warranty.

As for “harming myself”... hardly. Plenty of better and more reliable optics are available for use. I’m safer by not using anything manufactured by that pathetic company. You do what makes you happy. But don’t put others down for having principles.

Unobtanium

08-14-2018, 09:04 PM

Virtue signaling? Lol! Whatever sport.

I could care less whether my refusal to give them my money affects their bottom line. They don’t deserve my money and I can’t possibly trust my life or that of my loved ones to them. Even before their conspiracy to hide their issues came to light, the EOTech was a mediocre optic. I had 2 or 3 fail on my duty rifle. Countless more in my agency failed and there were boxes of them shipped back for warranty.

As for “harming myself”... hardly. Plenty of better and more reliable optics are available for use. I’m safer by not using anything manufactured by that pathetic company. You do what makes you happy. But don’t put others down for having principles.

I get that, but many people out there refuse to use what they view as they best products because of things like this. Then the same person will go buy a Ford or something and not see a darn thing wrong.

critter

08-15-2018, 02:43 AM