Plans for 553 minus riser mount???

nickdrak · #1 10-04-06, 01:33

I think that a version of the 553 minus the riser mount would do very well for L3/Eotech. Im sure you guys have your hands full with the current 553 being produced, but I for one would love to have one that is the same height as the 512/552 but with all of the upgraded features of the 553 except for the ARMS built-in riser mount. I also do not need NVG capability.

I think many others in the LE and civilian market would jump all over the version I described above. PLEEEASE BUILD IT!!!

DFinnegan · #2 10-04-06, 17:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by nickdrak

I think that a version of the 553 minus the riser mount would do very well for L3/Eotech. Im sure you guys have your hands full with the current 553 being produced, but I for one would love to have one that is the same height as the 512/552 but with all of the upgraded features of the 553 except for the ARMS built-in riser mount. I also do not need NVG capability.

I think many others in the LE and civilian market would jump all over the version I described above. PLEEEASE BUILD IT!!!

So basically you're looking for a 512 with CR123 batteries, I think, if I am making the right conclusion. I would just use the lithium AA batteries, and you're looking at nearly the exact same run time. If you don't need NV compatiblity then you probably don't need 66' submersion rating, so that wouldn't need to be included. I think the only thing you'd be lacking then is the stainless steel adjustment shafts. Can you be a little more specific in what features you're looking for?

Your interest is defnitely noted here at the company. I pass this stuff along to the right people, and it is taken in as a type of market input. Thanks for contacting us about it, and I look forward to hearing more.

Impact · #3 10-04-06, 17:55

I would also be interested in a 553 minus the riser mount

bigbore · #4 10-04-06, 18:48

If you (so to speak)modified a 512 to accept the 3V battery as used in the 553, it would be your biggest civilian seller BY FAR. No need for the NV, or the added height, or throw levers (and cost associated with) for most folks.

nickdrak · #5 10-04-06, 19:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbore

If you (so to speak)modified a 512 to accept the 3V battery as used in the 553, it would be your biggest civilian seller BY FAR. No need for the NV, or the added height, or throw levers (and cost associated with) for most folks.

Exactly! The shorter length of the 553 would be nice as well, but the big advantage(s) would be the 3V 123 battery commonality, lack of the ARMS riser mount, and the lower cost. It is also my understanding that the electronics in the 553 are upgraded from the 510/550 series. Basically every feature of the 553, minus the ARMS mount/riser and the NVG capability please.

DrMark · #6 10-04-06, 21:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbore

If you (so to speak)modified a 512 to accept the 3V battery as used in the 553, it would be your biggest civilian seller BY FAR. No need for the NV, or the added height, or throw levers (and cost associated with) for most folks.

Exactly.

I'd slap one on a proper (read LaRue) riser and be good-to-go.

USMC · #7 10-04-06, 22:04

I'd buy at least one!

Cold Zero · #8 10-05-06, 11:15

i too would buy a 553 w/o the riser mount. how hard would it be to delete that and offer it to the public?

Yojimbo · #9 10-05-06, 15:56

If EOTech made a 553 without the built in mount I would get one. I would also prefer it to have just one mount point so I can mount it closer to the end of the upper reciever without having to mount part of the sight on the railed handguard.

DFinnegan · #10 10-06-06, 11:02

Hmmmm. While its seems easier to accomplish than it actually is, the possiblity is there. I will take it up with the right people here and it will be discussed. Thanks for the feedback.

Stickman · #11 10-07-06, 14:21

Dennis,

I was talking with some trainers ( Mil & LE) about the 553, and a similar question was brought out regarding if a 123 battery version of the 552 would be available. No riser, no ARMs mounts, just something that allows the use of 123s.

These guys, and myself were figuring this would offer a cheaper solution for guys trying to keep with a standard battery, but who are uninterested in the other features.

I understand that this may be something which would go against the 553 market, but it may also be a nice supplement.

As always thanks for your time.

Boom · #12 10-07-06, 17:36

A no riser 123 battery model has my vote.

M4Guru · #13 10-08-06, 12:37

I'm could take or leave the riser and really want the 123 batteries, but I'll never own one till it has a screw or Larue lever.

Cold Zero · #14 10-08-06, 13:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cold Zero

i too would buy a 553 w/o the riser mount. how hard would it be to delete that and offer it to the public?

in lieu of the above, i would buy a 552 set up that would use cr123 batts.

DFinnegan · #15 10-09-06, 13:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stickman

Dennis,

I was talking with some trainers ( Mil & LE) about the 553, and a similar question was brought out regarding if a 123 battery version of the 552 would be available. No riser, no ARMs mounts, just something that allows the use of 123s.

These guys, and myself were figuring this would offer a cheaper solution for guys trying to keep with a standard battery, but who are uninterested in the other features.

I understand that this may be something which would go against the 553 market, but it may also be a nice supplement.

As always thanks for your time.

Well, if we can do a 512, we can do a 552 (electronics, seals, and purge rating are the differences). The sight would still be slightly higher, as the profile of the 123 battery would force the housing to sit raised 3mm (this is part of the 7mm or 1/4" rise in the sight; its not all in the base). I'm bringing the noted interest to the attention of the company. Thanks everyone for your input. Keep it coming.

nickdrak · #16 10-09-06, 15:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by DFinnegan

Well, if we can do a 512, we can do a 552 (electronics, seals, and purge rating are the differences). The sight would still be slightly higher, as the profile of the 123 battery would force the housing to sit raised 3mm (this is part of the 7mm or 1/4" rise in the sight; its not all in the base). I'm bringing the noted interest to the attention of the company. Thanks everyone for your input. Keep it coming.

Are you talking about converting a current 512/552 to operate on 123 batts? Or would you anticipate building a model closer in dimensions/design to the 553 (minus the ARMS riser mount)??? Keep us posted, and thanks for taking this into consideration!!!

MEANGREEN · #17 10-10-06, 00:39

I've been a longtime Aimpoint user.

If a 553 profiled model without NV and riser became available
I would buy one for sure

DFinnegan · #18 10-10-06, 13:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by nickdrak

Are you talking about converting a current 512/552 to operate on 123 batts? Or would you anticipate building a model closer in dimensions/design to the 553 (minus the ARMS riser mount)??? Keep us posted, and thanks for taking this into consideration!!!

What I believe everyone who has posted on this thread is interested in is the 552 and 512 using 123 batteries (without the ARMS levers). This would shorten the base length and increase the height by apporoximately 3mm. This would not bring the reticle up high enough to lower the irons into the bottom portion of the window, but would also not keep it low enough for an absoltue co witness. We cannot cut lower in the base, as it would be too thin for durability. The best resolution, still, is to use AA Lithium batteries in one of these two sights. Still, the interest is being expressed to our marketing and developing personnel.

Thanks again,

bullitt5172 · #19 10-10-06, 13:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by DFinnegan

What I believe everyone who has posted on this thread is interested in is the 552 and 512 using 123 batteries (without the ARMS levers). This would shorten the base length and increase the height by apporoximately 3mm. This would not bring the reticle up high enough to lower the irons into the bottom portion of the window, but would also not keep it low enough for an absoltue co witness. We cannot cut lower in the base, as it would be too thin for durability. The best resolution, still, is to use AA Lithium batteries in one of these two sights. Still, the interest is being expressed to our marketing and developing personnel.

Thanks again,

Dennis, I just picked one up and it's sweet. I would prefer the exact model with a Larue mount or just the normal bolt on mount. But all in all it's working great. I have question, I've read alot about ARMS levers being fragile. Will EOTech change out the levers if they do break? I'm just south of Detroit and if needed, can these be dropped off in Ann Arbor?

Thanks,
Bryan

nickdrak · #20 10-10-06, 13:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by DFinnegan

What I believe everyone who has posted on this thread is interested in is the 552 and 512 using 123 batteries (without the ARMS levers). This would shorten the base length and increase the height by apporoximately 3mm. This would not bring the reticle up high enough to lower the irons into the bottom portion of the window, but would also not keep it low enough for an absoltue co witness. We cannot cut lower in the base, as it would be too thin for durability. The best resolution, still, is to use AA Lithium batteries in one of these two sights. Still, the interest is being expressed to our marketing and developing personnel.

Thanks again,

I initially brought up this thread to express my interest, and try to see who else would be interested in a 553 without the ARMS riser. To me it appears that most that have posted here have shown interest in a 553 without the ARMS riser/mount, and not a 512/552 converted to use 123 batts. If there is a way to make a version that is the same height as the current 512/552 design, but with the shorter length of the 553, along with any/all of the 553's new features, that is what I am interested in, and I believe the market would be interested in. A large number of those interested in this sight would be mounting them on LaRue Eotech mounts, so the added (3mm) height on a converted 512/552 model may cause co-witness issues. I DO NOT want to turn this into a LaRue vs. ARMS thread, but I believe this is what a large portion of your markets is waiting for. The battery issue for me, is based on commonality of batteries for everything on my rifle. It is a big plus to have to worry about only one type of battery for all of your electronics. I may be wrong with what I believe your market truly wants....But I think I am right on target.