Printable View
He is testing his theory this weekend. He invited several shooters and asked them to bring as many CCOs as possible.
He started a topic on TOS to post results and how he is conducting the experiment. He is active on those topics so if you want more info go check it out. If not you will have to wait till he posts here.
Good stuff. Eric seems like a stand up guy and I'm looking forward to what he finds.
I'm surprised people are surprised by this. Everything has parallax issues. Everything. Most red dots are adjusted to have the least error at relatively short distances (50m-100m). This is the biggest reason I'm a fan of fixed FSB on a carbine. When I shot a red dot, there is a front sight in view. LPV is a different story and I enjoy the uncluttered FOV gained by eliminating the front sight. Red dot shooting almost requires it.
In other news, the sky is blue..
POI Varies with head position.....Lol...No chit sherlock.... Tier Juan operators anyway....
If he's going to ban aimpoint T1 optics on his course, he just as well ban every optic, since they all do it.....(the that's not how this works meme seems appropriate here)
Why is it that a bunch of dumbass rednecks and farmers can figure this out, but the "professionals" struggle....?
Shaking my head.
How bout teach putting your ****ing face on the rifle like your suppose to, now there's a concept.... Reticle in the center there numb nuts. Try not to shoot yourself in the dick or the face while operating tactically and operationally being Tactical.
Seriously, WTF is this shit? How is this even a topic of discussion?
Where's the video of the guy hanging upside down out of the back doors of a Toyota tundra shooting out the door? He might be able to shed some light on this one.
This had to be on purpose..... For attention whoring... Otherwise, well??? Better instruction might want to be sought out..... Lots of laughs. This might be the best example of tactical assholery yet.
Well stated!Quote:
Originally Posted by cbx
Gents, I just got notified this was up here. I'll have to apologize but I won't be active in the thread. I have made very detailed replies over on AR15, and to be quite honest after reading this thread I am not interested in replying to insults on more than one site. So this will be my only post here on this topic. Feel free to join in there, or wait for the results. They look very good so far....
Oh, and as an aside- I’ve got some LE and Mil units testing their optics this next week, so I’m opening submissions to anyone that can pull some friends and test their optics.
All properly filled out submissions will be included in a separate report section and compared against the original test and against each other. So, if you disagree- post your results.
All forms and instructions can be downloaded here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/obpot49wn...XjxXthzba?dl=0
Will Aimpoint be offering a buy back? Just curious......
Ill buy all your defective aimpoints for $100 ea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Green Eye Tactical
So is the issue that "parallax free" was used as a marketing point by several manufacturer's when modern red dots were first popular for civilian AR15s? Obviously eotech paid $26 million in settlement to the gov for that mistake (along with false temp specs for thermal drift). Has aimpoint or trijicon ever advertised parallax free?
It seems that all marketing departments should be flogged henceforth and engineers should be allowed to write spec sheets and provide usage warnings.
First, thanks to Eric for trying to substantiate his claims and for getting us some data to chew on. Second, and maybe it was for effect, but these tests should have been conducted before releasing a video and making claims.
TOS has the data but currently there are no names for the optics. But you can see some optics doing much better than others (total deviation of 0.5 MOA vs 13.78 MOA). Based on my own basement bootleg test, I would guess my MRO is closer to the higher end vice the lower end.
End of the day, we will have a data set that we can argue about. And that is better than wild claims.
I bet Digital Damage has all the information from actual machines measuring the optical shift, for most of these optics. Actually I know he does, he was the one who measured the optical shift in the MRO thread. Please share if it doesn't get you fired.:cool: