Eotech EXPS3 initial Cold Weather test

[Mysteryman]

You don't buy Eotech yet seem to have some strong opinions.

If the T1 battery cap caused a failure, it is a design flaw. The flaw may not manifest in every sight, but it is still a flaw.

I have had Eotech's in the past and they were ok, aside from the battery drain issues, one battery that leaked inside, loss of battery contact and the standard sh*t battery life. I never noticed a POI shift or the other more serious issues. Then again, I sold them shortly after I got them due to the issues listed above that I experienced. Still have buddies with them and they're constantly "re checking" their zeros.

The T1 cap isn't a design flaw, the cap in question was FLAWED. Either way Aimpoint solved the problem, Eotech simply hid it.

I just don't get some of you guys. They are giving full refunds, to anyone that can come up with one from ebay even for less money, even if they don't have a problem, with no questions asked (this is my understanding of the return process thus far), and that isn't good enough? You gotta be kidding me....
Nobody offers blanket full refunds. It just don't happen, not in Merika. It's always cheaper in the long run to jerk around in court for years.
Look up the Porsche IMS settlement that the fellow mentioned earlier, they paid out jack crap for a complete joke of a component that cost
people a fortune, and at that only managed to have to pay for a small portion of them. Because lawyers.
And based on this thread I can see why, even at a full refund people aren't satisfied. I can understand being bummed about it
because they were good sights to use and there aren't many other options, but sheesh.

The other thing that boggles my mind is that fifteen years these things have been around, and just now everyone decides they are garbage? GTFO lol...
They have never been an aimpoint, but they offer some features aimpoints don't, I don't think anyone that can type in google has been under any illusions
otherwise for a long time.


L3 ain't going nowhere I don't imagine. The fact that they can blow all this money
is more than proof. They will get this BS off the radar and continue right on raking in many
millions a year, and not from jerkoffs like us buying RDS's. No matter how upset we are on the
internet.

Based on the fanboy replies over this, there are plenty of folks who are clueless to the history of problems and failures associated with Eotech sights.

If your sole reason for favoring Eotech is their reticle, you can find it other optics as well. Sightmark uses it in their M-Spec. I actually have one. It's about 1/3 of the price and carries nearly all the same specs. It's held up great, even on full auto. Also has a lifetime warranty; which was the reason I pulled the trigger on it over the eotech or aimpoint. Is it the best optic out there? No. Does it do everything a civilian could ever ask of. Most likely.

I hope L3 comes out of this okay. But just ask Colt how well things are going after losing a government contract. I can't say this would stop me from ever buying one. I can say that this makes me feel a whole lot better about the $400 I saved and put towards ammo though.

Sightmark is absolute garbage..

A few years ago our agency sent a bunch of 512's back. They replaced them (not fix) then gave officers the opportunity to buy the now refurbished ones for like $165.

According to the fanboys you're a liar. Eotech sights are perfectly serviceable, the POI shift is not a design flaw which Eotech has admitted to. Nope, all BS, keep your Eotech.

Simply amazed at how many people still think they know the optic better than the manufacturer who admits they're unreliable and do not perform as advertised. Stop investing your emotions into your kit. Eotech lied and swindled many. Now you can get your money back and learn from it.

MM

ETA: Oh yeah, and 32'f is not cold...

[Kdubya]

Sightmark is absolute garbage..

I'd say that's a little unwarranted. I clearly stated that it's not the best on the market, but it's far from being garbage. You get what you pay for. If you buy one of their budget models, the expectations should be set accordingly. At the same time they do invest some more care and detail in their "higher end" offerings. I've not had any issues with mine. It's held its zero, even after mounting and re-mounting numerous times. Has not malfunctioned, and does exactly what I ask of it. They serve a certain segment of the market, and they do it well. I know plenty of others who are satisfied with their scopes, magnifiers, etc. It all depends on one's application. From a value perspective, they're a leader in their class. Much like primary arms. One thing that makes them different from the current company in the limelight, is they don't excuse duds and flaws. Instead they stand behind their product with a lifetime warranty. If anything, that drives them to continue refining their designs, and avoid complacency. You can flame on them all you want, and I don't seek to change someone's mind who poses such a well-founded critique. At the end of the day we have to evaluate our purchases individually. If a product serves the purpose for which it was intended, it doesn't matter who made it or what the cost was.

[Wake27]

Can we stop all of the bullshit arguing like little girls? Some people are all kinds of butt hurt about the situation (including some that have never even paid for an EOTech it seems), and some are willing to stick with the company and see what comes of it. Let's leave it at that. The amount of bitching in this thread is ridiculous and its not even directly related to the OP. He did a test, keep the discussion on that and not how EOTech is pretty much satan.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hop]

Sorry but other than the shape of the reticle the sightmark is nothing like a eotech. There are zero holographic sights on the market other than the eotech. I don't want to be a fanboy but to people with astigmatism there's etched glass and hws. All other illuminated type reticles look like a group of grapes.

[Mysteryman]

Can we stop all of the bullshit arguing like little girls? Some people are all kinds of butt hurt about the situation (including some that have never even paid for an EOTech it seems), and some are willing to stick with the company and see what comes of it. Let's leave it at that. The amount of bitching in this thread is ridiculous and its not even directly related to the OP. He did a test, keep the discussion on that and not how EOTech is pretty much satan.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you're referring to me, I am not the least bit butt hurt. I find this whole disaster quite entertaining. Seeing the fanboy support for an optic that doesn't work and has no remedy is a great way to work the abs in a laughing fit. Especially when a full refund is being offered and still being ignored. The apologists that Eotech has on their side is astounding. It's no wonder low end junk gets sold by the boatload every year to people. The emotional investment is higher than the logical/practical one.

The Op didn't conduct a test, he altered one variable slightly and made the assumption that his data is both accurate and empirical. Even though as I've said a dozen times, Eotech has admitted that the optics do experience thermal drift and it is by design that it does this. Yet somehow a poorly done home "experiment" if you want to call it that, somehow has not only merit, but more merit than those of Eotech and NSWC. Both of which are clueless morons...

MM

[KalashniKEV]

Yeah, I've used mine in temps from the mid 90°s to the -10°s and never experienced any zero shift either.

I can beat that- 110°+ to negative teens and never had any issues with zero shift.

To boot, my 511 and 512 are both straight banged up.

I wonder if this only effects the newer optics???

(...and I wonder what they are going to do with the turned in optics)

Also, can anyone tell me what exactly they lied about?

They still make the fastest, most precise, and toughest RDS in the game (though if this is founded, "tough" may be limited to external physical toughness)

[Mysteryman]

I can beat that- 110°+ to negative teens and never had any issues with zero shift.

To boot, my 511 and 512 are both straight banged up.

I wonder if this only effects the newer optics???

(...and I wonder what they are going to do with the turned in optics)

Also, can anyone tell me what exactly they lied about?

They still make the fastest, most precise, and toughest RDS in the game (though if this is founded, "tough" may be limited to external physical toughness)

It effects all of their HWS.
If the optic won't hold zero it matters not how "tough" it is.
Red dot optics are designed for speed, not precision.
Here's the easy answer:

Thermal Drift – After zeroing the ECOS systems at or near ambient temperature (73°F), the zero position will shift during operating temperature changes. The ECOS systems have the potential to shift approximately +/- 4 Minutes of Angle (MOA) at -40°F and 122°F. Due to thermal drift, the sight may not return to zero. The systems have the potential of approximately a +/- 2 MOA zero shift upon return to ambient (73°F) after being exposed to any temperature between -40°F and 122°F temperatures.

Fading Reticle – The complete 65 MOA ring with 1 MOA dot reticle may not be visible to the operator throughout the entire viewing window of the ECOS-Q optic. The ECOS-Q system’s age and environmental exposure are factors which accelerate reticle dimming. Impact to operators is the holographic reticle may not be visible in all firing positions.

HWS DiagramParallax Error – Parallax is an apparent change in the position of an object resulting from a change in position of the observer. The 65 MOA ring with 1 MOA dot reticle point of aim will appear to move in relation to your target during off-axis firing positions where maintaining cheek-weld and sight picture is not feasible. The ECOS-Q system has the potential of approximately 4 Minute of Angle (MOA) parallax error at 70°F and approximately 6 MOA parallax error at 5°F. Impact to the operators is the point of aim / point of impact will be affected by a MOA parallax error, in off-axis firing positions at all temperatures.

Is My EOTech safe to use?

There is no known fix for the problem other than replacing the unit. Degree of inaccuracy and MOA variance will change based upon the ambient temperature the HWS was zero’d at, the amount of humidity it has been exposed to over its operational life, the age of the HWS and the ambient temperature the HWS is used at while engaging target. We do not recommend continuing to use the EOTech HWS system in scenarios where reliable targeting is necessary across a broad range of temperatures or humidity.

What misrepresentations did EOTech make to US consumers?

Beginning in 2005, in its product marketing brochures, EOTech represented, “Extreme Durability – Built to take it: The HWS has been designed and tested to provide consistent, reliable performance even in the most hostile operational environments. The HWS is Waterproof (submersible), fogproof, shockproof, and withstands extreme temperature variations.”
It also represented, “No Reticle Wash-Out: The HWSʼs 30 brightness settings ensure the holographic reticle can be instantly viewed in ALL types of lighting environments, cluttered back- grounds and target colors. The HWS delivers an impressive 10,000,000:1 bright to low reticle contrast ratio … to ensure the reticle is always clearly viewable.”
In the HDS Specifications, it also said that the optics were “100% parallax free”.
EO Tech’s brochure specified the temperature operating rage to be: “-40 to 150 F(using AA lithiums); -20 to 150 F(all other battery choices)”

What did EOTech know?

In 2006, EOTech became aware that its sights failed to maintain zero with temperature changes, a condition it referred to as “thermal drift”.
EOTech’s CEO admits he knew that EOTech’s sights were experiencing increasing parallax errors in cold temperatures as early as March, 2007.
In early 2007, EOTech became aware that its sights were experiencing increasing parallax error in cold temperature. At 32° F, the parallax error was 12 MOA, i.e., 12 inches for every hundred yards, when measured from outside edge to outside edge of the sight; and at 5° F, the error was more than 20 MOA, from outside edge to outside edge.
In February 2009, EOTech became aware, based on testing a sample of sights, that moisture was entering its sights. When moisture enters a sight, it can cause a dimming of the reticle. Reticle dimming can occur more quickly in humid environments. An optic’s reticle is necessary to allow the user to acquire a target.
EOTech continued to sell its sights to the Government, Consumers, and others.
EOTech has been part of the L3 “Warrior Systems” division since 2011.
Beginning in 2011 , EOTech conducted testing of sights sold to Crane and found thermal drift of 2 to 6 MOA over temperature variations for its carbine sights.
EOTech continued to sell its sights to the government and the public without disclosing its findings.


You can find the above on eotechlawsuit.com

MM

[Ryno12]

I'm always amazed how the topic of RDS brands really brings out the fanatical ugliness in some people.

[Digital_Damage]

it is a shame there is just no competitor for the EoTech's, to my knowledge no one is doing what they are doing with HUD's

[Epoxy]

Can people be honest and stop whining? I (and I'll bet a large amount of those sending their optics back) are doing so because it's purely smarter in the business sense? I know my 512 was not going to sell for much on the forums, yet here's the manufacturer telling me they'll give me my money back? ****, call me a freeloader, I could care less. Eotech set the refund precedent, not the consumer. It's just business.