Eotech EXPS3 initial Cold Weather test

[Metric Matt]

I had a 552 that I had to send in twice within a two year period for a dim reticle due to gas leaks. The second time they quoted me something like $140 to fix it when it was $80 the first time. I had to point out to them that I had sent in the unit for the same problem already, they did come down on the repair cost after they looked up the previous repair order. So over $200 dumped into a $500 optic that really only saw moderate use. I had lost confidence in it's durability even before the news came out, so quite frankly I jumped on the chance to return it. I liked using it quite a bit, the reticle worked quite well with a magnifier too. Too bad.

[azoutdoorsman]

I had a 552 that I had to send in twice within a two year period for a dim reticle due to gas leaks. The second time they quoted me something like $140 to fix it when it was $80 the first time. I had to point out to them that I had sent in the unit for the same problem already, they did come down on the repair cost after they looked up the previous repair order. So over $200 dumped into a $500 optic that really only saw moderate use. I had lost confidence in it's durability even before the news came out, so quite frankly I jumped on the chance to return it. I liked using it quite a bit, the reticle worked quite well with a magnifier too. Too bad.

The reticle is superior to anything else available, in my opinion. For me it's faster in close, and more precise out to mid distances.

Sorry about your troubles, and I've seen emails from Eotech stating the seal problem is now permanently fixed. Whether or not that's true remains to be seen.

Those problems are independent of the zero shift problems though.

[tom12.7]

It is very possible that the OP may not have issues as many don't.
I have sent back Eotech stuff for issues. I have also sent back Aimpoints, Trijicons, Leupolds, S&Bs, Zeiss, etc. That does not mean that every product those manufacturers make are not good by a long shot.
Do some Eotechs shift, yes some do. Send back the ones with issues, not every one of them.

[HD1911]

It is very possible that the OP may not have issues as many don't.
I have sent back Eotech stuff for issues. I have also sent back Aimpoints, Trijicons, Leupolds, S&Bs, Zeiss, etc. That does not mean that every product those manufacturers make are not good by a long shot.
Do some Eotechs shift, yes some do. Send back the ones with issues, not every one of them.

Wise words.

[Mysteryman]

I don't think there could possibly be a worse group of followers than "we" gun people. If LAV came on here today and said he used snot to lube his training guns, overnight that would become "the" new popular thing. (no disrespect, just making a point).

I would wager less than 5% (that's generous) of the people on this forum will ever shoot in the conditions required to make these fail. Ever. Me included. Aimpoint is great, we already knew that. We knew that before all of us bought an Eotech, yet bunches of us still did. The company lied to keep from costing itself a multi-million dollar recall program over a defect that 99.999% of users will never find/realize? Wow, that's called business. The military/Leo implications aside, (I understand the gov dumping them) the civilian mass exodus from Eotech is ridiculous. I think the whole thing is pretty laughable. If General Motors was to come out and say that they discovered if you drive your suburban at speeds above 150 mph, it "may" cause mild drivetrain problems, I'm pretty sure I'd be ok with the knowledge, knowing that the likelihood of me using it in those conditions is near zero.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The company lied to generate revenue. Lying to save money from a recall is asinine as it will come back to haunt you for far more than a recall is worth. Hence the current refund offering and the drama associated. The sole purpose of the refund is to reduce the severity of the class action lawsuits that are happening and will likely continue to happen. Eotech doesn't give a sh*t about the customer, just their bottom line.

The defects are real and they effect all Eotech sights. The evidence is listed on the eotechlawsuit.com website and has been and is admitted to be the case by EOTECH THEMSELVES. It amazes me how many people seem to believe they know the optic better than the people who build them. Eotech admits they are faulty by design and NSWC and USSOCOM have tested and proven that to be the case. There is little doubt that the optics are not reliable, what is in question is just when they will fail. The temperature shift, the parallax issues, inconsistent adjustment values, the dimming due to moisture inside the optic, failed battery contacts, battery drain when the optic is off and the poor battery life are all other real issues.

I'd still buy a handful if they were cheap enough, eotech on my .22, eotech on my lever 3030, eotech on my toaster, eotech on my slingshot, eotech hood ornament....



Can anyone think of a product, in the consumer market, that something went south like this and they were bought back no questions asked
at retail price in masse? It's got to have happened but I can't think of it, especially years after the fact. I don't see VW rushing to buy back
TDI's with that ongoing fiasco.

VW didn't sell defective products, they simply lied about the emissions values, so what. The car still runs as advertised. Again, Eotech is offering full refunds as a way to mitigate huge lawsuit payouts.

If you had a problem that's one thing. If you've never had a problem, that's freeloading.

Late 90's to mid 00's Porsches are known to have an intermediate shaft bearing fail. If it failed under warranty, they would fix it. If the car was out of warranty, customer paid. No one got a full refund for their whole (used) car, especially if it was problem free. The bearing would grenade the engine and was a $8k or more repair.

Those returning their used Eotechs for full refund are now setting a difficult and unfair precedent for manufacturers and retailers to oblige.

Eotech is setting the precident, not the consumer. If they simply offered a poorly built product then it would sit amongst other low end brands like Tasco, NcStar and Leapers. The difference is they lied about the products capabilities and failed to make any attempt to solve the issues. It is this difference that has spurred Eotech to offer the refund. Avoiding lawsuits and their payouts is priority one. Other manufacturers offer to repair or replace the defective item under warranty. Eotech has no fix for the problem, they lied about the quality of the product. Call me crazy but if I was sold a product under false claims I would want my money back as well. Perhaps not being scammed is freeloading to you, I call it consumer protection. Then again, I didn't buy an Eotech.

I had similar problem with my Aimpoint T1. When I contacted Aimpoint they were also aware of the problem. Are they fraudsters too?

Turns out the battery cap required too much tightening force to complete the circuit and was unreliable. They handled it, I was satisfied.

There you have it, there was a defective battery cap, not an inherent design flaw(also known as a poor design) and they found it and fixed it. I hate to be the broken record here but Eotech isn't offering a fix, because there isn't one. The optic does not perform anywhere near the level they claim it does/can. They got caught and there is no solution. Eotech is in damage control mode, and minimizing the volume of people involved in lawsuits will cost them less in the end. Can't sue them if you got your money back now can you? The other thing the refund does(or they hope it does) is to reduce the amount and duration of bad press that Eotech/L3 is receiving. For those who still haven't figured it out, the refund also looks like a "gesture of good faith" which it's not.

On a final note, wait till some LEO's or servicemen's family can prove(or a lawyer can prove) their loved one was wounded or killed because their Eotech failed them.

MM

[HKGuns]

I concur that L3's handling of this entire situation, on the surface, appears to be sub standard.

ETA: I'm not referring to the full refunds, obviously that is fine. I'm referring to their communication of this issue to their customers.

Like I said up in the thread, I'm keeping all of mine as I'm not LE.

[wolf_walker]

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.

[Etho]

I had similar problem with my Aimpoint T1. When I contacted Aimpoint they were also aware of the problem. Are they fraudsters too?

Turns out the battery cap required too much tightening force to complete the circuit and was unreliable. They handled it, I was satisfied.

No, because Aimpoint acknowledged the problem and fixed the issue. Eotech/L3 never acknowledged(publicly) the problem existed until the lawsuit. Big damn difference if you ask me. Again, as recently as a couple of months ago they responded to my email inquiry about the issue using words that were that of surprise. Not anything about "yes, that can happen and this is our solution.".

Forgot to add. You won't convince me, I won't convince you. We'll have to agree to disagree. Have a good day.

[Kdubya]

The reticle is superior to anything else available, in my opinion. For me it's faster in close, and more precise out to mid distances.

Sorry about your troubles, and I've seen emails from Eotech stating the seal problem is now permanently fixed. Whether or not that's true remains to be seen.

Those problems are independent of the zero shift problems though.

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.

[nickdrak]

L3 isn't going out of business over this. They have tens of millions of dollars in contracts for their NVG equipment.

Im just hoping this ordeal forces Eotech to come out with an improved/fixed sight with battery life that is comparable to everything else in the market.