this is simply incorrect. the donut and the dot are both more precise and faster. more precise at 1 moa size for long distance. faster with a large circle at close ranges. it's literally the best of both worlds. the bottom stadia can also be used for close range height over bore correction if you train that way. it is all about personal preference, but these facts remain, there are advantages to the reticle. whether or not those advantages are meaningful to you or not does not change facts.
if you're shooting at distance with a reddot and expecting supreme accuracy then you've got the wrong optic. Reddot sights excel at short range and are capable of intermediate range (EOTech suggests out to 300 and many would agree). Add in the less than match performance of most ammo that gets used and the 1 MOA dot is a little too precise(see: too small) for the optics intended role. The ring offers the ultra short range aiming point at the bottom, but then again so does proper training and practice. Placing the dot atop a targets head will land you head shots. All this being said you are correct that the attributes of the ring and dot are there as much as they are a personal preference. However those attributes aren't worth a pinch of shit if the optic doesn't hold zero or simply takes a shit completely.
your denial is so strong and contrived. you're clearly saying that "if you can't see the target through the aperture of the optic then it doesn't matter how large it is." clearly the larger the aperture the easier it is to see the target through it. the parallax that is introduced at the extreme edges of the windows would have varying effects at varying distances. in my experience it's been good 'nuff. but i'm not going to change your mind. you do you booboo.
what I'm saying is that if your position is so awkward that you cannot align your eye behind the optic so as to see through it then it doesn't much matter how large the ocular viewing window is. Same goes for not being able to see the target and to see the target and the reticle you need to be aligned with the bore. If you're even remotely aligned behind a reddot and using both eyes then the FOV makes zero difference as there isn't a reddot out there that is wider than the separation between your eyes. Using the extreme edges of an EOTech will result in parallax error and apparently significant error to the tune of 12-20 MOA where 12 MOA is at an ambient temp of 32'F and 20 MOA at 5'F hardly abnormal or cold temperatures. EOTech marketed their optics as "100% parallax free" which is a lie and is also fraud.
i'm only referring to the people at the very tip of the spear. they're the ones that have the opinions that people should regard. they're the ones with the best stuff. eotechs have been good nuff for a while in these groups. are they the best? maybe not. does everything have pros and cons? yes, everyone should acknowledge that everything has pros and cons.
You clearly stated that maybe EOTech sights are not the best but just before that statement said that EOTech sights are what is/was being used by the "tip of the speer" crowd as they get the best stuff and that their opinions should be regarded, so which is it, do they get the best stuff or don't they? Are you questioning their opinions?
No offense to serving personnel but it has long been known that many are not gun guys and simply use what they are issued to the best of their and the equipments ability. LAV has made many statements confirming this as has the late Pat Rogers. Examples of tier one guys showing up with improperly mounted reddot optics to include mounted backwards or mounted at a 45 degree angle off square. I can't confirm this but I doubt anyone in the MIL ever receives or reads a manual that comes with their equipment. Regardless of the above US SOCOM has decided to ditch the optic, and the gov doesn't make these decisions on a whim. If you're litmus test is what SOCOM uses then you need a new optic because they don't use EOTech sights anymore.
firstly, your home defense scenario doesn't involve temperature swings. also, it doesn't matter what optic you run, you probably wouldn't reconfirm zero even annually so you're pretty much just hoping for the best anyway. lastly, you can just choose not to use the eotech in a home defense situation. it's not ideal for that. it's not a pick up and go optic, you have to turn it on. for home defense rifle, i always recommend aimpoint.
Why wouldn't an HD scenario have temp swings involved? Perhaps your rifle is in the car/truck parked outside in January or perhaps you had the rifle slung with your outside all day and were returning to the house when the situation occurred. Perhaps you are out camping or at the cabin. There are many possible scenarios where your optic/rifle may be subjected to colder temps than normal ambient. Either way an optic that can't handle the broad range of habitable temps is not an optic worthy of being used for defensive/offensive use. You admit the EOTech is not a great HD option as it must be turned on before use the byproduct of poor battery life. EOTech marketed their sights as being able to handle "extreme temperatures" and cited -40'F - 150'F as well as being waterproof as in submersible. All of which is a lie and is also fraud.
You say you always recommend Aimpoint optics, so I guess that means the circle dot reticle of an EOTech isn't all the important and that a simple dot in an Aimpoint isn't detrimental. Your own recommendation of Aimpoint for HD undermines your belief that EOTech is just as capable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhoUQgO2Riw
i'll leave this right here.
a quarter minute adjustment on a rifle that has an eotech on it. can you even hold a combat rifle with a non magnified optic to within 1 moa? the answer is no. can you do it with non match ammo? no. you get the 2 moa group (at best), onto the target at 100 yards, and you're staying in business.
again you've missed the plot. Zeroing your rifle should involve adjusting your optic to offer you the most precise and consistent point of aim/point of impact with the ammo you are using. An optic that fails to track properly will not help you achieve the most precise and consistent zero. A poorly zeroed rifle added to the performance variance of your ammo and your ability/inability to make the shot will all add up to a larger margin of error. EOTech marketed their sights as having 0.5 MOA adjustments and they are in fact not a consistent 0.5 MOA per click, that is a lie and is also fraud.
you reconfirm zero in order to let the optic get banged around a bit and have some amount of confidence. if it gets banged around all the time and you never confirm zero, you're just wrong. you can absolutely bang around an eotech. i've done it. it's not an unrugged optic.
Absolutely nothing wrong with reconfirming zero and especially after some hard knocks(situation permitting). Some seem to believe it is ok to reconfirm zero when the temp changes or before each use. This may be acceptable with low budget garbage optics but it is not acceptable for service optics nor is it acceptable for a $600 optic. Your banging around of an EOTech without issue is not uncommon and is not the issue. The problem is the optic won't hold zero due to the technology involved and the false claims made by EOTech.
EOTech optics have known failures and weak points and they are:
Thermal drift
Inconsistent adjustment values
False operating temperature claim
False waterproof/submergibility claim
Reticle fade due to moisture incursion
Parasitic battery drain
Battery contact failure during use
poor battery life
False parallax free claim
In addition to the above issues EOTech/L3 LIED about the problems and continued to sell their product to the public as well as military and law enforcement personnel for nearly a decade. That is FRAUD, and just plain unethical low as f**k business practice. Once confronted by the US GOV about the problems they quickly settled the lawsuit. To avoid even more financial damage they are offering a buy back program. Many have ignorantly applauded this action as noble or "customer oriented" when in fact it is strictly damage control in an attempt to minimize the financial loss. If EOTech was truly concerned about the failures they would have done something about them a decade ago. 
Originally Posted by imaguy3
If you had read my post and understand the issues with EOTech sights then you would know that such shifts are POSSIBLE not GUARANTEED. As mentioned a short range shot is of no merit as the differences between zero and POI shift even extreme ones are not hugely detrimental. As for your experience with EOTech and that of your co workers, good for you guys. It sounds like you feel that the claims of failure and the KNOWN deficiencies are not true? Keep in mind that these issues are absolutes and have been both proven by EOTech(as well as NSW Crane) and admitted to by EOTech and affect ALL of their sights. Why anyone would continue to champion a product that has several known flaws and one that has lied about them for nearly a decade while continuing to sell them to soldiers and LEO's who's lives depend on them is beyond me.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks