Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Eotech falsified testing data for extreme temperatures on some of it's sights. They settled with the Government / DoD. There is a civilian lawsuit against them so in a move to stem that they offered full refunds if you wanted to return your sight. Nearly everyone I know who owns one never plans on using it in Northern Alaska or Siberia so they just kept them.I must have been under a rock somewhere. What refund?
Oh gosh...I guess that means I should bubblegum over a company that produced and awesome optic, of which I own (3) and have never had a problem with any one of them. More first world problems for the American entitlement mindset...geeze.Anybody received their refund yet. I mailed mine on January 5th, they received it on the 7th. Since it's only been 4 weeks I'm not overly concerned, just a little curious.
Or working for NASA and/or NOAAFalsifying data? . . . Who do they think they are?
They should be running for president!?!?!?
Sheldon
Oh gosh...I guess that means I should bubblegum over a company that produced and awesome optic, of which I own (3) and have never had a problem with any one of them. More first world problems for the American entitlement mindset...geeze.
My point keyboard commandos like myself and others are hardly damaged by the fact that our EoTech may not work at -70f or whatever. But then again, us Americans like our free stuff.I dont know man, lying on testing to get government contracts potentially putting our troops in harms way just to make profit. But that's the true American way
Oh gosh...I guess that means I should bubblegum over a company that produced and awesome optic, of which I own (3) and have never had a problem with any one of them. More first world problems for the American entitlement mindset...geeze.
It's not that I'm looking for something for free. I loved my eotech and debated if I should send it back or not. I decided to mainly because although I never plan on getting rid of my firearms but if I did I want to make sure that they hold their value and if I had an optic that is tainted it may bring the value down and the optic be worthless.
No, why would I be kidding? I suppose me saying it could be worthless is an exaggeration but it certainly would/should be worth less than one that was not listed in the recall. Personally I didn't want to return it and I'll prob buy a new one after the dust has settled as long as their backorder status isn't terrible. Most likely the end result will be I will end up paying more $$$ for the optic like I had for it not to be branded.Your kidding, right?
Totally agree. So much that I will end up repurchasing it. None the less, back to my original question...Am I the only one that returned theirs?From all I've read, kool-aid bashing aside, Eotech is proven.
Did Stomper pay you to say thathttp://soldiersystems.net/2015/12/0...ssuing-refunds-for-holographic-weapon-sights/
Personally I use Aimpoints and will continue to do so.
Ambient temperature is not the problem, it will easily get that hot on top of an Ak with an Ulitmak and that is the main issue, it will get fried.
Their is no comparison when it come to battery life between the two, Aimpoint rules.
Point being they were not holding up to the temperatures they claim they would and it cost them 25 million, but the real question is did cost good guys lives?. I know a couple guys that fried them on AKs and that kept me from going down that road.