EOTech supposedly issuing refunds

[MrJones79]

Hey guys. Not sure if someone has already thrown this out there (didn't see anything), but I saw on Larry Vicker's Facebook page that EOTech is issuing full refunds on their optics now due to the mess they're in with the government lawsuit. Here's a link:

http://soldiersystems.net/2015/12/08/l3-communications-eotech-issuing-refunds-for-holographic-weapon-sights/

Saw some posts on M4carbine forum and apparently guys have been getting return authorizations for sights that are years old (think I saw one guy say they are taking back his 2007 sight).

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?177173-EOTech-Issuing-Refunds/page4

Anyway, just an FYI in case anyone wants to go that route. Edited December 9, 2015 by MrJones79

[JohnC]

If it works, why join the frenzy? It might bankrupt a company making a good product.

Not taking sides and I don't own one... But I don't operate in adverse conditions like mil/leo's so if my EOTech worked flawlessly as a civilian owned range toy, I would not try to get a refund.

[mikegideon]

I saw the Vickers post. I'm with John C. I LIKE my Eotechs, and they work fine. If I was in the business of doing CQB with polar bears, I would be pissed. Right now, my Aimpoint gets shuffled between rifles because I like using Eotechs MUCH better, crappy battery, inaccurate Polar Bear CQB problems and all.

Edited December 9, 2015 by mikegideon

[Troutburger]

I've also been completely satisfied with my EOtech, 

 

Given it rides a rifle in the corner more than it gets used these days.

 

Do they all eventually develop issues? I'd hate for them to go under about the time my site screws up...

[R1100R]

Mine sits in a safe. The reticle  has gone out twice in 7 years where it had to be sent to the factory to be repaired.

It would remain only dim and not work outside in bright light even after using a few set of batteries from different brands. They did pay for the repair both times, once in warranty and once out. I paid shipping both times.

 

 $500.00 is a lot of money to take a chance on working., That said I have some 35.00 red dots that have taken a lot of abuse over 10 years and still work great.

 

I put my request in for a refund and will see what happens. I do like  my EOTECH.

Edited December 9, 2015 by R1100R

[whitewolf001]

Aimpoint > EoTech  ;)

[MrJones79]

I agree with the sentiment that most of us aren't using these sights than anymore than a range toy. I had and EOTech and sold it, but still liked it overall. I think the biggest downside is the possibility that there isn't any support structure in place should L3 shutter that part of the business. Would suck to need warranty work and not have the manufacturer or division still in place to provide service.

[DaveTN]

A lot of old azz EOtech's will be going back. I don’t want to send mine in, but if I did I would be concerned that they might go belly up before I was paid. Good luck getting anything then.

The value of used EOtech's will take a big hit when they stop giving refunds.

[BigK]

I've wanted an EOtech for a long time, but couldn't bring myself to spend that much dough. It would probably suit me just fine for my weekend trips to the range too, but I'll never find out.

 

For starters they knowingly risked the lives of our soldiers to make a buck. Add to that the fact that they defrauded us taxpayers. I just can't forgive either.

 

Now that doesn't mean that if I owned one I'd chuck it in the trash to show my outrage, but I'd sure as hell send it back if I could get my money back...just out of spite, if nothing else.

[MrJones79]

A lot of old azz EOtech's will be going back. I don’t want to send mine in, but if I did I would be concerned that they might go belly up before I was paid. Good luck getting anything then.

The value of used EOtech's will take a big hit when they stop giving refunds.

I wouldn't be concerned with that. L-3 is a huge operation and EOTech is just one product they make. Plus, a lot of gun owners who own them will probably never even hear about the refund/lawsuit to begin with.

[QuietDan]

My Eotech 512 stopped working after five years. Eotech sent me a repair kit to freshen up the battery contacts and replace the battery compartment. Quick turn. Easy fix. Works like new. Of course, I am not using it in Iraq where my life is on the line, so I'm good. 

[QuietDan]

I wouldn't be concerned with that. L-3 is a huge operation and EOTech is just one product they make. Plus, a lot of gun owners who own them will probably never even hear about the refund/lawsuit to begin with.

 And L-3 is, I think, a Raytheon company. There are few deeper pockets in the country.

[mikegideon]

My Eotech 512 stopped working after five years. Eotech sent me a repair kit to freshen up the battery contacts and replace the battery compartment. Quick turn. Easy fix. Works like new. Of course, I am not using it in Iraq where my life is on the line, so I'm good. 

 

The sights have a problem with accuracy at extreme low temperatures. You would be just fine shooting warm goat humpers.

[musicman]

The sights have a problem with accuracy at extreme low temperatures. You would be just fine shooting warm goat humpers.

I lol'd.

[nightrunner]

The sights have a problem with accuracy at extreme low temperatures. You would be just fine shooting warm goat humpers.

I guess the guys on covert ops in Siberia use Aimpoints then :)

[whitewolf001]

I guess the guys on covert ops in Siberia use Aimpoints then :)

Well, actually....

[NoBanStan]

The sights have a problem with accuracy at extreme low temperatures. You would be just fine shooting warm goat humpers.

 

I think it's extreme either way correct? -40 and 122 according to the documents

 

The lowest temperature ever recorded in TN:   -32F

The highest temperature ever recorded in TN:  113F

 

I dunno, while I completely agree it's absolute BS that they hid those facts... those are some REALLY extreme temps... average Joe isn't likely to deal with that around here. Hell at those temps, I will likely give out before the optic does....

[mikegideon]

I think it's extreme either way correct? -40 and 122 according to the documents

 

The lowest temperature ever recorded in TN:   -32F

The highest temperature ever recorded in TN:  113F

 

I dunno, while I completely agree it's absolute BS that they hid those facts... those are some REALLY extreme temps... average Joe isn't likely to deal with that around here. Hell at those temps, I will likely give out before the optic does....

 

I believe you're right. This was about fudging milspec, not outright fraud. There's a reason they only had to cough up a settlement. 

[Chucktshoes]

I think the offering of refunds is a pretty smart move. It helps build goodwill AND it will help dry up the secondary market. That will stop folks from dumping their units for dirt cheap thereby further decreasing demand and exerting downward pressure on MSRP once they recover (and they will) from this bit of negative publicity.

[TGO David]

If it works, why join the frenzy? It might bankrupt a company making a good product.

Not taking sides and I don't own one... But I don't operate in adverse conditions like mil/leo's so if my EOTech worked flawlessly as a civilian owned range toy, I would not try to get a refund.

 

I am presently leaning this direction as well.  I have two of the XPS sights.  They work just fine for me and haven't presented any problems.  It's tempting to jump on the bandwagon and ask for a refund, but that would mean another $400 or so out of pocket to replace these with something from Aimpoint or Trijicon, plus I'm one more guy who isn't kicking in doors for a living, helping bankrupt a company that makes products for people who do.

[R1100R]

I sent mine back today. I have already sent mine in twice for repairs on the reticule. It sits on a HD weapon in my bedroom. I thought about selling it a while back but could not sell it in good conscious to another person. I am happy to get my money back.

I really do like the sight and will get another when the issues are addressed. For the money they should have a better warranty period.

[btq96r]

This was about fudging milspec, not outright fraud. There's a reason they only had to cough up a settlement. 

 

I don't think fudging milspec and fraud are mutually exclusive in this case.  Certainly once they knew of the flaws, they had a duty to inform the government contracting agent.  But instead, they were willing to risk compromising Soldiers lives instead of telling the truth.  I get it, they wanted those contract vehicles, but it's unacceptable to me going forward if they are unable to right this wrong.

 

Now when you look at where/when the identified failures can creep up, those temps (-40 degrees to 122 degrees) are not out of the norm for the mission set the US is facing, especially when you consider that EOTech's are used by Special Operations Forces more than anyone else in the US Military.  The standards the military wanted were for good reasons.

 

120 degree temps are normal for the desert in the summer months, and with a weapon sitting in a container, or some other area where heat gets trapped you'll get up even higher.  Surely a weapon with an EOTech has to have its zero verified instead of a normal test fire before setting out on a mission because of that.  Not very practical.  In a semi or non-permissive environment, I wouldn't be comfortable carrying one on mission if I was having to stay in bad guy land for an extended period.

 

The colder side, while much more of an extreme, is still especially relevant in looking at potential special reconnaissance or unconventional warfare missions in the Arctic Circle against Russian aggression, a role SOF could have if things keep going the way they are.  Out in the cold there, a team moving with snowshoes or snowmobiles and laying low in hide sights won't have the chance to test fire their weapons and readjust their zero's.  Would you want an EOTech on your rifle if you had to react to enemy contact after knowing the company hid the truth to protect their contract? 

 

I'll acknowledge my bit of hypocrisy and say I'm not giving up my EOTech, since the whole refund process seems like a hassle compared to its performance, and the resale market for them is still settling.  I love their ring style reticle a lot more than a simple red dot alone, and it works fine for what limited uses I need it for.  But I can say that unless they fix this, when I have to decide what red dot sight to spend a good chunk of money on for my next purchase, it won't be for their products. 

[mikegideon]

I have to wonder why it took the military so long to find these issues. I understand that it would be hard to see a 4 MOA shift with one of those sights. Reading the SOUM, the military has a legitimate bitch. And Eotech looks to have been dishonest about the performance. i'm just thinking that the issues have to be pretty small in the real world. What the military is saying... "Y'all hoodwinked us 10 years (or so) ago on a bunch of sights that don't perform to spec. Please ignore the small fact that it took us 10 years (or so) to find the problem.We don't shoot our guns much".

 

The HWS was introduced in 1996. Now, it's flawed.

Edited December 12, 2015 by mikegideon

[cannoncocker]

Sent my RA request for refund on Friday.  Received the following response this morning.

 

Your refund request has been received and approved. Please print and enclose this email with your optic and return it to: EOTech Refunds, 1201 E Ellsworth Rd, Ann Arbor, MI 48108. EOTech will refund the purchase price plus $15 shipping cost as soon as possible.

 

My Eotech device is a 512 A65 purchased in early 2006.

[DMark]

I'm going to hang on to my one EOTech for now.

 

Having had a less than enjoyable experience dealing with L3 as the Army's User Proponent on a multi billion dollar program....., I'm going to wait and see if the checks-in-the-mail really ever arrive.

 

I wouldn't put it pass those SOBs to put EOTech into bankruptcy and then sell the return inventory to Cheaper than Dirt.  :yuck: