New Eotech 512

[WrongHanded]

I just received the new Eotech for my Zastava ZPAP. I once had a friend who had one, and I shot with it some, but that was a long time ago.

Initial impressions:

It's fairly big, which I already knew, but it fits the rail mount I have almost perfectly (the rail is just one or two notches longer). The outer reticle is kinda fuzzy. I now know it's supposed to be, but that fact was conspicuously absent from the included documentation, or the Eotech FAQs. I found a video on YouTube that Eotech posted, which explained. So all is good there. Most importantly the center dot is sharp and clear.

What's really kind of astounding is how simple it is. An easy to use high vis reticle with no parallax (apparently), and two buttons. It goes on with a press of either button (the left has a 4 hr auto shutoff, the right an 8hr shutoff, providing the brightness is not adjusted during that time). It goes off by pressing both. And it goes up and down in brightness with 20 settings, left is down right is up. The buttons are large and easy to access with either hand. That's it.

Why are people not raving about these sights? Too expensive compared to the competition? Too large for most people to want? Have I just missed all the buzz about them?

 

[desmobob]

I had one and foolishly sold it back to them after the federal law suit/settlement. I did like it a lot, but would have loved it if it had a "shake awake" feature like Sig's Romeo5. I can't justify buying another one now that I'm retired and my shooting budget is much, much tighter. That high price is hard for this casual shooter to pony up... same for the other military-grade stuff from Trijicon, AimPoint, etc.

 

[BreechFace]

EoTechs got a bad rap a while back with their extreme temperature failures on an earlier generation.

They have since fixed those issues as far as I know. They are great optics, there are are still a lot of them used on two way ranges.

They are good for people with astigmatism, which is why I suggested one to you. It should serve you well.

They do make the xps2 & 3 which are more compact.

 

[desmobob]

EoTechs got a bad rap a while back with their extreme temperature failures on an earlier generation.

I believe the problem was a greater-than-specified shift of zero over a range of temperatures, not a failure.

 

[BreechFace]

I believe the problem was a greater-than-specified shift of zero over a range of temperatures, not a failure.

correct

 

[Old Dog]

Why are people not raving about these sights?

EOTech HWS have a lot of fans. They're my favorite optic on ARs, for sure, and I'm pretty sure I've raved about EOTechs for years on this forum and others. This 512 was my first personally owned EOTech and gave me 25 years of service before it finally died.

 

[Steve in PA]

I had an older 512 that was great, except for the battery compartment issue. I installed the fix they supplied and the sight ran fine. I gave it to my son when I bought an Aimpoint PRO for my duty rifle. He still has the sight.

Now, I love the PRO……it’s been great with no issues. But, while it as super battery life, it still needs a often hard to find battery. I like that the 512 uses AA batteries. I used lithium batteries when I had the 512.

I’m kind of leaning towards getting a new 512 just for the ease of battery replacement. We shall see.

 

[chicharrones]

I used to have an EOTech 517 on my one and only AR. The 517 was a lower 1/3 co-witness version of the 512.

I really liked how the frame blurred out of my vision and the reticle would appear to be floating in front of me. Plus the wide range or brightness from super low for darker conditions to very bright for daylight was excellent.

Alas, my particular AR isn't exactly a lightweight carbine so I changed the focus of the gun a bit to suit my needs better. So, the 517 went away and I installed a fixed stock and a 1.5-4x scope.

I thought that 517 was a great red dot. The only downside compared to the competition in my mind was battery life. But AAs were easy to find and stuff up the pistol grip storage compartment.

The pic below that I've posted many times over the years at THR is of the view through my long departed 517.

View attachment 1149709

View attachment 1149712

 

[gotboostvr]

They're very nice sights. Lots of options with the various models with regards to reticles, mounting heights and battery arrangements. Very sturdy, and like mentioned, great for those with astigmatism.

They've had a few issues over the years, but they've typically been sorted out as soon as the issue is found. I think battery life is the most common complaint I've heard. The biggest reason they're not particularly popular is partly due to it not being updated any appreciable amount since their introduction.

Aimpoints were always super durable and had good battery life, and have gotten even better, the EOTechs haven't really updated anything in the past couple decades. It was a great sight then, and is still very good, just a bit passé in some circles. I was looking for one, until I glommed a deal on a CompM3 for a pittance.

 

[chicharrones]

I've heard or read that since EOTech supposedly uses a laser in its holographic reticle, it simply uses more power than an LED emitter reflecting off a piece of glass.

https://www.recoilweb.com/the-holographic-sight-advantage-of-eotech-168886.html

 

[Old Dog]

The biggest reason they're not particularly popular is partly due to it not being updated any appreciable amount since their introduction.

You don't consider the XPS/EXPS 2s and 3s an upgrade? Smaller footprint on the rails, easier controls? IOr the G33 magnifier, which is for some of us far handier than using an ACOG with a top or side angle mounted RMR or irons for shorter distances.

It was a great sight then, and is still very good, just a bit passé in some circles.

Passe maybe in some civilian circles, but still in use in SF, NSW, SOC and pretty widespread in law enforcement throughout the country.

I think a lot of it is personal preference; but for me, the HWS offers quicker target acquisition that some of the tube optics, easy to use with both eyes open and as well (for me) is faster at shorter distances but really shines in low-light.

I'm a fan of AIMPOINT, too, having been issued the M2 and PRO, and I still like taking out a rifle with the ACOG 4x, but if one keeps a carbine handy for defensive purposes, I think the EOTech is a great choice.

 

[gotboostvr]

You don't consider the XPS/EXPS 2s and 3s an upgrade? Smaller footprint on the rails, easier controls? IOr the G33 magnifier, which is for some of us far handier than using an ACOG with a top or side angle mounted RMR or irons for shorter distances.
Passe maybe in some civilian circles, but still in use in SF, NSW, SOC and pretty widespread in law enforcement throughout the country.

Oh it has been upgraded for sure, but still lacks some features like shake awake, that make other optics attractive.

I'd be all over an eotech with shake awake.

Anytime someone asks for a recommendation for a hard use or duty type optic, I highly recommend them, aimpoints or ACOGs in the same breath.

 

[WrongHanded]

Oh it has been upgraded for sure, but still lacks some features like shake awake, that make other optics attractive.

I'd be all over an eotech with shake awake.

Anytime someone asks for a recommendation for a hard use or duty type optic, I highly recommend them, aimpoints or ACOGs in the same breath.

Whilst I appreciate the idea of a shake awake feature on a handgun optic, my thought with a long gun optic is that having to push either of two large buttons to switch it on isn't a big deal. But I suppose you must have your reasons.

 

[gotboostvr]

Whilst I appreciate the idea of a shake awake feature on a handgun optic, my thought with a long gun optic is that having to push either of two large buttons to switch it on isn't a big deal. But I suppose you must have your reasons.

I don't think it's a deal killer. Mostly I'm just repeating what other people have given as their reason for choosing another optic, since you asked.

I've only ever heard praise for the EOtech magnifiers, from people that like magnifiers.

I really like EOtechs, I've just never come across the right deal on one when I had the money for it.

I was actively looking for an EOtech, when I found a trade deal on a LNIB CompM3 in a LaRue mount and all the original packaging and receipts for some parts I only had $250 in. Just too good a deal to pass up, and enough providence I wasn't worried about it being a knock off.

I think the EOtechs are just about right and tailor made for AR's. Them not having much to update over the years is a testament to how right they got it the first time I think.

 

[trackskippy]

I tried an Eotech and for some reason, it, and the other projection type sights just didnt work for me. The Aimpoints and similar type just seem to work more naturally.

Where are you planning on mounting it on your AK? I think you'll find that the further ahead you can get it, the better, and for a number of reasons. The Ultimak rails work great here too. Although I kind of doubt you'll get a cowitness with the Eotech. Still, it keeps things up front and out of the way of your peripheral vision and handling. Best Ive found for mounting red dots on the AK's.

 

[Bullet Bob]

"Have I just missed all the buzz about them?"

Yup.

 

[WrongHanded]

Where are you planning on mounting it on your AK?

That's where the rail is, so that's where it's going.

 

[chicharrones]

View attachment 1149919

That's where the rail is, so that's where it's going.

EOTechs work just fine closer to the eye. Loss of vision in a tube dot up close isn't really a thing with an EOTech, in my limited experience.

 

[burrhead]

Had one on a braced pistol and couldn't warm up to the reticle although it was reliable. Sold the whole rig a couple of years ago. Much prefer my eight year old AimPoint Pro. I get the funky batteries from Amazon..

 

[trackskippy]

EOTechs work just fine closer to the eye. Loss of vision in a tube dot up close isn't really a thing with an EOTech, in my limited experience.

They both work up close to the eye, but you still have that big body of the sight right there in front of your face blocking your peripheral view. The old Russian Kobra's were in about the same spot and a PITA to shoot with.

That goes away the more you get the sight up forward. With the AK's, you also dont have to deal with the sight being over the cover, and you get full and easy access for cleaning, and you dont have to keep removing the sight to get access for cleaning.

Another issue is, the way its set up there, my nose would be right along the side of the top cover and my cheek on the "wrist" trying to get the normal AK cheek weld, and Id be looking into the lower part of the sight. If it were me, Id try and slide it as far forward on the rail as I could and it would be easier to deal with. Might not get the proper cheek weld, but it would be better.

If you try and get a cheek weld on the comb of the stock, the gun wont shoulder or feel right, and the stock wont fit you properly. Something to think about anyway.

 

[chicharrones]

They both work up close to the eye, but you still have that big body of the sight right there in front of your face blocking your peripheral view. The old Russian Kobra's were in about the same spot and a PITA to shoot with.

That goes away the more you get the sight up forward. With the AK's, you also dont have to deal with the sight being over the cover, and you get full and easy access for cleaning, and you dont have to keep removing the sight to get access for cleaning.

Another issue is, the way its set up there, my nose would be right along the side of the top cover and my cheek on the "wrist" trying to get the normal AK cheek weld, and Id be looking into the lower part of the sight. If it were me, Id try and slide it as far forward on the rail as I could and it would be easier to deal with. Might not get the proper cheek weld, but it would be better.

If you try and get a cheek weld on the comb of the stock, the gun wont shoulder or feel right, and the stock wont fit you properly. Something to think about anyway.

My experience is only with the AR mounted EOTech and even though my photos up the thread show the entire mass of fixed rear sight and EOTech lower body, the eye on the AR is only seeing through the reticle window.

I also had a tube type red dot on the same gun in the same position. Looking through the tube in that position certainly restricted forward view as the tube body didn't blur into nothingness like the thin double frame of the EOTech will with the human eye. Cell phone cameras pick up things differently.

Of course, this has not much to do with a high mounted EOTech on an AK.

View attachment 1149963

View attachment 1149964

 

[WrongHanded]

I'll see how it works out, but my initial thoughts are it will probably be okay. Located on the rear like it is certainly does not allow for a similar check weld to the one used for shooting with the iron sights. However, I can rest the side of my jaw on the stock and have a much more heads-up posture. This does allow for the butt stock to fit correctly at my shoulder.

Now my experience with such a high mount (which I experimented with during my time shooting an M1A) has been that without a cheek weld, accuracy is poor. But that was with a traditional telescopic scope, which of course the EOTech is not. Perhaps I will find accuracy is no better than with the iron sights, just faster. Or perhaps I will find it to be far more consistent. I'm betting it will be the latter.

 

[trackskippy]

My experience is only with the AR mounted EOTech and even though my photos up the thread show the entire mass of fixed rear sight and EOTech lower body, the eye on the AR is only seeing through the reticle window.

I also had a tube type red dot on the same gun in the same position. Looking through the tube in that position certainly restricted forward view as the tube body didn't blur into nothingness like the thin double frame of the EOTech will with the human eye. Cell phone cameras pick up things differently.

Of course, this has not much to do with a high mounted EOTech on an AK.

View attachment 1149963

View attachment 1149964

The AR's are a bit different than the AK's, as youre already shooting more "heads up" with the irons compared to the AK's "heads down" with the irons. Or at least it feels that way.

When you shoulder the AK, your head is down and forward, "nose at/along the top cover" and your eye naturally lines up with the iron sights with a proper cheek weld. Its kind of the same with the AR's, or at least it is for me, as Im a "nose to the charging handle" shooter, but my head feels more "up".

Where the difference comes in is, most of the dots and their mounts are basically meant for the AR's and are set up for them. Optics and the mounts on the AK's are more of an afterthought, and you really dont have the options, especially if you want things to cowitness. Anything rail wise (other than maybe the Ultimak) on the AK's usually puts things up to high. Some might let you see the irons under the optic, but those tend to be even higher.

Thats where the Ultimak/Aimpoint combo really shines, as the forward rail sits low, low enough that you can still get the Aimpoints mounted with a low ring, and still see the irons through the tube and get a cowitness, just like you do with the AR's. The rifle shoulders and shoots naturally, just like you do using the iron sights. Same cheek weld and head position, except now, when you look at the target as you shoulder the gun, the "dot" just appears where you were looking on the target, and you dont see the body of the sight, consciously anyway, and your peripheral vision isnt blocked by the sight.

One issue I seemed to have with the Eotech's that I dont have with the Aimpoint type sights is, with the Aimpoints, its as I explained above, I look at the target as Im shouldering the gun, and the dot just appears where I was looking on the target, or very close to it. For some reason with the projector type sights, I see the target, but the dot/reticle doesn't seem to just appear, and I have to look for the reticle and then put it on the target. I dont know if thats just me, or if thats the way they work or what. I had the same problem with a couple of the cheaper red dots of the same type as the Eotechs early on, while trying to figure out what I wanted.

Dont get me wrong here, if you like the Eotechs, by all means run what you like, I know a lot of people like them. Im just pointing out my experiences with them and the others.

For me, the type of sight, how they can be mounted, and battery life were why I went with the Aimpoints..

 

[trackskippy]

I'll see how it works out, but my initial thoughts are it will probably be okay. Located on the rear like it certainly does not allow for a similar check weld to the one used for shooting with the iron sights. However, I can rest the side of my jaw on the stock and have a much more heads-up posture. This does allow for the butt stock to fit correctly at my shoulder.

Now my experience with such a high mount (which I experimented with during my time shooting an M1A) has been that without a cheek weld, accuracy is poor. But that was with a traditional telescopic scope, which of course the EOTech is not. Perhaps I will find accuracy is no better than with the iron sights, just faster. Or perhaps I will find it to be far more consistent. I'm betting it will be the latter.

I think once you figure out what works best for you, youre going to find that your AK's and AR's shoot very much alike, especially when youre shooting on your feet and a little more realistically than just target shooting.

You just have to experiment and see what works best, and that will likely take some fiddling, and also tends to burn ammo.

 

[chicharrones]

One issue I seemed to have with the Eotech's that I dont have with the Aimpoint type sights is, with the Aimpoints, its as I explained above, I look at the target as Im shouldering the gun, and the dot just appears where I was looking on the target, or very close to it. For some reason with the projector type sights, I see the target, but the dot/reticle doesn't seem to just appear, and I have to look for the reticle and then put it on the target. I dont know if thats just me, or if thats the way they work or what.

That's how the EOTechs work for me on an AR. It's as if the reticle is in the lens of my eye, I'd look at a target while bringing the gun up and the reticle was "already" there.