AR Sponsor
Posted: 2/2/2015 9:14:04 PM EDT
|
I just bought a used TRS-25 in excellent condition and I'm having a problem and need some help.
With the dot in lower half of the window, it works fine. When the dot moves above the center of the window it slowly disappears. It's like an eclipse effect where dot vanishes from the top down as it moves up in the window. I've taken some pics to show what I'm talking about. Keep in mind that the dot "blooms" much larger in the photos than it appears to the eye. Low in the window, no problem. 
Center of the window and still fine. 
As soon as it moves north of center it starts to vanish... 
...more... . 
...and more. Any further than that ad it's gone completely. 
Any idea what would cause this? Anyone seen it before with the Bushnell or other similar sights? |
|
There is another recent thread here. It seems to be endemic to the TRS-25 version (there are two) with the diode emitter down at the bottom, 6 'clock. The other version has the emitter at about 4 o'clock to the right. The 4 o'clock versions are not reported with this problem. It is a true defect. Return it and find one with the 4 o'clock emitter.
I have one of the 4 o'clock. versions on a .22LR and it works fine. |
|
Quoted:
There is another recent thread here. It seems to be endemic to the TRS-25 version (there are two) with the diode emitter down at the bottom, 6 'clock. The other version has the emitter at about 4 o'clock to the right. The 4 o'clock versions are not reported with this problem. It is a true defect. Return it and find one with the 4 o'clock emitter. I have one of the 4 o'clock. versions on a .22LR and it works fine. The emitter is located at 6 on this model. |
|
Quoted:
The emitter is located at 6 on this model. Quoted:
Quoted:
There is another recent thread here. It seems to be endemic to the TRS-25 version (there are two) with the diode emitter down at the bottom, 6 'clock. The other version has the emitter at about 4 o'clock to the right. The 4 o'clock versions are not reported with this problem. It is a true defect. Return it and find one with the 4 o'clock emitter. I have one of the 4 o'clock. versions on a .22LR and it works fine. The emitter is located at 6 on this model. Yes, and that is your problem. Return it for a 4 o'clock version. |
|
Quoted:
There is another recent thread here. It seems to be endemic to the TRS-25 version (there are two) with the diode emitter down at the bottom, 6 'clock. The other version has the emitter at about 4 o'clock to the right. The 4 o'clock versions are not reported with this problem. It is a true defect. Return it and find one with the 4 o'clock emitter. I have one of the 4 o'clock. versions on a .22LR and it works fine. This is exactly what I've heard as well. I thought that I read somewhere that the 6 o'clock version was a VERY old/early version and that they've long ago switched to the 4 o'clock position, but who knows... it's the interwebz haha. My 4 o'clock version works flawless. |
|
Quoted:
Why does it matter that the dot disappears, in a position/angle at which you would never use it? Seriously? Never use the dot in the upper half of the window? Having to line up the dot in a certain part of the window completely negates the advantage of using a red dot in the first place. Try getting quick follow up shots or hitting a moving target with a sight that malfunctions like this. |
|
Quoted:
Seriously? Never use the dot in the upper half of the window? Having to line up the dot in a certain part of the window completely negates the advantage of using a red dot in the first place. Try getting quick follow up shots or hitting a moving target with a sight that malfunctions like this. Quoted:
Quoted:
Why does it matter that the dot disappears, in a position/angle at which you would never use it? Seriously? Never use the dot in the upper half of the window? Having to line up the dot in a certain part of the window completely negates the advantage of using a red dot in the first place. Try getting quick follow up shots or hitting a moving target with a sight that malfunctions like this. The red dot will always be level with the receiver, and you will always have to bring the rifle level to your line of sight before you pull the trigger. In order for you to not see the dot, the red dot would have to be tilted on the receiver, the way you are tilting it in your hand. Think about it. |
|
Quoted:
The red dot will always be level with the receiver, and you will always have to bring the rifle level to your line of sight before you pull the trigger. In order for you to not see the dot, the red dot would have to be tilted on the receiver, the way you are tilting it in your hand. Think about it. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why does it matter that the dot disappears, in a position/angle at which you would never use it? Seriously? Never use the dot in the upper half of the window? Having to line up the dot in a certain part of the window completely negates the advantage of using a red dot in the first place. Try getting quick follow up shots or hitting a moving target with a sight that malfunctions like this. The red dot will always be level with the receiver, and you will always have to bring the rifle level to your line of sight before you pull the trigger. In order for you to not see the dot, the red dot would have to be tilted on the receiver, the way you are tilting it in your hand. Think about it. I briefly mounted it on a carbine and the dot still disappears any time it's in the upper half of the window. It is rediculously slow to pick up the dot when bringing the rifle up, moving around corners, transitioning from shoulder to shoulder, etc. Imagine adding live fire or moving targets to the equation. Like I said, you should not have to center the dot on a RDS to hit your target, much less find the dot. The only way I could see this not being an issue is if you're doing nothing but shooting from a bench. |
| There is a cover over the top of the diode that at a certain angle will cover the led. I've seen some sit differently. I have a white lettered, 6 o'clock emitter, TRS-25 and my dot disappears in the top 1/3 of the sight. It doesn't bother me because I never tilt the gun/my head at that angle to notice it. I would have to have the gun off my shoulder and canted up to even notice it. But that's the reason it's doing that. Look into the sight from the front to back and you'll be able to see the cover over the diode. |
|
Quoted:
I briefly mounted it on a carbine and the dot still disappears any time it's in the upper half of the window. It is rediculously slow to pick up the dot when bringing the rifle up, moving around corners, transitioning from shoulder to shoulder, etc. Imagine adding live fire or moving targets to the equation. Like I said, you should not have to center the dot on a RDS to hit your target, much less find the dot. The only way I could see this not being an issue is if you're doing nothing but shooting from a bench. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why does it matter that the dot disappears, in a position/angle at which you would never use it? Seriously? Never use the dot in the upper half of the window? Having to line up the dot in a certain part of the window completely negates the advantage of using a red dot in the first place. Try getting quick follow up shots or hitting a moving target with a sight that malfunctions like this. The red dot will always be level with the receiver, and you will always have to bring the rifle level to your line of sight before you pull the trigger. In order for you to not see the dot, the red dot would have to be tilted on the receiver, the way you are tilting it in your hand. Think about it. I briefly mounted it on a carbine and the dot still disappears any time it's in the upper half of the window. It is rediculously slow to pick up the dot when bringing the rifle up, moving around corners, transitioning from shoulder to shoulder, etc. Imagine adding live fire or moving targets to the equation. Like I said, you should not have to center the dot on a RDS to hit your target, much less find the dot. The only way I could see this not being an issue is if you're doing nothing but shooting from a bench. If you are having that many problems, you have no form whatsoever. Stop looking at the dot and practice bringing your rifle up to a proper shooting position. When you get the hang of that, the dot will naturally center itself. |
|
Quoted:
If you are having that many problems, you have no form whatsoever. Stop looking at the dot and practice bringing your rifle up to a proper shooting position. When you get the hang of that, the dot will naturally center itself. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why does it matter that the dot disappears, in a position/angle at which you would never use it? Seriously? Never use the dot in the upper half of the window? Having to line up the dot in a certain part of the window completely negates the advantage of using a red dot in the first place. Try getting quick follow up shots or hitting a moving target with a sight that malfunctions like this. The red dot will always be level with the receiver, and you will always have to bring the rifle level to your line of sight before you pull the trigger. In order for you to not see the dot, the red dot would have to be tilted on the receiver, the way you are tilting it in your hand. Think about it. I briefly mounted it on a carbine and the dot still disappears any time it's in the upper half of the window. It is rediculously slow to pick up the dot when bringing the rifle up, moving around corners, transitioning from shoulder to shoulder, etc. Imagine adding live fire or moving targets to the equation. Like I said, you should not have to center the dot on a RDS to hit your target, much less find the dot. The only way I could see this not being an issue is if you're doing nothing but shooting from a bench. If you are having that many problems, you have no form whatsoever. Stop looking at the dot and practice bringing your rifle up to a proper shooting position. When you get the hang of that, the dot will naturally center itself. LOL. I've been using various dot sights and EOTechs for nearly 20 years including multiple carbine courses and dozens of competitive events. I know how to use the optic and I also know that one that is defective like this makes it slower and less effective. Try your "form" with a sight like this while shooting from the ground on your side or back around cover and get back to me. |
|
Quoted:...
LOL. I've been using various dot sights and EOTechs for nearly 20 years including multiple carbine courses and dozens of competitive events. I know how to use the optic and I also know that one that is defective like this makes it slower and less effective. Try your "form" with a sight like this while shooting from the ground on your side or back around cover and get back to me. LOL. So your experience predates the widespread manufacture and use of red dots and Eotechs, and the existence of carbine courses? If you were going to use it for that type of shooting, with your vast experience, why did you opt for the $60 Chinese optic to start with? |
|
Quoted:
LOL. So your experience predates the widespread manufacture and use of red dots and Eotechs, and the existence of carbine courses? If you were going to use it for that type of shooting, with your vast experience, why did you opt for the $60 Chinese optic to start with? Quoted:
Quoted:...
LOL. I've been using various dot sights and EOTechs for nearly 20 years including multiple carbine courses and dozens of competitive events. I know how to use the optic and I also know that one that is defective like this makes it slower and less effective. Try your "form" with a sight like this while shooting from the ground on your side or back around cover and get back to me. LOL. So your experience predates the widespread manufacture and use of red dots and Eotechs, and the existence of carbine courses? If you were going to use it for that type of shooting, with your vast experience, why did you opt for the $60 Chinese optic to start with? I think you need to check your timeline. I had an Aimpoint in the mid 90s and have been using primarily EOTechs for a decade. I've currently got three EOTechs and one Aimpoint micro. I bought the Bushnell to use on a .22 AR trainer. |
|
All red dots, whether Aimpoint or budget, are intended to allow accurate shooting regardless of whether you have your head centered behind the optic and your eye aligned with the dot in the middle of the field of view. They are intended to be parallax free, or at least practically so. You should be able to see the dot and aim accurately with it even with your bead and eye positioned off center and the dot at the edge of the field of view in any direction from the center. If the dot disappears while migrating it over to the edge of the field of view before reaching the edge from any angle and the battery is fresh, the optic is defective.
This is a known issue with TRS-25s that have the 6 o'clock emitter position. Not all have it, but none of the 4 o'clock style users are reporting this. |
|
Quoted:
All red dots, whether Aimpoint or budget, are intended to allow accurate shooting regardless of whether you have your head centered behind the optic and your eye aligned with the dot in the middle of the field of view. They are intended to be parallax free, or at least practically so. You should be able to see the dot and aim accurately with it even with your bead and eye positioned off center and the dot at the edge of the field of view in any direction from the center. If the dot disappears while migrating it over to the edge of the field of view before reaching the edge from any angle and the battery is fresh, the optic is defective. This is a known issue with TRS-25s that have the 6 o'clock emitter position. Not all have it, but none of the 4 o'clock style users are reporting this. EXACTLY! |
|
Quoted:
All red dots, whether Aimpoint or budget, are intended to allow accurate shooting regardless of whether you have your head centered behind the optic and your eye aligned with the dot in the middle of the field of view. They are intended to be parallax free, or at least practically so. You should be able to see the dot and aim accurately with it even with your bead and eye positioned off center and the dot at the edge of the field of view in any direction from the center. If the dot disappears while migrating it over to the edge of the field of view before reaching the edge from any angle and the battery is fresh, the optic is defective. This is a known issue with TRS-25s that have the 6 o'clock emitter position. Not all have it, but none of the 4 o'clock style users are reporting this. It isn't defective at all. Read my above post. Design flaw? Maybe. Functioning improperly? No |
|
Quoted:
It isn't defective at all. Read my above post. Design flaw? Maybe. Functioning improperly? No Quoted:
Quoted:
All red dots, whether Aimpoint or budget, are intended to allow accurate shooting regardless of whether you have your head centered behind the optic and your eye aligned with the dot in the middle of the field of view. They are intended to be parallax free, or at least practically so. You should be able to see the dot and aim accurately with it even with your bead and eye positioned off center and the dot at the edge of the field of view in any direction from the center. If the dot disappears while migrating it over to the edge of the field of view before reaching the edge from any angle and the battery is fresh, the optic is defective. This is a known issue with TRS-25s that have the 6 o'clock emitter position. Not all have it, but none of the 4 o'clock style users are reporting this. It isn't defective at all. Read my above post. Design flaw? Maybe. Functioning improperly? No This is how it should look. It should be capable of being moved all the way to the edge in any direction. If it can't, it IS defective. I can post more photos with the dot at the edge of any quadrant, any angle, if you like. This is, of course the 4 o'clock version of the TRS-25. Other red dots I have from two other companies do the same. Do not accept less. 
|
|
Quoted:
This is how it should look. It should be capable of being moved all the way to the edge in any direction. If it can't, it IS defective. I can post more photos with the dot at the edge of any quadrant, any angle, if you like. This is, of course the 4 o'clock version of the TRS-25. Other red dots I have from two other companies do the same. Do not accept less. http://i1366.photobucket.com/albums/r772/gbloss/Mobile%20Uploads/1d4599b0-1096-412d-84f9-8dfd5f3271a7_zpsbylefi50.jpg Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
All red dots, whether Aimpoint or budget, are intended to allow accurate shooting regardless of whether you have your head centered behind the optic and your eye aligned with the dot in the middle of the field of view. They are intended to be parallax free, or at least practically so. You should be able to see the dot and aim accurately with it even with your bead and eye positioned off center and the dot at the edge of the field of view in any direction from the center. If the dot disappears while migrating it over to the edge of the field of view before reaching the edge from any angle and the battery is fresh, the optic is defective. This is a known issue with TRS-25s that have the 6 o'clock emitter position. Not all have it, but none of the 4 o'clock style users are reporting this. It isn't defective at all. Read my above post. Design flaw? Maybe. Functioning improperly? No This is how it should look. It should be capable of being moved all the way to the edge in any direction. If it can't, it IS defective. I can post more photos with the dot at the edge of any quadrant, any angle, if you like. This is, of course the 4 o'clock version of the TRS-25. Other red dots I have from two other companies do the same. Do not accept less. http://i1366.photobucket.com/albums/r772/gbloss/Mobile%20Uploads/1d4599b0-1096-412d-84f9-8dfd5f3271a7_zpsbylefi50.jpg It works as it is supposed to. It's a design flaw by putting that cover over the top of the emitters at 6 o'clock. And what is with everyone posting blurry pictures? Do you all have Parkinson's Disease? |
|
Changing the subject to poor cell cam photos, now, are we? Can't help the camera, but can state the facts: The dot is supposed to be visible to the edge in any direction.
High quality photos can be procured if you think this is some optical illusion. It defies logic for one to think it acceptable to give up as much as 1/3 or more of the otherwise usable "eye box" of a red dot to defend a defective product claiming that "it works as it is supposed to." One of the main features of red dots is the ability to shoot effectively with the dot as far off center as the very edge of the field of view. A RDS that does not permit this is defective. If this is by design (unlikely), then it is even worse, because this is unnecessary and limits functionity. |
|
This is interesting. I purchased one of these about 3 months ago from a reputable dealer on this sight and never noticed it until now. I just went and checked mine. Sure enough the emitter is at the 6 O'clock position and it does the exact same thing. I had no idea this whole time. I bought it for a range toy so I doubt I'll ever do anything about it especially since I hadn't noticed it until now. BUT, if it's not supposed to be that way then I agree with the OP. Get it fixed. Doesn't matter if it's a $20 optic or a $600 optic. You pay for a working and fully functional item then that is what you should receive. Just my $.02. I'll don my flame suit now.....
OP, I'm curious how this plays out for you. Please keep the thread updated with whatever you decide. |
|
Quoted:
Changing the subject to poor cell cam photos, now, are we? Can't help the camera, but can state the facts: The dot is supposed to be visible to the edge in any direction. High quality photos can be procured if you think this is some optical illusion. It defies logic for one to think it acceptable to give up as much as 1/3 or more of the otherwise usable "eye box" of a red dot to defend a defective product claiming that "it works as it is supposed to." One of the main features of red dots is the ability to shoot effectively with the dot as far off center as the very edge of the field of view. A RDS that does not permit this is defective. If this is by design (unlikely), then it is even worse, because this is unnecessary and limits functionity. Not changing the subject at all. Hence it was not the only thing I posted. You obviously don't comprehend what you read. I HAVE ONE. MINE DOES THE SAME THING. I CAN TELL WHY IT IS DOING THIS. I have also had numerous of these in my hands with the emitter at 6 o'clock. All of them did this. All of them have the cover over the top of the emitter. It is the way they are designed. Don't like it? Return it. It's a $50 red dot that serves its purpose. Want to be a Spetsnatz and do all these ground rolls, flips, and tucks and have a parallax free sight so that you can shoot it without having your rifle shouldered? Buy a better quality sight. I have mine on an AK pistol. What do I have on rifles I care about the quality of sights? ACOGS and Aimpoint Micros. I can tell you though that on mine, I have to put the gun at an angle where a stock would be in my armpit and my eye looking through the glass for the dot be even close to disappearing. If you're going to try and shoot a rifle like that because of positioning, you might want to reconsider your positioning. Bought it used? See if you can return it. Bought it new? See if you can return it. Want to call Bushnell about it? I bet the replacement will do the same thing unless you get one of the older models that has the emitter at 4 o'clock BECAUSE THAT IS HOW THEY ARE MADE. Call Bushnell and complain that their $50 sight has a problem with it and doesn't perform as well as others. |
|
Quoted:
Not changing the subject at all. Hence it was not the only thing I posted. You obviously don't comprehend what you read. I HAVE ONE. MINE DOES THE SAME THING. I CAN TELL WHY IT IS DOING THIS. I have also had numerous of these in my hands with the emitter at 6 o'clock. All of them did this. All of them have the cover over the top of the emitter. It is the way they are designed. Don't like it? Return it. It's a $50 red dot that serves its purpose. Want to be a Spetsnatz and do all these ground rolls, flips, and tucks and have a parallax free sight so that you can shoot it without having your rifle shouldered? Buy a better quality sight. I have mine on an AK pistol. What do I have on rifles I care about the quality of sights? ACOGS and Aimpoint Micros. I can tell you though that on mine, I have to put the gun at an angle where a stock would be in my armpit and my eye looking through the glass for the dot be even close to disappearing. If you're going to try and shoot a rifle like that because of positioning, you might want to reconsider your positioning. Bought it used? See if you can return it. Bought it new? See if you can return it. Want to call Bushnell about it? I bet the replacement will do the same thing unless you get one of the older models that has the emitter at 4 o'clock BECAUSE THAT IS HOW THEY ARE MADE. Call Bushnell and complain that their $50 sight has a problem with it and doesn't perform as well as others. Quoted:
Quoted:
Changing the subject to poor cell cam photos, now, are we? Can't help the camera, but can state the facts: The dot is supposed to be visible to the edge in any direction. High quality photos can be procured if you think this is some optical illusion. It defies logic for one to think it acceptable to give up as much as 1/3 or more of the otherwise usable "eye box" of a red dot to defend a defective product claiming that "it works as it is supposed to." One of the main features of red dots is the ability to shoot effectively with the dot as far off center as the very edge of the field of view. A RDS that does not permit this is defective. If this is by design (unlikely), then it is even worse, because this is unnecessary and limits functionity. Not changing the subject at all. Hence it was not the only thing I posted. You obviously don't comprehend what you read. I HAVE ONE. MINE DOES THE SAME THING. I CAN TELL WHY IT IS DOING THIS. I have also had numerous of these in my hands with the emitter at 6 o'clock. All of them did this. All of them have the cover over the top of the emitter. It is the way they are designed. Don't like it? Return it. It's a $50 red dot that serves its purpose. Want to be a Spetsnatz and do all these ground rolls, flips, and tucks and have a parallax free sight so that you can shoot it without having your rifle shouldered? Buy a better quality sight. I have mine on an AK pistol. What do I have on rifles I care about the quality of sights? ACOGS and Aimpoint Micros. I can tell you though that on mine, I have to put the gun at an angle where a stock would be in my armpit and my eye looking through the glass for the dot be even close to disappearing. If you're going to try and shoot a rifle like that because of positioning, you might want to reconsider your positioning. Bought it used? See if you can return it. Bought it new? See if you can return it. Want to call Bushnell about it? I bet the replacement will do the same thing unless you get one of the older models that has the emitter at 4 o'clock BECAUSE THAT IS HOW THEY ARE MADE. Call Bushnell and complain that their $50 sight has a problem with it and doesn't perform as well as others. Oh, we all comprehend fine. It is the dogmatic defense of poor performance that is astounding. If you are correct that this is by design, it is a horrible design that is lacking (thank goodness) in every other red dot from the cheapest to Aimpoint and EOTech. I own enough and have used enough of others of all prices to know that this unique "design" is not present in any of the others, nor should it be. Ever. The solution is NOT to accept mediocrity that is even below crap like Sightmark, BSA and Barska and like. Heck, an otherwise worthless Sightmark (won't even hold zero), that I bought for the kids to play with on a single shot .22LR, does not have this problem. OP's dot disappears just barely above the center of the field of view. The solution is to return the sight and insist on one that works properly. We know Bushnell can do it, because they have with the 4 o'clock emitter versions. Red dot training should include shooting in situations in which the dot cannot be centered and where body geometry in relationship to the rifle stock and optic are off center. These sights and others like them are often employed on handguns, as well, and need to be able to hit targets reliably at the edge of the field of view. Frankly, defending this as an a acceptable design is irresponsible at any price point. Bushnell can do better. Accepting this condones continued mediocrity. Yes, it is time to hear from Bushnell customer service with fixes and not excuses. Low price does not excuse this. |
|
Quoted:
Oh, we all comprehend fine. It is the dogmatic defense of poor performance that is astounding. If you are correct that this is by design, it is a horrible design that is lacking (thank goodness) in every other red dot from the cheapest to Aimpoint and EOTech. I own enough and have used enough of others of all prices to know that this unique "design" is not present in any of the others, nor should it be. Ever. The solution is NOT to accept mediocrity that is even below crap like Sightmark, BSA and Barska and like. Heck, an otherwise worthless Sightmark (won't even hold zero), that I bought for the kids to play with on a single shot .22LR, does not have this problem. OP's dot disappears just barely above the center of the field of view. The solution is to return the sight and insist on one that works properly. We know Bushnell can do it, because they have with the 4 o'clock emitter versions. Red dot training should include shooting in situations in which the dot cannot be centered and where body geometry in relationship to the rifle stock and optic are off center. These sights and others like them are often employed on handguns, as well, and need to be able to hit targets reliably at the edge of the field of view. Frankly, defending this as an a acceptable design is irresponsible at any price point. Bushnell can do better. Accepting this condones continued mediocrity. Yes, it is time to hear from Bushnell customer service with fixes and not excuses. Low price does not excuse this. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Changing the subject to poor cell cam photos, now, are we? Can't help the camera, but can state the facts: The dot is supposed to be visible to the edge in any direction. High quality photos can be procured if you think this is some optical illusion. It defies logic for one to think it acceptable to give up as much as 1/3 or more of the otherwise usable "eye box" of a red dot to defend a defective product claiming that "it works as it is supposed to." One of the main features of red dots is the ability to shoot effectively with the dot as far off center as the very edge of the field of view. A RDS that does not permit this is defective. If this is by design (unlikely), then it is even worse, because this is unnecessary and limits functionity. Not changing the subject at all. Hence it was not the only thing I posted. You obviously don't comprehend what you read. I HAVE ONE. MINE DOES THE SAME THING. I CAN TELL WHY IT IS DOING THIS. I have also had numerous of these in my hands with the emitter at 6 o'clock. All of them did this. All of them have the cover over the top of the emitter. It is the way they are designed. Don't like it? Return it. It's a $50 red dot that serves its purpose. Want to be a Spetsnatz and do all these ground rolls, flips, and tucks and have a parallax free sight so that you can shoot it without having your rifle shouldered? Buy a better quality sight. I have mine on an AK pistol. What do I have on rifles I care about the quality of sights? ACOGS and Aimpoint Micros. I can tell you though that on mine, I have to put the gun at an angle where a stock would be in my armpit and my eye looking through the glass for the dot be even close to disappearing. If you're going to try and shoot a rifle like that because of positioning, you might want to reconsider your positioning. Bought it used? See if you can return it. Bought it new? See if you can return it. Want to call Bushnell about it? I bet the replacement will do the same thing unless you get one of the older models that has the emitter at 4 o'clock BECAUSE THAT IS HOW THEY ARE MADE. Call Bushnell and complain that their $50 sight has a problem with it and doesn't perform as well as others. Oh, we all comprehend fine. It is the dogmatic defense of poor performance that is astounding. If you are correct that this is by design, it is a horrible design that is lacking (thank goodness) in every other red dot from the cheapest to Aimpoint and EOTech. I own enough and have used enough of others of all prices to know that this unique "design" is not present in any of the others, nor should it be. Ever. The solution is NOT to accept mediocrity that is even below crap like Sightmark, BSA and Barska and like. Heck, an otherwise worthless Sightmark (won't even hold zero), that I bought for the kids to play with on a single shot .22LR, does not have this problem. OP's dot disappears just barely above the center of the field of view. The solution is to return the sight and insist on one that works properly. We know Bushnell can do it, because they have with the 4 o'clock emitter versions. Red dot training should include shooting in situations in which the dot cannot be centered and where body geometry in relationship to the rifle stock and optic are off center. These sights and others like them are often employed on handguns, as well, and need to be able to hit targets reliably at the edge of the field of view. Frankly, defending this as an a acceptable design is irresponsible at any price point. Bushnell can do better. Accepting this condones continued mediocrity. Yes, it is time to hear from Bushnell customer service with fixes and not excuses. Low price does not excuse this. 1. Not defending it in the slightest, just explaining why it does what it does 2. The top cover just needs to be cut shorter. They shouldn't have passed QC before production. From my understanding they're not making the 4 o'clock position ones anymore. What's out there to sell is out there. 3. Don't hold zero, dot disappears toward the top of the glass...either way, they don't work like they're supposed to. They're cheap so I would expect them not to have the same QC or quality as more reputable companies. 4. It's obvious you don't have one of these because if you did you'd see what insane position you have to be in, either the gun or your head, to have this make any difference. Like others have said, many don't even notice it if it isn't pointed out simply because no one shoots in the weird f'in position you'd have to be in for it to matter. The OP may have one that disappears lower than all the ones I've held, but of the ones I have held they disappear in maybe the top 1/4, not so low to say it goes in the 1/3. |
|
Pride goeth before a fall. By continuing to sell this product with this defect, Bushnell has fallen. Let's not join it by condoning the defect. If this is acceptable, I suggest that Bushnell reduce the size of the occular lens substantially to just enough to show a centered dot. That would force us to only use the exact center of the occular for aiming, right? No off center shots allowed, right?
Forget what red dots are supposed to do and accept a restriction in aiming utility as just an anomaly in a budget optic that is excusable. Whether we agree or not, there will be people here who, for budgetary reasons, may have to defend themselves or family with this dot, when things get very stressful in the midde of the night and shooting position may be less than ideal. I can't tell that person to forego an optical aid that increases the chance of survival by someone on a very tight budget. I can tell them that this design or manufacturing defect or QC blunder could cost them their life, while other "cheap" red dots within their tight budget will at least let them get the dot on the bad guy from less than perfect position. I'm done. The danger, yes it is, for people who can afford no better, has been exposed. I'm done. Carry on defending the undefendable. |
|
Quoted:
The OP may have one that disappears lower than all the ones I've held, but of the ones I have held they disappear in maybe the top 1/4, not so low to say it goes in the 1/3. As MS556 pointed out, the one I had disappeared just barely above the halfway point. It was unuseable in about 40% of the window. |
|
Quoted:
As MS556 pointed out, the one I had disappeared just barely above the halfway point. It was unuseable in about 40% of the window. Quoted:
Quoted:
The OP may have one that disappears lower than all the ones I've held, but of the ones I have held they disappear in maybe the top 1/4, not so low to say it goes in the 1/3. As MS556 pointed out, the one I had disappeared just barely above the halfway point. It was unuseable in about 40% of the window. As I pointed out, send it back, call bushnell, buy another one....either way expect close to the same result unless you can find one of the older 4 o'clock models. It's just how they are made now. Take a flashlight and shine it into the front lens and look at the cover over the emitter and you'll see and know what I'm talking about that is causing it. Call bushnell and complain about it. Guy called them and was told the same thing I'm telling you. http://nyfirearms.com/forums/ar-15/89819-bushnell-trs-25-review.html |
AR Sponsor