Results 1 to 10 of 31
Thread: Original vs. Clone Optics
-
22-01-2011, 07:51 #1
- Join Date
- Jan 2011
- Posts
- 1,114
Original vs. Clone Optics
Has anyone compared original vs. clone optics? What were their findings?
In many idustries contract manufacturing is a well accepted practice. However in this industry many people get violent allergic reaction to an idea that their kit might have been shipped from Asia.
-
22-01-2011, 07:59 #2
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
- Age
- 46
- Posts
- 29,307
Re: Original vs. Clone Optics
In this industry there are two main categories of gear. There is cheap gear and there is good gear.
I haven't seen a clone that is anywhere near the original wrt durability , clarity ,battery life etc.
Buy a Aimpoint T1. Buy quality and only cry once.
-
22-01-2011, 08:06 #3
Re: Original vs. Clone Optics
No need to buy the T1 unless youre planning on diving with it or running NV. The H1 will do you just fine. I have looked at a couple of clone optics and I ran one for a while. It worked for a bit, then it shit the bed.
I understand that even the optics SIG sells for their long guns are a bit ass.
Buy the Aimpoint. In the scheme of things its not that expensive. Especially when you consider what you have already paid for the gun and what you will spend on ammo.
Edited to add: Its not that the clones are made in the east that is the problem but rather that they are made in the east for airsoft.Last edited by SSP; 22-01-2011 at 08:16.
Cattle die, kindred die, every man is mortal:
But I know one thing that never dies,
the glory of the great dead.
Havamal
-
22-01-2011, 08:11 #4
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
- Age
- 46
- Posts
- 29,307
Re: Original vs. Clone Optics
Good point I should have said any of the Micro series.
-
22-01-2011, 14:52 #5
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
- Location
- Not where I want to be..
- Posts
- 12,596
Re: Original vs. Clone Optics
Micro versus clone
1) Aimpoint uses the best materials available and the clone does not
2) the Micro uses a microscopic diode a couple of which will fit on a pin head.
3) the Micro utilises top quality pc that manages the output and battery.
4) the combo of (2) and (3) results in a constant on battery life of around 5 years. I will bet the value of the clone that it cannot do the same.
5) the anodising on the top quality aluminium of the body ensures excellent resistance to scuffing and chipping.
I run a H1 on my light AR and I ordered a clone to see what it was about - the end of the story is that I returned it to the seller because for serious use on a real gun it is a pos. When I received it the rear lense rattled and there was no way to tighten the ring that holds the lense in place, no way it was even going to be splash proof or rain proof not even talking about water proof.
The clone will be maybe be ok for playing airsoft for a while before it croaks.Last edited by DS; 22-01-2011 at 15:00.
-
23-01-2011, 04:08 #6
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Location
- Australia
- Age
- 55
- Posts
- 1,849
Re: Original vs. Clone Optics
As per Big T, Khumba & SSP - don't waste your money. You will buy the clone & later the real deal, so way more expensive.
If it is for SD, it may cost you more than your money.
Go onto the 'Optic Talk' forum or the 'Midway' shopping site and read the comments reviews re. cheaper optics - mostly negative. The few positive comments/reviews, are I expect, as a result of:
a) Exceptions to the rule;
b) Guys who dont use their guns much or seriously;
c) Guys who have never had anything better to compare to.
I have a cheap Nikko Stirling scope on my .22 lr silhouette rifle, so at worst I may miss some silhouettes one day when it breaks, but at least they don't shoot back. (Strangely enough, so far mine is an exception to the rule as it tracks positively still after 1 1/2 yrs of constant adjustment changes & only recently have the vertical adjustments started to meel mushy/less positive).
-
23-01-2011, 06:57 #7
-
23-01-2011, 15:52 #8
- Join Date
- Jan 2011
- Posts
- 1,114
Re: Original vs. Clone Optics
Very interesting views. I believe that any generalization is dangerous. One has to review each case on it's merit. So, we should be product specific.
I read in recent HBR that Chinese companies are leveraging it's former partner's technology in the following fashion:
1. If you (the company) want to sell your products to the market of 1.3 billion people, then you have to make it here in CN.
2. If you want to make your products in CN, it has to be a Joint Venture with a local firm.
3. The JV agreement states that you will share your R&D with the JV partner.
4. Once the JV partner has the technology, you can't prevent him from starting their own production of similar product. AND start competing with you in foreign markets.
Chinese have over 4,000 years history and they were already doing business when our grand...fathers were clubbing each other with sticks. Who are we to tell them that they are wrong?
My iPhone 3, 3GS, 4 and my iPad is "Designed by Applie in California. Assembled in China". Steve Jobs is a visionary genius, but he is also a very intense man that is known for smashing imperfect prototypes against a wall. Have you got a dodgy Apple product? Probably not, but check the small print where it was made.
If you go to China to source products, you will be asked what you want? Premium brand, mid-market, or cheap (and nasty). It is entirely your call.
Back to Optics. I don't believe that CN citizens are able to buy firearms and/or optics, but it is only a matter of time until one of the Optics firms relocate their production to CN. They already manufacture AR's.
So, do we have a direct comparison of the same optic made in the West vs. East? I must ask the Google man. He seems to be well connected.
---------- Post added at 15:52 ---------- Previous post was at 14:59 ----------
I see good example from this forum...
http://www.gunsite.co.za/forums/show...568#post140568
Does anyone have a first hand experience with the Millet?
I suspect that the original one was made in the West and the current one in the East.
-
23-01-2011, 16:00 #9
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Location
- /\/¯¯¯¯¯\/\
- Age
- 43
- Posts
- 10,754
-
23-01-2011, 16:14 #10
- Join Date
- Jan 2011
- Posts
- 1,114
Re: Original vs. Clone Optics
SSP's point on Aimpoint made for Airsoft is for me the most concerning, as it might be difficult to differentiate (besides the price).
Khumba comparison and his point on 1MOA (if I recall correctly) from another thread are key.
I am concerned about Paul's note, it indicates that we buy from some unscrupulous suppliers.
Nkosi, thanks for the references.
BigT's note confirms my point on premium brands, mid-range and cheap imports.
Thanks for a great insight. The Aimpoint T series seems to be the choice of local pro's.
Similar Threads
-
New USPSA Division - Carry Optics / Production Optics
By Edwill in forum SAPSA / IPSC DiscussionsReplies: 8Last Post: 24-07-2015, 09:32 -
Hawke Optics Hawke Sport Optics HK4006 4-16x50 SideWinder 30 Side Focus Mil Dot Rifle
By ravingDIODE in forum Optics, Mounts, and SightsReplies: 6Last Post: 06-02-2015, 18:53 -
CANIK 55 cz clone
By Asif in forum HandgunsReplies: 28Last Post: 21-11-2014, 20:23 -
Shooting a 92/clone...
By luke peter in forum HandgunsReplies: 19Last Post: 19-01-2012, 20:00 -
Norinco M4 Carbine clone
By farmer-el in forum Tactical Rifles and CarbinesReplies: 17Last Post: 16-03-2010, 11:23
Bookmarks