EOTech 552 Genuine vs. Clone

I wanted another sight so I don't have to move mine around between blasters. I have also been using low cost Chinese clone 552s as my go-to nerf optic for about the last 10 years and wanted to own one of the genuine version the whole time, obviously deferred because of cost. 

Recently I figured I would have a look at ebay for any deals on the secondhand real deal before grabbing another new Amazon Special, and sure enough, there was this sweet old unit with a bit of character/patina to it. I bid, and I won, and now I finally have a real one.

 

 

Sorry metric fans, not this time. This is freedom hardware.

 

 

Comparisons to my most often used, relatively modern era ClonEOTech of the same model (552) follow:

The railgrabber on the genuine is wonderful. I never thought tightening up an accessory could feel so well fitted and rock solid. I guess I hit my specs on Picatinny rail then...

The anodizing on the aluminum parts is proper type 3 on the real deal and quite matte, the clone just whatever thin spec and kind of shiny.

The battery box locking lever on the genuine is much more secure and there is a beefy soft rubber gasket it is getting mashed into, going along with the overall weatherization of the entire thing that the clones lack.

Both take 2 AA cells.

Nothing about the externalities of the clone is evidently truly reverse-engineered. A lot of part geometry and dimensions don't align whatsoever. The most visible being the flatness of the hood top on clones.

Everything is a little different about the keypad on the back.

Something about all ClonEOTechs, they are not really holographic sights. They are reflex sights mocked up as one. You can see that here with the semi-silvered looking lenses on the clone much closer to the ends of the hood.

There are a couple ramifications. Firstly, parallax error, the clones aren't as good at eliminating it because they are really just red dots. Secondly, yes, indeed, the real thing has a MUCH clearer/less "shaded" view than a clone, since there is no need of a semi-reflective element to bounce the reticle off. I didn't realize how much nicer that would be. Finally, the clones do show light from the illuminating LED through the front and from the rear seen from above and obviously the real holographic doesn't. Not a big deal for tag sports, but it's inherent to them.

The reticles on the clones can vary and the A65 is perhaps not really 65 (or 68, or whatever exactly it's supposed to be) MOA, one of mine that is older is similar to my real McCoy or a little smaller, and my newer one has a bigger ring.

The reticle of the real deal, being a hologram illuminated with a laser, has that distinctive laser sparkle to it. The reticle of a clone is flat LED light. The newer clones do the dimming with LFPWM and you can see the frequency (some hundred Hz).

Obviously if you have used a clone, the night vision mode on the clones isn't, the button still says NV for replica points but it toggles to a green illuminator instead. Actually, this green reticle can be useful for visibility in some circumstances.

The reticles of either are famously un-photographable with any accurate or clear representation (something wonk about camera optics interacting with the sight optics differently than an actual eye) but this is the best I can do on that task:

 

This A65 on this clone appears like the real thing here but looks slightly bigger in person:

 

Actually, but maybe not surprisingly given their primary market (?) the clones seem to have a more useful/larger elevation adjustment range for tag sports. The genuine is pretty well maxxed out to get it zeroed how I want it on my T19 but it does hit it.

In the end: Yeah, of course genuines are expensive overkill for tag sports, but also, I'm glad I have one. What a sweet piece of hardware.

On that note, if you use any sort of 1x optic on a blaster and you DON'T own a clonEOTech yet, get yourself one. Despite the dimmer view they are ...really pretty damn good in every respect.