Sup /k,
What are your opinions on the Elcan Specter DR 1-4?
I've done quite a bit of searching/lurking, and I hear lots of good reports about them, and they are a favorite of some SCAR owners. They're issued to SOCOM, and from what I've read, they've had good luck with the 2nd gen models.
However, I've also heard some pretty negative things about the Elcan: Zero shift, reticle illumination. Plus, the external adjustments have me concerned somewhat: Ice, snow, mud/debris.
Who's got some trigger time behind one? Has anyone owned one before and switched to a different optic? Ever bought and sold/returned one? Thanks guys.
expensive and heavy, while still suffering short eye relief like an acog.
most guys will stick a micro dot on top of the scope rather than use the 1x setting, because of the impact shift
with that in mind, I prefer acog+rmr. it's a cheaper and lighter package that is still damn tough.
remember, secret squirrels might get issued nicer shit than us joes, but they still get issued shit. and they get crap too.
the mount is dogshit but the glass is pretty good. Don't shoot it with a helmet.
The 1-6 is better, docter red dot on top works well.
Don't be retarded, get an ACOG.
>>30494070
The secret squirrel DOD and CIA (anti-big guy taskforce) guys who hung out in our compound generally had more freedom in what they used, and I saw more ACOGs than anything else. Some actually preferred the TA01 for reasons.
For the most part good balance, good slings, and the ability to get a good grip on the handguard were more prized than worrying about Gucci. They also put a lot of stock into having nice helmets for the comfort factor.
For what my comment on a Mongolian doll collecting forum is worth.
I'm super tempted to buy one of those Chinese bootleg elcans just to see how long it can hold on an AR
>>30493918
>favorite of some SCAR owners
The majority of SCAR owners are complete and utter imbeciles who will ravenously defend their overpriced novelty item while completely disregarding any facts presented that might shatter their operator fantasies and "muh seals use it" mentality.... I am talking of course about the Specter DR.
>>30493918
For a 1-4/6, I prefer something like the Strike Eagle, myself. I picked one up to toy with the other day and it's actually pretty nice.
I've used one before, seemed like a very nice optic. Glass was pretty clear and the killflash was neat.
I've looked through every product trijicon has, I'd rate the specter higher than them all.
>>30495135
Well, there goes any chance that I'll ever buy an Elcan.
Used a few that belonged to bearded dudes that spent a lot of time sun bathing. Nice optic but I don't see what it gets you over an ACOG and RMR. Heavy as dog shit for the magnification too.
>>30495135
The SCAR community has/had some great people in it, but there is definitely a vocal group of tactical dentists, just like you're saying. Tons of money into a gun that will never be fired, yet more than willing to bash anyone that didn't opt for whatever they'd chosen because muh soccom.
>>30494955
This imo
>>30493918
I got to use one on an FAL sbr last year and went with an ACOG TA11 for my 17s. Speaking with it's owner confirmed my assumption that the dual power was a meme, you will realistically leave it on it's highest power setting and leave it there. The 1x is not like a red dot, it's still subject to eye relief. Battery life isn't anything exceptional. I guess what I would say is it didn't do anything I didn't feel like I could get out of an ACOG, and with enough price difference to get a couple cases of ZQI or something to practice with.
>>30495135
OP here.
Holy shit. The smallest bit of anything could get jammed in there and throw off the zero by a mile. WTF, not spending my hard earned money on that. No. Fucking. Way.
>>30495226
PA 1-6 not bad for what it is either.
>>30495436
smart man
Leupold Mk8 1-8
>>30495474
OP here.
$3,800 @ OpticsPlanet. That's fucking steep.
Is the battery life on the Mark 8 any better than the Mark 6? I've heard that the batt life on the Mark 6 1-6 is about 24 hours.
>>30495436
B..bu..but the navy seals use it!
>youtu.be/6cbZiPPnUmE
>youtu.be/7TWYMT4Jerw
>>30495563
Bottom vid is airshit family
>>30495538
Couldn't tell you,
Can tell you for variable power (low magnification) optic it combines excellent eye relief (including FFP) with good reticle, and pretty dank glass. Also, the pinch to unlock turrets I like a lot.
As far as diopter shift for reticle focus, POI/POA shift through changing magnification goes and other important things to consider go... Couldn't tell you.
For $1000-$1500 ACOG & rmr if you are so inclined won't do you wrong
For $2000-$2500 Elcan might do you wrong
For $3000+ Mk8 won't do you wrong
>>30495538
>Is the battery life on the Mark 8 any better than the Mark 6
No, not significantly.
>>30495604
>Bottom vid is airshit family
Except as an avid airshitter, and former Elcan owner, I can assure you it's not. That's the real deal fambino.
>>30495635
>Except as an avid airshitter, and former Elcan owner, I can assure you it's not. That's the real deal fambino.
>>30493918
Elcan uses arms mounts
bottom of the barrel. An artifact from some far flung past era (the Clinton administration).
>>30493918
It's not inherently bad, but its one gimmick is more easily, efficiently, and sturdily accomplished by a regular 1-anything time scope.
Not only is it cheaper, but its objectively a better investment, plus it'll be more durable and more useful than a 1 or 4.
Get a 1-6x or something. You can find many that come with an illuminated reticle or center dot.
>>30495678
>he doesn't know what a Gen3b Specter looks like
>he doesn't know all commercial variants including the one shown are based on this spec
>he didn't know every airshit replica to date is based on the Gen2 housing and use TA01 reticles
>he didn't know airshit replicas use traditional zoom magnification
>video clearly shows Elcan rotating prism mechanism and all appropriate markings and reticle
Go ahead and regurgitate ignorant youtube comments like the Elcan cuck you are.
Worked beautifully for me through two deployments to afghanistan. Best piece of glass on the market. Had no zero shift. The mount is spring loaded and under a high speed camera, will bounce when fired. By the time you fire again it will have reset to its point of origin.
>>30495135
Wow. So SOCOM soldiers shooting people at real gunfight with this kind of crap?
>>30493918
so far all I'am hearing is the gen 1's and 2's have the shift problem and they addressed it at least thats what I've heard on newer models maybe the military arms channel can do a durability test and see if thats the case.
>>30494973
>preferred the TA01 for reasons
why?
>>30493918
so I guess to fix the shift problem sight it in on the 4x
this thread here: http://forum.snipershide.info/showthread.php?t=50788
has a bit more info though its from 2010. they may have fixed the problem or addressed it in the past 6 years who knows?
>>30495135
>mfw richfags actually wasted their money on this shit
>>30494070
>expensive and heavy, while still suffering short eye relief like an acog.
>most guys will stick a micro dot on top of the scope rather than use the 1x setting, because of the impact shift
The fixed-magnification Elcans have much better eye relief than ACOGs though. Nearly double the TA33's eye relief.
SpecterOS4 with a red dot is probably a better deal than SpecterDR1-4, since the 1x on the DR is fucky
>>30493918
Just do what CAG did and buy the Vortex Razor HD 2 1-6x. It's great optic, see SuperSetCA for a great review of it. His only inaccuracy is that the red dot is 3 MOA at 1x and 0.5 MOA at 6x.
>>30495623
>>30495538
I just keep spare CR2032s in my range bag. I doubt you'll be doing enough night shooting to worry about battery life. I do believe it has an auto shutoff feature, too.
>>30498486
>not h27d
pass
>>30498496
I couldn't argue with the price... I would have had to spend $1400 more just for a reticle. No thanks.
>>30497102
They liked the more precise reticle for distance shooting and that it came default with usable BUIS on top. The BUIS are regarded as pretty shitty for distance, but if you're using them you've pretty much resorted to self defense and they are good enough for close range.
The guy I talked with a lot was a former Green Beret turned DOD advisor. He rolled with a TA01, 14.5 inch barrel, fully flippable BUIS, and a PEQ15. He carried some kinda special ammo, I want to say something by Black Hills, but my memory fails. He was way into gun configurations and techniques. Learned a lot just sitting around bullshitting with him.
He really changed my opinion on my FS92 and even though he admitted they weren't his favorite pistol, by the end of learning from him I appreciated them as a weapon rather than thinking of them as a useless brick.
>>30498496
>christmas tree
>for any reason ever
>>>/v/
>>30493918
I've heard the switch from 1x to 4x can stick in cold weather. As a MN? This matters a lot.
>>30498635
Yeah, seen some guys selling that model of mk8 for like $2k in the past. I probably would have bought them if I was flush at the time.
>>30495450
I don't like how the whole reticle is illuminated instead of just the dot/crosshairs.
>>30495786
#told
>>30495011
for $100 why not? if anything if it dosent hold zero you can toss it on a 22 rifle
>>30493918
Never handled one, but I like the idea of 1x, 4x, and nothing in between.
Trijicon VCOG or Accupoint 1-6x? A bit longer, but less brick-like, and a higher top-end magnification.
>>30495538
>$3800
Jesus god, that's Schmidt & Bender territory.
>>30500780
I'd stick with fixed magnification and a micro dot for the kids of prices people are shelling out for variable optics. Personally, I think 1x-Xx variable optics are a meme. Sure people can blindly hero worship SOCOM and copy them by getting Elcans, but remember this gear is contracted way above the user level (did we forget Eotechs so quickly?) and a lot of SOCOM guys are using micro optics on their variable Elcans anyway.
I'd think for yourself rather than copying what you see soldiers do. There are restrictions and politics, even for operators. If you honestly like variable optics, go for it, but for me they just don't make much sense.
>>30499827
>He really changed my opinion on my FS92 and even though he admitted they weren't his favorite pistol, by the end of learning from him I appreciated them as a weapon rather than thinking of them as a useless brick.
this sounds interesting
care to paraphrase what he said about it?
>>30500828
Basically, most people in the military consider the FS92 a piece of junk. Everybody wants one, but as "FOB bling" so they can walk around without a rifle on their back. The pistol has reputation as being shitty. Since it is commonly thought of as shitty, nobody really practices much with it, because "Hey why waste time with this piece of shit?"
Admittedly, the FS92 has a lot of problems (heavy, stupid safety position, having a safety in the first place), but it those don't make it useless. Most peoples' biggest problem is the very heavy first trigger pull, which is treated as impossible to aim with. But with training you can overcome that and become very accurate with it.
So, yeah, we went out and shot a lot with the pistols, dedicating at first to getting good with the first trigger pull, then with more complicated shots, and the idea of the pistol as useful began to shine.
He helped us get our holsters and mag placement unfucked.
With my commander's ok, my unit started carrying the pistols decocked, but safety off anywhere near local forces or outside the wire.
I still don't like the FS92, but if you put one in my hand, I can use it.
>>30500909
>decocked but safety off
that's how the AF keeps their M9s in the holster
>>30500825
dropping your rifle into a barrel isn't exactly combat useage, but 3gunners have been using 1-4x and 1-6x variable optics for a while.
>>30497582
but that movement is there by design, anon. the springs are there to help prevent zero shit if dropped and knocked around
>>30500909
Dude. He's making the most of what he has since he isn't allowed outside issue, holy shit get it together, the FS92 is still terrible with the current market choices goddamn
>>30500995
I...I never said otherwise. What I said is that since most people initially don't like it, they make no effort to get good with it. With some practice, even a GI M9 can be effective, more than people think.
>>30500948
Big rules are safety on when on the FOB, we changed that any time near locals to include training them. Green on blue, etc.
>>30500909
>He helped us get our holsters and mag placement unfucked
how so?
>>30501028
apologies, yeah anyone should be able to use the M9 effectively, then again a standing army should have the logistics and foresight to adopt a pistol where that isn't necessary
>>30501040
Wearing droplegs (issued and they actually weren't too terrible dismounted, so please no 'REEEE') at the right height. Getting pistol ammo on our belts instead of vests.
Basically redoing our belts to be effective first lines. Taking certain stuff off, putting other stuff on.
>>30500995
not him but its hard to hate a 92 because they are so extremely goddamn reliable. i hate the size and weight as a civilian...and the frame safety. those are really its 2 main drawbacks over any other handgun in the market. maybe trigger too if you compare against only striker fire pistols, but compared to its own category like Sigs, thats kind of negligible. and maybe military has more of a use for DA hammer which gives a user second strike capability on a primer, i dunno.
assuming everything else was equal between 2 handguns, including cost, would a military pick a striker or DA hammer fired pistol?
>>30501057
as not great as the M9/92FS is, it's not really a big deal in the grand scheme of things. a war isn't won or lost based on the strength of your pistol.
>>30501067
the open top slide doesn't help reliability.
>>30501067
>not him but its hard to hate a 92 because they are so extremely goddamn reliable.
stop posting, the design had inherent slide failures when the Navy first got their hands on them
just stop posting I'm not even going to read whatever else you posted
>>30501067
should be striker considered it takes less moving parts and therefore increases reliability
herp
>>30501084
a war isn't won by making rash decisions either, case in point - what the mil did with the M9
fuck off
>>30501067
The thing about a pistol, especially one which you carry day in and day out is that the weight is an issue. Especially when it is a backup weapon which is very rarely used. The weight to use ratio is too killer.
Also, a safety at all on a handgun is kinda stupid. Especially an SADA, where the heavy first pull is the safety. The 92G is a better design.
Overall, I would be much more comfortable with a Glock or other safetyless striker polymer handgun if given the option.
But training to use a wide variety of weapons and using certain weapons in as many situations as possible is how you get good. Learn to use any handgun. Learn to use handguns at distance, learn to do CQB with full length rifles, etc. Kind of the anti-thesis of a lot of /k/ thinking where if you don't have *exactly* the right gun or tool, you may as well just give up.
>>30499827
Was it the Black Hills 55gr Barnes TSX? I heard secret squirrels were running it in their SBRs because M855 wouldn't cut it out of a 14.5in
>>30501174
It's a 70gr TSX loaded by Black Hills, referred to as "Brown tip".
>>30501155
but my question was about military use. i think the military will always choose a pistol with a safety because they obviously dont trust the average GI to walk around base without one. hell, our current cuck military doctrine doesnt even trust our troops walking around with loaded guns when the president is talking to them
>>30501230
For military use, I would trust a striker handgun more. Our leadership has different ideas, but as far as I'm concerned if you are worried about a soldier NDing, you shouldn't give him any pistol in the first place.
So is dual power/variable zoom just a meme at the end? Will we never get the perfect one scope package?
Seems like the DEVO is the true compromise we're looking for.
>>30501262
they clearly are worried or concerned about ND though, because why else would they mandate safety-on carry? and this anons commander made a personal exception to the generally adopted doctrine, because he wasnt a fucktarded idiot >>30500909
ill never understand why the military handicaps itself with such cuckhold rules. it seems like they are more afraid of their soldiers ND'ing and shooting each other, which i have never seen many examples of. and if they are doing that regularly, that only means military training sucks ass and is failing, in which case how can you trust the soldiers to actually fight an enemy if they are too untrained to not shoot their own foot
case in point, on domestic bases, only MPs can carry weapons. why? what the fuck is the purpose of such cuck rules? how many shootings/attacks have we seen on military bases where that fucks them over? being in the military puts a target on your back. fort hood shootings (1 and 2)? navy yard shooting? tennesee recruiting center shooting? fort bragg shooting?
>>30501367
Oh, I'm sorry. I see you're ranting about intangibles and cucks. My mistake. I was talking about weapon use and techniques at the user level. Farewell.
>>30501367
not to mention the numerous shootings on afghan and iraq bases where the little faggots in the local 'security' forces and up shooting our own troops
what ever happened to the days of ww2 where every GI had his loaded M1 Garand on his back or 1911 on his hip while walking around camp?
>>30501367
well for the latter... that's due to an executive order from Bill Clinton.
>>30501393
>>30501386
well you said you agreed that military leadership doesnt trust soldiers with a striker fired pistol. and i expanded on that showing how they dont trust soldiers with any pistol
>>30501304
The DEVO is offset for magnified and doesn't work that well. Conventional 1-6x works fine with a throw lever.
