<Off-topic posts removed - Z>

I'll do a "first impressions" review of my Burris XTR14 optic.

Someone already posted the reticule diagram, so I'll spare you that.

For those that don't know the features:

- second plane reticule
- true 1x claimed
- illuminated center circle, and 100, 200, and 300m dots
- BDC based on a 62gr projectile at 3050 fps.
- mil-dot spacing on the horizotal reticule lines

My XTR is mounted in a LaRue SPR mount, on a CMMG 20" lightweight upper, standard handguards. It's a bit of an odd configuration for a 3 gun gun, but as it happened yesterday this does seem to work well. The rifle has an A1 buttstock, so I did expect some issues with eye relief. I ended up mounting the SPR unit with one of the rail units hanging free over the end to get things to work. I also mounted a zoom ring onto the unit to make changing the magnification easier. The drawback of the mounting arrangement is that I would need one heck of a flat BUIS if I wanted to install one.

Photos pending.

Sight-in was on Friday; The unit was bore-sighted and leveled in its mount using a Cabelas laser bore––sighter, and with the unit mounted in the Larue unit, mounted in turn in the upper, seemed to have an optical zero pretty much dead on.

Sighting in took 15 shots - as in three groups. I generally zero with five shots, not three. One group at 25m to make sure I would not be looking for the group off-paper at 100, and two at 100. The unit claims quarter MOA clicks on windage and elevation (as does the little sticker inside the elevation knob cover), and was only off less than 2" either way from the boresighted zero. Windage and elevation were indeed 1/4 MOA.

As expected, subsequent shooting with the unit revealed that the unit did indeed hold zero just fine. At a weight of just over 1 lb, one would expect some degree of durability. Both the reloads I use for 3 gun (a 55gr FMJBT with 25.0 gr of TAC), and Prvi M193 were tested, and found to group the same, much to my relief.

Saturday's three gun match went well as well - most of the shots at the local match are about 80 yards at very small steel targets. My head wasn't 100% with it so finding the consistent cheek weld was hard that morning, but from the prone position there was no challenge at all. The glass was clear, and the while the illuminated reticule is not bright enough in full sunlight, it jumps out when the object in the sights is dark, automatically contrasting itself.

Good:

- bright, clear glass
- lit reticule visible on dark objects in daylight
- the inverted donut and dots from center on down is a pretty good one, IMO. You can see small objects if you need to, or use the donut for up close targets
- rugged enough for 3 gun
- 1x can be used with both eyes open

Bad:

- zoom twist feels gritty
- zoom objective has some play in it - it wiggles. Since that's not where the reticule lives, does not affect the zero, BUT I worry about the nitrogen seal.
- battery cover is bigger than the rheostat controlling brightness, so fat fingers will loosen the battery cover when turning up the brightness
- brightness setting rheostat is NOT graduated in a tactile - there are no clicks, leading to my next point:
 - the idea of having an "off" position right next to the position for a particular brightness is great IF, and only IF, there are tactile clicks on that dial. Since there aren't, handling the optic has the nasty habit of turning off the lit reticule, or "blinking" when you're looking for the brightness that suits you at the moment.
- other than the explanation sheet for the reticule, there were no model-specific instructions included. Only the catalog-style XTR optics manual, with does not list the 1-4x model. There are a bunch of hex screws on there, and I don't know what they do, for that reason. I definitely don't want to pop the nitrogen seal.

All but the wiggling objective are minor points (no matter how annoying), so I give the scope a 7/10. Good for 3 gun, and hunting things that don't shoot back. If someone from Burris were to tell me I didn't give the scope a fair shake because it's not working like it's supposed to, then they shouldn't have shipped it this way, IMHO (although in fairness I know more about companies' warranty service for guns, cars, etc than anyone else I know - it's just my luck).

I'll post again after a few more matches.

Elcan Spectre DR review by Victor Di Cosola of Tactical Night Vision Company:
http://www.ar15.com/content/products/sights/elcan/index.html

Elcan brochure:
http://www.armament.com/SpecterDR_Dual_Role_Optical_Sight.PDF

New Elcan 1.5 x 6 brochure.  It doesn't fit the requirements, but what the hell.
http://idr.janes.com/public/adlink/ads/1337230.pdf

Elcan review by i303 over at XCRforums:
http://xcrforum.com/index.php/topic,714.0.html

I fear I have entered the rabbit hole when it comes to these 1-4x optics.

I will post any more that I find along with any reviews or interesting information.  It would be nice to get this thread tacked.

Ellis Optics (MK-7 Omega)
Horus (Talon)



I think these meet the requirements, but I'm not sure.  I haven't researched them yet.

Here is a pretty good disscusion on the topic:
http://www.weaponevolution.com/forum/showthread.php?t=807

My Burris  zooms very smoothly, firmly. No grit or wiggles.

You need to add the Leupold Mk.4 1.5-5x MRT to the mix.

I'm very please with mine on a LT-104 mount.

IOR 1x/4x Pitbull review starts on page 4.

Elcan Spectre DR Review.

Any more info?  Can you fill in anything on the GRSC Combat Rifle Scope?

http://www.grsc.com/combatriflescope.php

<Off-topic posts removed - Z>

Having already invested in a couple N4's and an LMT with an ACOG and EOTech I decided I had to "skimp" a little on a general purpose optic on the 3rd of those for my hunting and gun games purposes - for this year at least.

I went with the Nikon African non-illuminated 1-4x. I've read it's a true 1x and it certainly seems to be to my eyes.

http://www.nikonhunting.com/riflesco...an-1-4x20.html

Nikon claims this model has quote: "an incredible 20mm-5mm exit pupil range for low-light hunting". FWIW, I don't know A) if that is exactly right or B) how significant that high end at low power is in real use. I just don't know that much about optics.

I mounted it in a LT-139 SPR-E and it works great at its listed 4" eye relief although it seems a little shorter than that to me.

I've shot it a couple times so far and it's worked very well. 1x feels fast as hell - both eyes open - throw it up and you seem to see the whole world out there (92 feet worth at 100yds). The German #4 will be more than sufficient for my gunning.

The return to zero characteristic of the LT-139 works as advertised. I was pleasantly surpised when bore sighting it when after mounting the scope in the LT-139 - it was boresighted as far as I could discern and first rounds downrange at 50 yards were perfect for windage and just 4-5" low. It was a quick zeroing process.

I think it'll do until I find a fiber optic and tritium illuminated 1x AND 6X (no in between) with 5.56 BDC for less than a grand.

Troy BUIS fits fine.

Seems funny my QD mount costs almost as much as the scope but what the heck.
http://swfa.com/Nikon-1-4x20-Monarch...pe-P42349.aspx

Just ordered a Meopta K dot for my patrol rifle.  It arrived today and I got a chance to get it mounted and zeroed.  It zeroed in 6 rounds and then I got to shoot some drills.  1 inch dots at 50 yards were a piece of cake to hit.  I love the 4X setting outside of 25 yards.  In close drills, it seemed awkward but no slower than a RDS.  It seemed more accurate in failure drills as my rounds were stacked tight.

The glass seemed to live up to its reputation and was very bright and clear.  The illumination worked well and it was very bright out today.

About the only problem I had was using it from the left side on 1X.  I definitely did not pick it up as quick from the left as I do a RDS.

It seems like it will be a perfect optic for my patrol rifle.

In these pics you can see some of the blocker ring I was talking about earlier in the edges of the FOV.

Thank you to the folks who have provided some more information on the Nikon and others. I will update the table as soon as I get the time. I will also be adding the GRSC scope to the table an correcting some spelling errors etc. It has also come to my attention that there exist two different models of S&B 1-4x scopes that have differing stats so I will be adding the newer model.

Also, I have on order an IOR pitbull scope. I simply couldn't resist. It's stats are unbelievable. Hoping its as impressive in person as on paper.  I will be adding my review of that as soon as it arrives.

<Off-topic posts removed - Z>

On the table on page one... I noticed 480 hours on the SN4 and US Optics told me under 12 hours on max... did they change their illumiation system?  The Meopta has a 22mm objective not listed as it is blank.  The Elcan Specter has a 32mm objective not listed and the battery lfe is 300-2000 hours.  You should add a section for daytime bright illumination yes/no.  As far as I know Elcan, Swaro, Meopta, Trijicon, and S&B are all yes and everything else is no.

I'm bound and determined to find a 1-4x scope for a flat top AR yet.  After looking through the forums, looking at the Weaver 1-3x, the Millet DMS1, etc.  I think I've narrowed it down to these few:

Weaver 1-3x

Leupold 1.5-4x20 Mark AR Riflescope

Leupold VX-II 1-4x20mm Rifle Scope w/ Matte Black Finish, Duplex Reticle 56700

Nikon Series Monarch African Riflescope 1 - 4x 20 Matte German #4 Reticle, 8446

Millett 1-4 x 24 DMS, Multi Coat Red-Dot Rifle Scope BK81002

Konus Konuspro M30 1-4x24mm Zoom Riflescope D.30mm w/ Bubble Level 7284

anyone with experience with these that could give some feedback?

I'm leaning towards the Leupold (either one), only because they are local for me.  But the Nikon also looks good.

Main purpose would be for close to midrange plinking/target/varmint shooting, maybe some 3-gun, QCB or home D.  Not too worried about the latter 2, as there are more options.

Any help would be appreciated.

Slo

BigJimFish’s IOR pitbull review:

The quick pro’s and cons:
Pro’s:
- Huge field of view at 1x and 4x
- Large exit pupil allows for generous head movement
- Attractive robust construction
- Good low light performance
- Clarity is good but not earth shattering
- Very nice bullet drop / range estimating features on the reticle

Con’s
- Tremendous curvature of field at 4x (fish eye) with some chromatic aberration
- Weighs a metric ton
- Turrets, though nice, are really to heavy and unnecessary on this type of scope
- Illumination is insufficient for day use and has trouble with internal reflection
- Reticle is a bit small for high speed close up work
- No ideal mounting options
- NOT DURABLE MINE BROKE DURING MOUNTING



Full review

Today I received one of the first 1000 recently released IOR Pitbull scopes. I was quite excited as I tore into the USPS package, dug out the green IOR box and put my hands on this formidable piece of hardware.
For those of you wondering just how heavy is this thing let me tell you it is quite substantial. You could always club your enemies to death if you run out of bullets. The scope comes with a massive set of steel rings as well. I long for the day Larue finally gives up and makes a 35mm ring because that would make this scope much more desirable. The heavy steel rings combined with its already obese nature is a pretty big turnoff.
The external appearance of the scope is pleasing. The fit and finish is flawless and the heavy knurled and knobby exterior has an intimidating look. The power ring and diopter ring move smoothly though the power ring is a bit stiff . The diopter is perhaps a little to loose. The turrets on this scope are huge. I think they might be slightly bigger than Leupold M4’s. Though this is pleasing to the eye it is totally unnecessary. I doubt that many folks will be constantly fiddling with them since presumably the scope will see most of its use at less than 300 yards. I can’t help but think that a great deal of weight could have been saved by going with smaller turrets. To be fair I would also like to have them protected by caps since I really don’t think they will be used much in combat and the zero is very easy to disturb with them out in the open. To be fair the zero indicator can be set after you find your  zero so that you will know if you bumped the scope but I don’t think most folks double check the zero every time they pick up the rifle. Indicator lines also exist so you know which turn of the dial the scope is on. These would be great turrets on a sniper scope. The adjustments have a positive tactile and audio click every .1 mil increment. If I  had my choice I would swap these mondo sniper rifle turrets with the hunting turrets my Zeiss conquest has. They are small, capped turrets that still offer fingertip adjustment and even a movable zero indicator.
On to my impressions of the optical qualities of the scope: First off the field of view feels as big as the numbers suggest. It dwarfs that of my Leupold CQT at 1 power and is almost equal to the cq/t’s 3x numbers at 4x. That being said I noticed when trying both scopes out that because you use a 1x scope with both eyes open this larger field of view at 1x not as meaningful as I previously thought it would be. On 4x  though the larger field of view was quite helpful. Unfortunately, This field of view did not come without its costs in the design of the scope. At 4x this scope displays massive curvature of field (fish eyed appearance). Though the CQ/T also displays some curvature of field at high power it is much more pronounced in the Pitbull. In order to illustrate this I made sure to take some quality pics through the scope. You can easily see the edges blur and stretch at 4x. this curvature is not really noticeable at 1x which is a relief since large curvature of field with both eyes open is very distracting. You can also see some significant chromatic aberration at 4x (If you don’t know what chromatic aberration is please look it up the explanation would take to long to add to this review.) The 32mm exit pupil this scope boasts was definitely helpful in keeping a good image despite slight movement of the head. A great deal more movement is tolerated with the pitbull’s design than that of the CQ/T. Only good things can be said about the exit pupil it is perhaps the best selling point of this scope since it allows the scope to come much closer to the 1x experience of a red dot.




The clarity of the pitbull is good though perhaps not as good as I expected or desired. It easily bests my Leupold CQ/T but that is not saying much since my CQ/T is getting quite old and likely does not boast the newest coatings Leupold has available. When compared to my zeiss conquest 4.5-14x I found the Pitbull’s resolving capabilities not quite equal and this is ignoring the fact that the Pitbull has a great deal of curvature of field rendering the edges of the view quite fuzzy. I’m not saying the clarity is poor just that it is nothing to write home about.
One of the features I most anticipated in this scope was the reticle. I have come to the opinion that although not perfect a drop compensating reticle is a great advantage in this type of scope. I came to this conclusion when, through experimentation it became clear to me that shooting sub moa at 4x, or even 3x is pretty easy. If the magnification is sufficient to hold groups to less than an inch at 100 yards it should be plenty sufficient to engage man size targets out to the full range of the .223 cartridge provided you have the drop compensator to aid you. The pitbull includes not only compensating lines in the reticle but also a very helpful range estimating feature. The width of each compensating line is equal to the average width of a mans chest at that range. Genius. Certainly this reticle is well suited for the long range portion of its job description. Unfortunately I found it somewhat less suited for the close quarters part. I simply found it to small and thin. It has a sort of a half circle dot setup but I just found it small and kinda hard to be particularly fast with. To make matters worse I do not like IOR’s illumination. Unlike the CQ/T the IOR only illuminates the center dot. This would probably be fine if not for the amount of internal reflection the illumination creates on any of the higher settings. In my photograph you will notice big fluffy red clouds of scattered light in the optic . I found this very distracting and undesirable.  Though this internal reflection is not apparent in high light daylight settings neither is the illumination of the reticle. It seems that if the environment is such that the illumination of the reticle is evident so is the internal reflection of the lighting. Truthfully the illumination of the reticle can only be judged an unmitigated fail. All in all the reticle was for me a mixed bag.



For the mounting of the scope I use a wheeler engineering FAT torque wrench so that I do not under or over torque a scope. I set the wrench to 25 inch lbs which is what I typically start a scope at (I have in the past had to torque up to 35 with a scope that had the habit of shooting loose.) I don’t consider 25 inch lbs to be particularly tight. Before I had the torque wrench in my ignorance I used to torque scopes much much tighter. During the torque down procedure I heard a light crackle. Upon inspection I could see that one of the internal lenses had chipped. I find this totally unacceptable for obvious reasons. Since most of us buy these very expensive optics with the desire that they be durable enough for combat I think the potential happy owners of this scope may be quite limited. This is not a durable product. If the lense will crack under a mild torque I shudder to think what dropping it on the tube would do. I would never trust my life to this scope. Perhaps it could find a use for a 3 gun competitor or for hunting game that doesn’t shoot back
Following the cracking incident I returned the scope to Valdada. I would love to say that they gushed with apology and bent over backwards but that is not the way it went down. Instead they insisted that the failure was my fault for using extreme pressure. They suggested using 12.5 inch lbs of torque. I have included the torque I used so that you can judge my level of incompetence and the scopes level of durability yourself. I will add that after a good deal of threatening and berating on my part they agreed to replace the scope with a new one at no charge. So they did, albeit begrudgingly, back their product.
In conclusion I would like to say that although its numbers are superb I would not recommend this scope. Though it might serve the 3 gun crowd well it is simply not durable enough to have widespread appeal. Additionally the reticle is poor for close quarters use, the illumination is awful, and the curvature of field

<Off-topic posts removed - Z>

Updated my IOR Pitbull review to reflect the damn thing broke during mounting.

Updated the table on page 1 to include DeVL's edits. Removed battery life estimate from US optics SN-4S scope due to many conflicting reports.

I have decided not to include daytime visible yes or no column in the table because it is just to subjective for some scopes it is obvious like the Pitbull being a no but for some like the Leupold CQ/T it is kind of a matter of opinion because the illumination is visible but perhaps not bright enough.

<Off-topic posts removed - Z>

Who would have the better optics, Nikon 1x4 or Weaver 1x3 (both the 1 inch models)?

i have the weaver and it has very good glass is small lightweight, and is true 1x, have a few nikon scopes as well glass is just as good but not knowing which model you  are talking about hard to say, probably bigger heavier and longer.

How is the Weaver in low light?

Got a chance to run the Meopta in some drills at work yesterday.  The first set were at 7 yards.  I ran the Meopta with the front scope cover up and down, and there was not change in point of impact with it at 1X.  The reticle was a little easier to see with the cover down as it was really bright and we were shooting a white target.  Speed wise, I felt as fast as with a red dot and was easily on par or faster than the rest of the line.  It just didn't seem as natural.  My shots were real close together and closer than with a RDS.  Some of this may be due to getting rid of the VFG as I dropped it as it didn't feel as good with the Meopta on the rifle.  I may have been controlling the rifle better withouth the VFG, I don't know.

The next set of drills were multiple shoot and no shoot targets inter mixed from 20 to 50 yards, while moving from various cover.  I ran these drills on 4X and the illuminated reticle seemed to "glow."  I'd snap the gun on target and it seemed like the reticle was finding the target by itself.  I tried head shots on all of the targets and they were all in there.  Even from the left side, I could pcik up the reticle and target easily, just not as fast, as from the strong side.  If only I could close my right eye.

I ran some of the support side stations with it on 1X and it was real similar to a RDS.

All in all, for the first day of running it hard, I was very pleased.  It was much, much nicer on 4X than a RDS and magnifier for me.  I liked being able to flip a lever to switch magnifications.  Daylight illumination is a must IMHO.

Even in my plate carrier, I did not have any trouble with the fixed eye relief of the Meopta versus a RDS.  I thought the added thickness might be a problem, but at least from standing, kneeling, and prone it wasn't.

An excellent hands-on review of the Meopta.  I just wish it was smaller, lighter and fiber optic to solve the battery life issue.

Got to try the Meopta with a 2032 instead of the reccomended 2354 and noticed a drop of reticle intensity of 50%.  2032 IMO is a pure emergency battery.

A Meopta with the scope cover closed will produce similar reticle shift to using an ACOG.  You may not notice it close range but it is there and it is impossible to NOT produce reticle shift in ANY optic doing this.

I plan to check the shift at greater distances as I like to know what my gear is doing.  I doubt I will ever need to run it with the scope cover down, but I like to know under which circumstances I can if I forget to flip it up or it gets knocked down.

I've tried it before with magnified reticles and the shift was real noticeable so I was happy to see the unoticeable variation on 1X at 7 yards.

I wish it was smaller (mostly for looks) and lighter is always better.  According to the specs, it is about 1 ounce heavier than my RDS and magnifier but switching back and forth between the two setups, the Meopta felt heavier.

The gun did not feel lively to me with the VFG and the Meopta hence getting rid of the VFG.  It feels much better without it and more like my other scoped rifles.  I guess that's why you have to check everything.

I haven't tried it with a 2032 battery and hope to not have to.  I do need to get a spare battery to put in the pistol grip.

So far so good.  I have another rifle instructor class coming up in October so I should have a real good idea how well I like the scope after that.

<Off-topic posts removed - Z>

<Off-topic posts removed - Z>

<Off-topic posts removed - Z>

Got a chance to fire about 20 rounds at night with the Meopta.  The glass quality was evident as picking up the black steel silhouette from the hill side was pretty easy.  The scope seemed real fast on target at night, but it seemed like "smoke" from the muzzle was a bit of a problem.  I never remembered this with a RDS and it was the same ammo.

I let another officer shoot it and he had no problem getting hits with it as well.

So far so good.

I updated / rewrote my two reviews today to reflect the return of the IOR from the shop as well as my thoughts in general.

COLD, could you please take a few pics of the Z6i illumination in bright light?

That's too bad, I was hoping the pitbull would be an economical alternative to the Elcan Spectre DR.
Thanks for telling it like it is.  Good review.

What are you going to buy to replace it?

BUMP

Great thread.

I am trying to figure out which one to throw on my BCM middy. I REALLY want the TR24G but man is it hard to find. Trying to decide on getting a Burris and being done, or getting a less expensive Millet and waiting on the Trijicon.

Great thread. Thanks for sharing. If I can request something, is it ok to add the TR24 to the chart on the first page? Also, do you have an update on the battery life of some the optics? Thanks.

I played with these at the SHOT show. The 30mm is a 1.1X and the 1" is a 1x.
Very very nice optics.





Bill

On the Leupolds, look at their web site for the "actual" magnification. They "round up" or "down" for their numbers.
In other words their VX-2 1-4 is really a 1.6-4.2X and their VX-3 1.5-5X is really a 1.5-4.5X.
Kinda of misleading to me.





Bill

<Off-topic posts removed - Z>

tag and looking for more info on the Ellis MK7 Omega...

<Off-topic posts removed - Z>

Originally Posted By 3gunbutch:
Ok, I have been lucky enough to field test this scope for the past 6 months or so. So I wanted to share my findings. First things first, this is from the perspective of a 3 gun shooter. It is not meant to provide TE for practical use, only competitive use.

My objective was to determine if this scope could be a viable platform for 3 gun competition. My requirements were only that it have true 1x, have a lighted reticle for CQB, provide 4x magnification, and most importantly, prove the BDC is accurate. I mounted the scope with a Larue SPR-E to a newly built JP 18” upper. The rifle is super accurate and allowed me to critique the scope knowing the quality of the rifle.

My homework started with developing a load that would accurately compare to the load used to develop the reticle. Several variables needed to be worked out. The reticle was calibrated for a 62 grain bullet coming out of a 14” barrel. Since I planned to shoot only one weight of bullet, a 55 gr Nosler Ballistic Tip, I needed to match the trajectory of the calibrated bullet to my load. Not rocket science if you have the ballistic software to play with. After much trial and error, I developed a load that was really, really close, out to 400 yds. I settled on 25 grains of AA2230 which chronoed to 2,940 f.p.s. Using a 70 yard zero, I was able to verify the bullet paths from 50 out to 300 yds. The 200 and 300 yd aiming points was all I used in the tests.

The reticle itself is not complex, but it is a bit “busy”. But let me first say that the illumination is unusable for daylight. Even at it’s brightest, it is not illuminated in sunlight. I even tried two CR2016’s to boost the voltage, but to no avail. It’s fine in a dark room, or low-light, but is unusable as a dot @ 1x in the daytime. That was a bummer. Truly nothing like Trijicon’s stuff. Anyway, at 1x, the reticle is small but still can be used on CQB targets-just takes a keen eye. Having said that, I was more interested in the BDC at longer ranges. And this is where the reticle shines. Using the main aiming point on anything out to 225 yds was spot on. After 225, I settled on using the 300 aiming point, given the zero. Knowing the hold over/unders at those distances is not necessary.

I used the scope in some local 3 gun matches, and took it to the R&R racing multigun this summer. Had a long range rifle stage with 8” plates out to 325 yds. Had no problem hitting them. You just have to remember which aiming points to use given the target distance. Laser range finders are good.

I’m happy to have the scope. A couple drawbacks that cannot be mitigated. One, it’s heavy…built like a tank. Two, the illumination is worthless in day light. However, the glass seems fine, has a good FOV. I dislike the adjustment knobs as there is not a distinct “click” when adjusting them. Having said that, once you get it zeroed, you never touch them anyway. It holds a zero in the rock-solid Larue mount just fine. Even with it’s drawbacks, I’ll be shooting this scope over a TR21 or TA11.

I would like to see a couple things changed in the reticle itself. I realize the design allows for ranging a target. For my application, it’s not needed and actually causes problems. The 300 yd aiming point has a ranging circle around it. When sighting it on a plate at say 300 yds, the outline of the plate is obscured by the ranging circle. Other ranging circles just get in the way for me. I’d clean it up a bit for competition use.

Finally, I’d like to thank Ed for bringing his idea to reality. This guy is great to talk to and I wish him luck in getting his reticle into a higher quality scope. If his 1x6 pans out, it will be something to have. I realize the price point will be high, but I’d kill for a light 1x6 with his reticle, as long as it has illumination.

Nice review.

What scope was it?

That was 3GB's review of the discontinued first gen GRSC CRS, based on the Millet DMS chassis.
Ed at GRSC is working on an updated version.

<Off-topic posts removed - Z>

I have decided that, in the interests of continuing to make this a more and more useful thread, I will begin re-posting reviews of relevant scopes I have found around the net and at arf on this thread with proper attribution to their author. Also, at some point as the pages increase I am going to add a column to the table listing which pages each scope has reviews posted on. Below is the first re-posting of a review. It is a fine review of the  Elcan Specter DR by our own SOC. The original review can be found at: http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=18&t=454478

After months of research I finally decided on a what I thought was the Ultimate "Do it all" combat optic.

The Elcan SpecterDR, it was even on SFs block 2 approved optics list. I figured if it was something SF wanted to upgrade to It must be "up to snuff".

The catch, If I could find one they cost $1800-$2200.

So I used a Millet DMS-1for my 1-4x needs on my AR back home, it took me only a couple months before the battery housing (It's glued on) came off and the illumination was no longer functional.

It did show me that a 1-4x illuminated optic can be very versatile for "tactical/speed" use.

Then I deployed to Iraq, after a few months I ordered an Elcan SpectreDR from BoTach through an add on Gunbroker months ago, it took 2 months longer than it should have to get to me and there were many issues. But for $1600 the price makes up for it I guess.

Bottom line. Even if BlowTach has it in stock expect delays.

Here it is.



First thing I noticed is it is heavy. However the weight is "all in one" In other words it is similar in weight to and EoTech, or Aimpoint with magnifier and mount.

Second is it looks bulky, again it is still a lot less bulky than the Optic/magnifier combos.

It uses 1 AA 1/3 battery that is common to the Aimpoint M2 and M3s.

Then I took a peak through it, this thing is crystal clear, on 1x there is some distortion around the edges when you have both eyes open using is as a CQB optic. However it isn't as bad as the DMS-1 and is much "truer" to 1x.

The 4x is just as clear, here is a pic for refferance.



Here is a pic of the Dot illumination on 4 of the 6 settings. The first 2 are IR and don't show up on camera.



As you can see it has very low "IR" and very high "daylight" settings. It is very handy the the adjustment knob is marked for all levels of brightness as well as an off. So unlike the Aimpoint and EoTech it takes the guess work out of knowing weather the optic is turned off or not.

Another great feature is the Cross hair illumination.



One less setting than the dot but I was very impressed with how sharp the lines are on full illum.

The next thing I tried was the 4x setting. With a little forward and down "flick" of the lever the optic instantly go's from 1x to 4x. Something very handy when you transition from inside a building to outside.



I like the size of the dot with the different settings. The higher illumination pulls your eye to it and the lower levels give you more precision. Outside the higher levels shrink quite a bit in the daylight.

The Cross hair illum was next.


Again crystal clear with plenty of brightness.

I really feel like the cross hair is the ticket with the optic on 4x. I don't know how they could do it but the only way I could see making this optic much better would be to select the illum settings with the power settings. IE Dot Illum on 1x and Hair illum on 4x. But the dot on higher power is quickly growing on me. I just "feel" faster with the dot.

The first operational "test" was to mount and unmount the optic about a dozen times and check for marring.



Hard to tell on this issued M4 as it is well worn but I didn't detect any marks from mounting or unmounting it.

Hmmm, not marring the rifle... Maybe the rifle is marring the optic?



Not really... Can't see it from the pic so much but looking at it I thought that the little scuff marks there looked a bit worse after the process... They wiped off with a little CLP.




Well this is it for now, I need to put some rounds down range with it mounted, check re zero, and see if the POI shifts with the different power settings. I'll probably have to wait for a range back at FT. Bragg as we don't have a range at my current station. Maybe I'll even get a chance to drag it through the dirt. It will get some durability testing around here as it gets knocked around in vehicles and such.

Awww but how can you not be worried about scuffing you $1600 optic.

1. I'm a shooter, I don't pay $1600 or more on optics and weapons for them to be safe queens. I paid for reliability, accuracy, whatever, and I'm going to drag it through the dirt, shoot thousands of rounds with out cleaning, get it wet, muddy, bake it, freeze it, and treat it as a work horse. I want to see what works and what doesn't when the S really HTF.

2. Warrantys, If you offer a warranty with your "tactical products" they should be soldier proof. That is "normal ware and tare" better include anything a "normal grunt on the ground" might do to it. In other words if it fails to work as advertised when I'm putting it through it's paces, the company that makes it better replace it.

As for input, grips, groans, complaints, wishes.

1. A setting to match Dot Illum to 1x and Hair Illum to 4x. (Don't even know if its possible)

2. Maybe a lighter model? (As it is I think I'd make my M4 non functional by throwing it around before the optic failed. Maybe that's a good thing.)

3. And the biggest complaint. Larue doesn't make a replacement mount for it. (Yes I love the Larue cool aid)

All in all none of the gripes are anything more than nitpicking (except for the lack of a Larue mount) and doing it different may be a turn off to most people.

I look forward to doing a shooting update and a few torture tests, maybe even a few down and dirty tactical shooting courses.