I've been shooting the Elcan since about 1996.
I've put 20k+ rounds through under one (fullbore) plus probably 5k more in smallbore.
I've fired the Elcan in CQB matches in the UK, one of which involves 3 exposures of only 3 seconds to fire a total of 10 rounds. It can be done, and with a 2" bull at 25 yards, it's possible to get HPS on that.
My observations are that the Elcan is however better at longer ranges. I shoot it out to 500m.
If you can shoot with both eyes open and bring the optic up into your line of sight, that seems to work best.
I would disagree with CAR10's statement about the eye relief. The Elcan's eye releif is 76mm, or about 3".
Now, back to your question:
"I've noticed several pics from Irag with 240's and 249's with Elcans mounted on the rail. If you ended up in a CQB role, how effective would it be?"
Apples and Oranges.
M-240s and M-249's are not CQB weapons (for the most part) they are supposed to be supporting fire weapons, and using the Elcan on them allows the operator to better view and correct their fall of shot.
I've fired a fair amount of rounds through the C-9A1 (Minimi with Elcan) and while the mounting position on the topcover is not the ideal for accuracy, the ability for the gunner to observe and correct fall of shot is extremely handy.
YMMV, but I like the Elcan, and find that it's pretty damn good, as long as you have the Gen IV base.
NavyShooter
www.canadiangunnutz.com