AR Sponsor
Posted: 1/13/2013 3:49:03 PM EDT
|
Thinking of getting one of these. From what I hear the eye relief is better than the ACOG. The elcan is heavier. Glass about the same. I am thinking of running this versus the LED ACOG. I have also found from what I can tell with the dual illum acogs have illum problems at night, not as bright as led' can get washed out in bright sunlight. But I digress. Anyone have anymore experience with the OS4x? NOT THE DR variable version. I will probably run it with an RMR. It is also less than the ACOG. I would also love to see a reticle pic at night with full reticle ill um. There are no stocking dealers in my area. Also, if you have a good place to buy that would deal if you call them up that would be appreciated as well. It seems everyone sits on MAP. Thanks
|
|
I don't necessarily have the OS4x, but I do have both a TA31RCO and a Specter DR. Eye relief is better on the ACOG, but there is a noticeable clarity difference between the ACOG and Elcan in glass quality being the Elcan is superior.
If you still want reticle pics I can upload some. |
I got mine at Euro optic I will post a night pic tonight when I get back home! |
|
How do you like it? Have you had acogs as well? |
|
Quoted:
http://i.imgur.com/Jdn26.jpg I got mine at Euro optic I will post a night pic tonight when I get back home! Also, which reticle do you have? I am thinking cross hair. |
|
I've had the Elcan for a year. I have used acogs in the marine corp. The reason I went with the Elcan instead of acog is because first off the solar thing is only good for 9 years and I did not feel like having to replace. Secondly I noticed in shooting houses while dark, the reticle sucks. I would rate the acog as better than most but I prefer a battery powered optic with bdc. The Elcan has never lost zero. Is very clear. Has NVG settings along with dif brightness settings for dif light situations. It is heavy! Really easy to adjust zero. I have the chevron reticle. This is common reticle on the acogs. |
| Thanks, since I will not be able to see before I buy, how does the reticle look size wise in the sight picture? Its probably not as small as your image looks, but cash I compare to the a cog as far as the sight picture goes? I CAN get my hands on an a cog to get an idea. |
|
Quoted:
I don't necessarily have the OS4x, but I do have both a TA31RCO and a Specter DR. Eye relief is better on the ACOG, but there is a noticeable clarity difference between the ACOG and Elcan in glass quality being the Elcan is superior. If you still want reticle pics I can upload some. Not sure I agree with this... I have two DRs and three ACOGs - and compared to the 4x32 ACOG, to my eye - the eye relief is "better" on the ELCAN, at least it's longer. It does, in my experience, have a slightly less forgiving "eye-box" than the ACOG, IMHO - due largely to FOV, but it is somewhat irrelevant either way - because as scopes, they are both subject to parallax - just because you can "see" the reticule doesn't mean you're getting an effective sighting solution. I will agree that optical quality and clarity on the ELCAN, when clean, is far better than the ACOG. Trijicon's glass, IMHO, is kind of "passe," it's not horrible, but it's nothing to write home about. Then again - ELCAN's pedigree is manufacturing cameras (ELCAN = Ernst Leitz: Canada). That being said - the optical quality of the glass can become more of a non-issue if you use your optic in the field and it is subject to environmental dust and debris that will affect both, which I suspect Trijicon knows (advanced COMBAT optical gunsight) - nevertheless, ELCAN gives you the better starting point. The biggest thing the ACOG has going for it, however, is the extremely generous FOV for a 4x scope. The ELCAN's FOV is excellent - the ACOG's however, is phenomenal. Neither give you the "drinking straw" effect of many tubed optics (and even Aimpoints sometimes), but the ACOG is just huge and wide open for excellent situational awareness when scanning for targets and observing objects at a distance. To be honest - though I love the SpecterDR for its capabilities in the Dual Role function - I don't know that I would choose the fixed 4x version over the ACOG. It's heavier, and the ARMS mount is not my favorite - though I don't have the same vehement and vitriolic hatred of them as some others have. IMHO - the benefits of the ELCAN, based on my use of the DR is the manual battery illumination and the longer eye relief - allowing a little bit more flexibility in mounting locations, which may or may not make a difference when mounting with a BUIS. Optical clarity is definitely on the plus side for the ELCAN, but as I said - if you [and your rifle] get dirty, it's less of a benefit. Compared to the ACOG, the FOV is reduced, it's heavier and generally bigger, and there are fewer mounting options. ~Augee |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't necessarily have the OS4x, but I do have both a TA31RCO and a Specter DR. Eye relief is better on the ACOG, but there is a noticeable clarity difference between the ACOG and Elcan in glass quality being the Elcan is superior. If you still want reticle pics I can upload some. Not sure I agree with this... I have two DRs and three ACOGs - and compared to the 4x32 ACOG, to my eye - the eye relief is "better" on the ELCAN, at least it's longer. It does, in my experience, have a slightly less forgiving "eye-box" than the ACOG, IMHO - due largely to FOV, but it is somewhat irrelevant either way - because as scopes, they are both subject to parallax - just because you can "see" the reticule doesn't mean you're getting an effective sighting solution. I will agree that optical quality and clarity on the ELCAN, when clean, is far better than the ACOG. Trijicon's glass, IMHO, is kind of "passe," it's not horrible, but it's nothing to write home about. Then again - ELCAN's pedigree is manufacturing cameras (ELCAN = Ernst Leitz: Canada). That being said - the optical quality of the glass can become more of a non-issue if you use your optic in the field and it is subject to environmental dust and debris that will affect both, which I suspect Trijicon knows (advanced COMBAT optical gunsight) - nevertheless, ELCAN gives you the better starting point. The biggest thing the ACOG has going for it, however, is the extremely generous FOV for a 4x scope. The ELCAN's FOV is excellent - the ACOG's however, is phenomenal. Neither give you the "drinking straw" effect of many tubed optics (and even Aimpoints sometimes), but the ACOG is just huge and wide open for excellent situational awareness when scanning for targets and observing objects at a distance. To be honest - though I love the SpecterDR for its capabilities in the Dual Role function - I don't know that I would choose the fixed 4x version over the ACOG. It's heavier, and the ARMS mount is not my favorite - though I don't have the same vehement and vitriolic hatred of them as some others have. IMHO - the benefits of the ELCAN, based on my use of the DR is the manual battery illumination and the longer eye relief - allowing a little bit more flexibility in mounting locations, which may or may not make a difference when mounting with a BUIS. Optical clarity is definitely on the plus side for the ELCAN, but as I said - if you [and your rifle] get dirty, it's less of a benefit. Compared to the ACOG, the FOV is reduced, it's heavier and generally bigger, and there are fewer mounting options. ~Augee If I were to lean towards the acog it would, will be the led version ta02. I want to run a 4x and a rds at 45 degrees. I like the elcan reticle better and I guess the overall look. Trijicon may cancel the led, and I have considered the Browe but just not for me. The elcan cost a little less. Any guidance on the acog led versus the os4x? |
|
No experience with the TA02 or Browe - however, I tend to find them a little - hokey.
Having never handled one personally, I think its an interesting concept and understand some of the reasoning behind them - but I think the addition of the battery tube and adjustment knobs have made them a little less compact and low profile than the original ACOGs. Nevertheless, I'd love to try one if the opportunity presented itself - but at this point, I don't see me spending my own money on one as I have not felt that there was that much deficiency with the Tritium illuminated ACOGs - to be perfectly honest - my preferred ACOG is the TA01NSN with the black, etched, non-illuminated daytime reticule. ~Augee |
| I see your point. I guess the os4X draws me because of the center and full illumination options, and just seems to me to be a little more "boutique" if you know what I mean and I tend to be drawn towards those types. If you cant go wrong either way I think I will go with the os4x. |
AR Sponsor