Anybody know the specs?

From that image I see

Magpul CTR with LaRue RISR(LT7480) and LaRue POD(LT733)
Magpul MOE pistol grip
PVS-14 with LaRue PVS-14 pivot mount(LT755-14)
Aimpoint Comp M4 with LaRue mount(LT659)
Troy folding BattleSight
Gas Buster .308 charging handle

and of course the LaRue OBR 7.62 heavy

Thanks, but I should have made my question more clear.
Does anybody know the PVS14 specs?

Some sort of shock-isolated mount perhaps?  That would be awesome, but likely very expensive.

If it is their standard flip to the side mount it has no shock isolation at all (I have one). The pic is to small for me to tell exactly what it is. Just because you can get a tube dealer to gamble that a .308 or 7.62 won't destroy too many housings or tubes for one year does not mean you should do it. As I said before anyone can put a weapons grade ITT or L3 tube in a PVS-14. Even a hand selected high halo tube would fill this role. A PVS-14 was never designed to stand up to this kind of abuse. If someone wants to warranty it for a year that is their choice.

They may hold up for awhile with guys who do limited shooting. IMHO some housings are going to be destroyed as well as tubes. How many ? Don't know, but we will see if the gamble pays off. There is a reason ITT and L3 warranty the PVS-14 on .223 only and not all of it is related to the tube. Wish them luck with this but I would keep Ed's number handy for repairs. Just my .02

ETA : As to the specs of the PVS-14 pictured. I would expect it to be average with a high halo value. No way to tell by just looking at the housing. I have purchased a Larue PVS-14 back in December. While no spec card was included I could put it up against scopes I own that have sheeted tubes. It performed average. Not as good as some scopes I have but on par with what I would consider an average tube. Not horrible, but nothing to call home about either .

From the LaRue link above:
PVS-14 Specifications:



Magnification: 1X



Field of view,
deg: 40°



Lens system: 26mmF/1.2



Lens aperture, mm: 25



Focus range,
m/in: 0.24/10" to infinity



Eye relief, mm: 25



Tube reliability standard:
10,000 hours



Operating temperature: -58°F to +131°F



Photocathode type:
18mm GaAs



Photocathode sensitivity, typical, mA/lm: 1350-1800




Resolution, typical, lp/mm: 64



Luminous gain, typical, fl/fc:
35000-75000



Signal-to-noise ratio, typical: 21:1 or better
I think Dino has it nailed with regard to Halo value because LaRue is stating these units were hand selected for them. The price including the flip to the side Larue mount is $ 3,199.95 (corrected price)






 

The tube is also warranted for 5 years by manufacturer - but they don't say who that might be.

Anyone have a source at LaRue to get more data?



I am having to think seriously about this one given the combo price point, 5 year mfg warranty and hand selection.

We talked about this topic in depth at this link

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_18/350051_Pvs14.html

This link is also interesting for those thinking of putting a PVS-14 on a .308 . The lack of response is the most interesting part.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_2_219/207969_Optic_Options.html&page=1#i1699738

I would read both these threads in depth before I made my purchase.

No magic PVS-14 exists. Just some willing to gamble not to many will break. I think it is a bad gamble but to each his own. ANY dealer can put a weapons grade tube in a PVS-14. ANY dealer can select out high halo value tubes that are not weapons grade to use in a PVS-14.These are usually lower grade tubes due to the high halo values. Easy to do this but few dealers will because they know it is not a wise endeavor. This is no magic scope, just a calculated experiment at best.

Just re-read both threads to be sure I was familiar with them (I had posted the link to David's excellent pinned post at the end of one of them)
My recollection is the LaRue site was showing a 1 year mfg warranty on the tube at that time (which you had pointed out was likely AEO Optics and Sightmark sourced)
My thought was that either ITT or L3 were involved this time because of the 5 year mfg. warranty - or maybe one of the other two vendors is teetering on bankruptcy and willing to offer a 5 year warranty they know they won't have to honor.
If it is ITT or L3, they know the PVS-14 won't handle the 7.62 recoil UNLESS they have made a special deal with LaRue for weapons grade tubes at a greatly reduced price (the GWOT wind down is under way courtesy of Obama - Iraq to 3k troops by end of 2011; Afghan withdrawl complete by Sept 2012) due to cancellation of DOD contracts and having done their own shock testing of the LaRue mount and WG tube in a PVS-14 body in their own labs.
Agreed, AEO/Sightmark is most likely but ....
just in case,  does anyone have a source inside LaRue?





ETA: My father did shock testing during one of his assignments inside IBM.  Most people are not aware that there are highly specialized, very expensive (at that time - this was 20 years ago) and very thin shock absorbing materials  that are not commercially available - example -  1/8" high density foam handled up to 400 G's.  IBM has always had some of the best researchers in the world working on problems that do not see the light of day for years ... if ever.



 

ITT or L3 won't warranty a PVS-14 above .223. Now, if a private dealer wants to offer extra coverage it is up to the individual dealer. TNVC says their scopes are good to go on a 6.8 SPC. This is reasonable as the round has a G force that most people accept it will handle just fine.

The issue with putting a weapons grade or high halo value tube in a PVS-14 for me has nothing to do with whether the tube will hold up. If the tube is selected very carefully I am sure most will be fine. The housing itself is my concern. Don't forget this scope from the outset was to be head mounted. Rifle mounting was a afterthought and with testing they determined it was OK on a .223 .

Nobody that I know has ANY testing done on a .308. The scope is plastic with retaining rings and lenses attached to plastic. I think anyone that says this is OK is nuts. If they have extensive testing to back up the claims I (or anyone I know) have never seen it. The warranty is strictly a dealer warranty. No way ITT or L3 would say it is OK to use a PVS-14 housing on a .308 . The threaded hole on the bottom of a PVS-14 is just imbedded in thin plastic, looks just like a Heli-Coil possibly held in place by plastic threads or maybe some epoxy. Exposing this screw hole to the forces of a .308 is a recipe for a broken housing.

Using a ring mount on the objective lens would fare no better as it too is held in place by a retaining ring backed by thin plastic. Whatever method you use you are asking for trouble and I bet ITT and L3 know it won't hold up or they would have sold this option with their weapons grade tubes long ago as a factory scope.

I just think this is a huge mistake that is bound to end up with folks having broken housings. I cringe putting mine on a .223 . No way in hell anyone can convince me a .308 is fine without hard data to back up the claims.

I am in agreement with what you are saying on this topic. I have little hope that this is a magic solution - because if it was, they would charge more money for it. I will call them in the morning and see if I can get the name of the manufacturer and additional details.








From my limited knowledge, it looks like they are using the J arm attachment point on the PVS-14 and that would be another set of problems that are bound to come up (i.e. cantilever moment, screw mount not fully tightened, etc, etc).





 

I like Larue and his products. I own many of them. That said, they are not experts in night vision. Great people but I think they are being misled by certain dealers (suppliers ) who have sales at the top of the agenda.

The reason the scope is cheaper is due to the quality of the tube and who makes it. In all honesty a Weapons grade tube is just a poor performer ! It is a joke that this is some magic "heavy duty" tube. They are the tubes people don't want because of the LARGE halo. Magically they are "weapons grade" ... Whole lot of bullshit in my honest opinion ! Great marketing though, if that is what you believe.

+1

"At this point in time, they have done neither. Perhaps it's time to ask
LaRue these questions instead of making assumptions, because I don't
really know the status of their testing or product validation at this
point."



I completely agree, David. The only reason I have offered to call them is because I want answers and have been known to politely push till I get them - but I am far from being one of the best people to ask the questions.



I also didn't think it was appropriate for me to sit back and wait for someone else to step up. I will gladly do any of the following:

• Wait for set of questions provided by the SME's on here that I can use to call and ask LaRue for answers.


• Step aside if one of the SME's is willing to call them and report back with answers.


• Provide questions I would like LaRue to answer.

The only thing I bring to the table is free nationwide calling, the time to spend on the phone and experience with pushing vendors for answers.



I want answers for the same reasons (I think) that you do. Either LaRue is misrepresenting what they are selling - perhaps by accident ... or they have information that backs up the advertising they have not provided to the public that they should so a more informed decision can be made. It may be they have an agreement with a vendor that limits what they can say .. but that leads us back to "magic" products and I prefer test results.



Thoughts on a path forward?  

Hi Barliman,

 

Interesting, looks like the PVS-14's they previously had on their site were gone (used to be listed under new products).

I asked a while ago, when I was first looking into NV who made their stuff and this was their response:

"We sell the Sell Mark PVS 14, which are assembled with ITT components.  I believe they are the Pinnacle Tubes."

That was back in May, not sure if the one pictured above (from Facebook) is different, but I'd sure like to find out.  That they took the original product(the one linked to above) off of their site, seems to indicate they are somehow different in any case.

Let us know what they say!

The only thing ITT about the SellMark scope they sold me may have been the housing. I can assure you the tube inside was straight up L3. Actually it was a AEO tube who uses L3 components to pot their own tubes. Did not really look hard but the housing could have been L3 as well. Basically this was the same scope TNVC regularly sells during the holiday as their Xmas special.

Decent scopes but not tier 1 and that is why they are sold much cheaper.

Well, it seems what was posted last week was premature.  There is a new link I was just given this afternoon:
http://www.new.laruetactical.com/night-vision-device-pvs-14-auto-gated-and-lt755-14-qd-pivot-mount
These tubes are L3 (Dino was correct) and the PVS-14 is by Summit. The tube specs are:
Tube Technical Specifications




M814-CS001™ (P/N 245140-CS001)




and you can even find this picture:









and if you have kept reading past the cj7hawk/Dino1130 pron  



I'll tell you that anybody who had actually ordered one last week would be really happy (by comparison, at least) cause the price shown now for the combo is $ 4,500 USD



The 5 year manufacturer's warranty is gone. The warranty is 1 year.  The site does still say the PVS-14's are hand selected and "These units are capable for weapon-mounting on up to 7.62 NATO
rifles (like the LaRue OBR)."



Maybe the additional $ 1,300 goes toward a custom PVS-14 body ???  But I doubt it - David, Dino?





 
 

Maybe there have been enough recoil related failure returns that they have had to recalculate their actuary tables?

Well, the tube pictured is a milspec tube. I can assure you that is not the tube you will find in a Summit scope. As far as modifying a PVS-14 housing to be sturdy enough for high recoil rifles I think you have a few issues. First off the PVS-14 housing is patented. Legally I don't think you can take a ITT or L3 design and rework it without expressed permission from them.

To do something like this would cost major dollars for design and thorough testing. I am sure if this was done Larue would be mentioning all the testing that was done. I think Dean (not me) at Summit built some scopes and told Larue they will work on a .308 and if it breaks within a year he will warranty it. Just my guess with how it went down.

All fine and good except for guys whose life depends on these scopes. Having the housing break and fly into someones face would not be fun. A Warranty is useless when a life could possibly be on the line. I don't shoot on a two way range but some people do and I bet they want to know what testing these scopes have and why they are considered "special"

From what I see it is a run of the mill PVS-14 with a L3 tube that has high halo values. The tubes appear to be average with the specs listed. They are certainly no super tube by any stretch.

So where the heck is the other $ 1,300 in value? You can pick up the L3 PVS-14 for $ 3,000 and, if purchased separately, that mount is $ 179.





If there is an order of mil-spec tubes canceled by the DoD, would L3 be able to sell them for commercial use?





Just asking questions because LaRue has a good reputation and it seems unlikely they would go down this path to sell something at a premium that would generate bad PR.





I was expecting a Halo number more like 1.25 given the statement about using it on their 7.62 OBR.





ETA:  I was just thinking ...


If Vic does another Christmas deal, he could bundle his L3 PVS-14 and
the TNVC mount like last year BUT add an option to get the M845 1.5X
Gen2 SHP Red Dot Sight for a grand total of $ 4,500.  





Presuming Vic doesn't mind me messing with his business plan, marketing and margins ....  

Larue does have a good reputation. But, they know little about night vision and are just re-selling a vendor supplied scope. There is nothing Larue about this PVS-14. Larue did not design one single part of it except the mount. I think Larue is relying on bad info supplied by a smooth talking salesman. This salesman knows if you put a Larue stamp on it they will sell.

Nothing against Larue at all. I just think the info being supplied by their vendor is not accurate at all. When you know little about a product you depend on accurate info from experts. In this case I think Larue is not being told the entire truth.

I am adding this link for anyone who reads through this thread and wonders about what the bottom line of this discussion turned out to be:





http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_18/352794_PVS_14_s_on__308_s_or_Higher_.html





If there are any further developments regarding this specific discussion, I will try to add those links.



10/2/11:  I've struck through the word specific above lest this and other possible additions get nitpicked.  One of the keys questions in this thread has been with respect to warranty coverage of a tube being used on rifles above 5.56 caliber. I've added the link to a thread that discusses ITT's approach to warranty claims. If I find additional information regarding Litton's warranty approach, I will add it to this post.



http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_2_209/209480_Can_we_talk_about_warranties_of_PVS_14_s_and_other_tid_bits_of_myths_.html

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_2_219/209453_PVS_14_Safe_for_Use_on_a_7_62mm_Rifle____Contradictions.html

Well, we got a response to the PVS-14 debacle. Not what I would of liked to hear but a response none the less. The difference between a supplier warranty and a manufacturers warranty should be clearly stated. Both ITT and L3 say the PVS-14 has not been tested on a .308 platform. Proper testing in a lab costs hundreds of thousands.

Sending a few guys in a field to fire off a box or two of rounds is not testing in my book. By the way they all get the housing from the same people. Insight makes the PVS-14 housing and they are owned by L3 who says putting it on a .308 is a no no. Everybody gets the housing from the same place ! Slight cosmetic differences due to how a certain company wants theirs to look but the mold and design is the same.

Larue PVS-14 ? Yep, it has a Insight housing just like everyone else gets. Any dealer can find a tube to withstand the recoil. But, they ALL still have to use the SAME housing. Ever see a rifle scope mounted on a .308 made of plastic? Better yet ever see the attachment point as a Heli-coil epoxied or threaded into plastic. Does not take an engineer to see this is a bad idea. I just hope nobody gets hurt.

I didn't have time this weekend to make a short video showing recoil on my FNAR compared to the recoil on my 6940. I want to add that video to make clear to the casual reader the difference between the two calibers ... because the more I considered your earlier post in this regard, the more I agree with your point about safety in these circumstances. Another week gives me time to think of ways of demonstrating the different levels of force involved.



The open question I asked regarding the $ 1,300 premium over the L3 PVS-14's widely available at $ 3,000 still stands.



The $ 1,300 premium is 43% of the open market cost for the PVS-14 - based on actual usage estimates (i.e. the average PVS-14 will spend most of its time in a safe rather than being submitted to 308 mag dumps) this could prove a fairly lucrative undertaking for anyone willing to act as an agent for a class insurance policy.  



Want to make some fast money anyone?



A class insurance policy would be negotiated with one of the larger insurers (no, not Lloyds - they would steal the idea) to cover  1,000 PVS-14's. The insurance company actuaries would put together the stats and quote you a price with a deductible you would cover before making any claims. You would cover your deductible by buying  1,000 PVS-14's but only selling 750 of them. If you can buy 1,000 PVs-14's for $ 2,500/each but sell the 750 for $ 4,300/each. Your out-of-pocket cost is $ 2,500,000. Your gross revenue is $ 3,225,000. You gross profit is $ 725,000.



Your deal with the insurance company is your deductible is that you will replace the first 250 units returned under warranty during the first year - but you already have those units on hand for negligible additional costs to you. If during the one year warranty period, the units returned exceed 250, the insurance company will cover your cost to order replacement units. They've looked at the statistics and estimate their risk to be an additional 40 units that would require payment to you or $ 100,000. The insurance company charges you $ 125,000 which will leave them with a gross margin of $ 25,000 - at worst case according to their actuaries - if there are no claims, they come out $ 125,000 to the good side.



Your situation is all to the good unless more than 290 units fail under their one year warranty. If you have done enough field testing to know the average number of rounds before a failure occurs and you are willing to take the risk that 460 ( 61% of the 750) of the units will only see 25% of those rounds during the first year after sale, then you are "insured" on 39% of the guns and are looking at a gross profit of $ 600,000.



Not too bad!



This is really long post     so I'll leave to another time the additional gross profit opportunity available by watching the actual claim rate and determining how many of the 250 held in reserve you could sell for $ 3,000 of additional gross profit each you could realize by selling them as the "standard" L3 PVS-14's
 

You know from a hunter stand point I almost don't care that they are selling this with extra profit margin in place to cover units that WILL be lost. That is not really the issue for me at all. Any dealer could do the same thing as Larue is doing. I respect the fact TNVC won't do this until L3 or ITT says it can handle a .308. The reason I am against it is purely safety.

I don't want to see someone hurt or even a worse outcome. This is a horrible idea and I have lost some respect. When the Engineers and the guys who designed the scope from the ground up tell you not to do something it usually is for good reason. L3 or ITT would have sold these long ago as a factory option for a .308 if they thought it would hold up. It won't and they know it won't !

Sales is one thing but when you put someones life on the line it pisses me off. For me ? If it breaks I buy a new housing and fix it. For LE/Mil this scope could cost their life. Totally unacceptable and if any one of them wish to discuss it here in the night vision forum myself and I am sure MANY others would be more then happy to oblige.

I don't blame Larue as much as the supplier who is feeding them this crap that could get someone hurt or killed. Having a PVS-14 fly into your face could make for a bad outcome . As I have said before you need no degree in engineering to see this for yourself. Just look at your PVS-14. I would never put mine on a .308.

I'm new to the NV world and have been doing research on which device to purchase.  I've read through this thread and the one thing I want to understand is is there a difference to the amount of "G" force from a bolt action 308 and an AR 308.  Logic would tell me yes because of the buffer tube design af the AR platform.  If my assumption is correct then what is the difference in that felt recoil and is it still within the limits of the product?

I have an OBR and several AR's so my preference is to have a PVS 14 that can function for both calibers.

Can you all offer any thoughts and maybe point me toward an acceptable product?  I've considered a PVS 22 but size is the issue here, as well as cost.  The 24 is an option but I'm running a 3.5-15 x 50 Nightforce on the OBR and this is a no no as the 24 is only meant for 4 to 6X.

Thanks in advance for any guidance.

Considering that your NXS in conjunction with a PVS-22/27 would weigh like 5+ pounds, a dedicated NV riflescope to compliment your NXS, both on high quality QD mounts, would seem a good way to go.

How far do you really plan to shoot in the dark?  4x mag is surprisingly effective out to 300y on reasonably sized targets....8" is a 2.6 MOA shot at that range.  Doping a sigle device for multiple platforms is a real PITA favoring a clip-on, but as an example, one can purchase TWO D-740s with recoil-tolerant L3 tubes for roughly the same cost of a 22/27.