New Scope At Shot Show

[wgnoyes]

My area director (A6) saw this at the shot show and ordered two:

http://www.armament.com/SpecterDR_Dual_Rol...tical_Sight.PDF

Sounds interesting, but it's also REAL expensive: $1200. As he said, "...Jim Shanahan told me about it and he is not quickly impressed. It is easily the most impressive scope for 3 gun rifle I have ever seen. I ordered two for me and should have them in 30 days. These are better then the EOTech and Aimpoint and when these make it to the battle lines, I am all but certain that civilians will not get another opportunity."

Bn

[vincent]

Sounds interesting. Do you know what that exposed spring is on the underside of the tube about in the middle?

[kellyn]

That was an interesting scope.

I see a couple of issues, though.

1) The arm which changes the power would probably need to be extended for competition use. An easy enough fix but as it sits, it's only slightly faster than twisting a dial on any other variable scope, if at all.;

2) The scope base with external adjustments does not appear to have been upgraded from the old Elcan. My understanding is that base has a troublesome history of breakage, but while 3 gun is tough, it ain't combat, and;

3) The reticle is kind of lame, but not disasterously so. They told me that is what DOD wanted (with heavy Navy SEAL input) so that is what they produced. I can't remember any Navy SEALS winning any three gun matches though. I almost felt sorry for the Elcan rep trying to survive an onslaught of questions and comments from 3 Gun shooters (Kurt and Eric Miller and myself) who are not particularly impressed with what the DOD thinks. I believe it was Kurt who said "This thing would kick ass with a TA11 reticle."

I'm sure we'll see some in the 2006 shooting season and I'm sure they'll do well. It is a scope capable of winning any 3 gun or rifle match. It is a step in the right direction (are you listening Trijicon!!) but it's a step, not a revolution.

But for $1200 you can buy a lot of Benny Hill specials.

[wgnoyes]

Sounds interesting. Do you know what that exposed spring is on the underside of the tube about in the middle?

No idea...

[Zak Smith]

Alan and I told him the ARMS lever had to go. Larue or simple thumbscrews would be preferrable.

I also told him I wanted a fiber optic so I didn't have to deal with batteries for daytime use.

[SinistralRifleman]

It looked neat, had a lot of interesting features...cost was the big turn off to me. It didn't appear to do anything better enough to warrant a retail cost of twice that of other variable power optics.

[kurtm]

Thats not quite what I said. I said that "since they were already stealing reticle designs they should have stolen the TA-11 doghnut!". I sure think this thing is cool, but when someone offered to let me in on a big order I declined. I'm not sure this thing does anything that a TA-11 doesn't do for me already, and besides I just got a Meostar and I'm still ringing that thing out. I'm still not sure that the 1X is all that important for my eyes anyway. KURTM

[Zak Smith]

If anyone besides me is interested in potentially putting leverage on Elcan/Specter to make the changes "we" want to this optic, contact Mike Cecil (CSGunWorks.com) mike@csgunworks.com

[Cactustactical]

Current prices from the ad sheet given out at the show for this scope are:

MSRP - $1757

Dealer- $1264

so it will be a bit more expensive moving forward than the $1200 mentioned above. If a shortage occurs because of the military demand, I expect price will be closer to the actual MSRP.

I did find the lever to change from 1 to 4 power not very user friendly. It needs to be larger and easier to find, as Kelly mentioned. Also, I found that the eye relief changed a bit when looking at 1 power vs. 4 power. Caused me to adjust head position on the stock which would cost a bit of time.

Edited February 16, 2006 by Cactustactical

[tewlman]

not trying to nay say but it looks like it still needs some development. most likely the engineers were pressured by higher-ups to have it out for SHOT show. I wish i'd have seen it while out there.

I am working on trying a us optics SN4 for 3 gun competition. They are a great company and John is really good to work with.

[kurtm]

I didn't find any change in eye relief nor did my brother or Kelly or Mike Hughes of Gun Site fame. Mike Seeklander and Brian Hill both also saw the scope and thought it was great....except forr the reticle!!

Zak, thanks for the link!! the pressure begins KURTM

[Cactustactical]

tewlman,

I don't believe this was a rush job. The scope was well put together and is ready to ship in the next month or so. 3 of the scopes were given to a rifle mfgr here in Phoenix during the show for marketing purposes. It just needs a bit of tinkering to improve it. Most scopes built with military input usually need some tinkering to be optimized for the competition arena.

kurt,

eye relief changed for me a bit more than 1/4 an inch. It did it repeatedly as I flipped the lever back and forth. The scope was not mounted forward on the receiver in a perfectly optimal position for me, that might have had something to do with it. We will be able to test out the "demo" scopes over the next few weeks and I will be able to see if I can eliminate the change through precise positioning on the receiver.

[BPiatt]

I laid it down and checked it for paralax error..... none on the one I saw.

Glass quality looked great, at least from what I could see on the show floor.

I bit too pricey for me though.

[MyBoyElroy]

The guys designing/building this shoot at one of our local ranges. They're good to talk about the devices. The system engineering manager's card is sitting on my desk. The optic is pretty cool but it's not as sweet as the pure solid-state device.