Elcan setup

Plink

Plink

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
54   0   0
Location
Having a boating accident.
Hey guys. I picked up a used Elcan at a gun show yesterday, and of course, immediately ran home to put it on my rifle. The unit did not come with a manual, and I don't know anything about the Elcan, other than that after having used one on someone else's rifle, I wanted one.:D

I took the rifle to the range, and managed to zero in the windage no problem, but, even with the unit at the 0-200 "port" position, I'm shooting about 12 inches high at 100m. I do not know how to depress the scope any further to get the correct elevation.

Can anyone give me some ideas (besides the usual, toss it in the garbage its junk kind of comment):slap:

Thanks!
 
Ah HAH! That's the solution. As mentioned, I didn't have a manual, so did not know about the lifting of the port.
I'll give that a shot...

Thanks!


THEN chuck it in the garbage.........:D
 
Only a couple of problems with mine, one minor, one serious - clamp wing nut inserts are brass, engaging steel screws. Replaced screws and nuts. Serious one is that there is no provision to adjust for personal vision, and the reticle is fuzzy unless I wear glasses with a particular correction - which I don't wear for general use. Sort of defeats the purpose of an optical sight to have to wear special glasses to sharpen the reticle.
 
Yeah, it doesn't make sense does it.... Fortunately, I don't require glasses yet, so, I'm ok with it. But it does make one scratch their head and go hhmm doesn't it... :confused:

What I've seen of it so far I like. Simple, good field of view, always on, and overbuilt tough.
 
It is accurate out to 25m, depending on how strong your throw is.:D

As you look at the back of the sight, push the right side of the dial to raise (counter-clockwise) and push the left side to lower (clock-wise). Right to raise, left to lower. Windage adjustments are just as they read, right to right left to go left on the front screw.
YMMV,
Hoddie
 
The Elcan is junk,always was always will be. The most common problem is the base itself, you cannot have reliable scope that sits on a "floating" base,the old generations were really bad for loss of zero as the mechanism inside would fail,the newer ones (gen II or better) will simply take more time for these failures to develop. That is the non techno-babble version others can explain it in much better detail than me. I have seen way too many of them fail to put any trust in the Elcan, for a casual shooter it may last a long time, but would not recommend one for a serious shooter.
 
the_kiD said:
why is everyone against the Elcan? is it realy that bad? i have one and i works well. i can do clovers with it on my AR.
Click to expand...

not everyone is against the Elcan, just the three guys who've had to actually use one in combat. The rest of us don't bet our lives on them, so we're good. :D
 
aninchlow said:
Ryan ###### just won the bc provincials with an elcan on a ar-15. (as far as I know).
Click to expand...

It isn't target shooting that's the problem, it's targets that are shooting that causes issues (and the associated falls, dives and gymnastics to avoid the above).
 
That would be me.It was a C7.
The scopes are great for service rifle events but can't hold up to combat type use.Just too many stupid design flaws to go wrong.I like the optic itself but the base is pretty hurting.Anyone had a crack at the Spectre in combat yet?
 
Remember that the C79 was brought in for one reason -- to increase low light shooting accuracy.
I have been told that several noted soldiers had choices they believed where bettet -- but a senior Patricia officer (whom is now the H.C. ) blighted the forces with that scope (and he had the NERVE to brag about the fact he had foisted it on us at the 90th BTW -- of course he is a little senile and did not understand we wanted him dead for that)

Since then we have had a LCMM blame the zero lose on the helmet :rolleyes: , inexperienced troops, and finally poor metal in the mount.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom