Specter TR 1/3/9x - Initial thoughts (Shot Show 2015)

[Miraclejoe]

Now that the Spectre TR is commercially available, some have asked for my thoughts on it.

It's huge:


No, seriously:


And it has that questionable adjustable base that Elcan seems to be stuck on:


What I like:
-The 1-3-9 adjustment. It is quick, easy and felt solid.
-Reticle. Nice visible dot at all magnification and I remember liking the BDC. You can find them on the Armament Technology Inc Website.

What I didn't like:
-That god damn adjustable base. The sales guy I was talking to was saying that it made for a way more solid and reliable system, compared to an internal adjustment scope. I don't buy that.
-It is huge and felt heavy. (1.9 lbs for a TR vs 0.6 lbs for an ACOG TA31 or 1.45 lbs for a 1-8 CQBSS.)

What I am worried about:
-Zero shift issues. After the C79 and Spectre DR zero shift issues, I am weary of any first gen Elcan product.


Conclusion:
It is not cheap at ~$3100, but competitively priced compared to other offerings in that category. It is huge and heavy and they can't seem to get away from the external adjustment on the base. I still want one for SR and CQB matches and if reliable I might entertain one at work for the SS/DMR guy in my section. If I could only have one scope and money was no object, I would go for the Leupold CQBSS 1.1-8x24mm, for now.

 

[wildphil24]

Thank you for your post.
About the weight of the CQBSS, does it includes a one piece mount?

 

[jparent]

Hopefully the lessons learned from the POI shift on the first Gen DR's (which were mostly WAAAY overblown) won't apply (which i suspect it won't).

I want one!

 

[Miraclejoe]

About the weight of the CQBSS, does it includes a one piece mount?

Probably not, I picked the numbers from the website.

 

[Miraclejoe]

Has anyone shot with one of these? No one I know has taken one to the range.

 

[Miraclejoe]

Has anyone shot with one of these? No one I know has taken one to the range.

Anyone?

 

[Ericshawn777]

Don't listen to all the crap about poa shift. I have both the dr 1-4 and the new tr. The arms mounts are extremely sold. As well as the new tr mount. Wish it was a qd mount but still solid with lock washers.

The glass and recticles arm amazing.

Here are some pics of my tr and dr with size comparison and mounted on my AR15

 

[Got Juice?]

Wow. Talk about HUGE

 

[onetwentyish]

Here is my TR mounted on my MH, unfortunately I do not have any range time with this set up yet. I am hoping to get a chance to go to Milo range ad get it properly zeroed 1st, but that is a 3+hr drive one way.

In playing around with it I am very impressed with the design, quality, and the overwhelming feel of durability compared to other similarly tubed optics. The only downsides I see to it are the weight (all that durable construction has a downside!) and also the field of view has a significant blind spot around it unlike other similar offerings such as the Vortex Razor 1-6 gen 2 where the rim of the scope is almost indistinguishable when looking through the scope.

That said I think this has huge potential as a DMR rifle scope.

 

[beltfed]

The Elcan TR is too heavy, bulky and that 1,3,9 power is dubious for the money.
I just don't see it gaining much traction with all of the quality variables out there (the whole vortex thing aside).
There is a whole world missed between 3 and 9 power as well...

I'm partial (still) to the Nightforce NXS line (awesome value for money) which I think offers equal quality glass to Elcan. Slap a small RDS on a 2.5x10 NXS and save yourself quite a bit of coin.

 

[onetwentyish]

The only downsides I see to it are the weight (all that durable construction has a downside!) and also the field of view has a significant blind spot around it unlike other similar offerings such as the Vortex Razor 1-6 gen 2 where the rim of the scope is almost indistinguishable when looking through the scope.

Similar offerings like a vortex?? Lol. You can't even compare the two. It's like comparing a Benz to a Kia.

Similar in features, not necessarily quality. Hense my decision.

They are not similar at all. So don't mislead people comparing the two.

They are similar. They are both low power scopes. The both retail above $2k, they both have better glass than 80% of other products out there. But this is all besides the point, because these are not the features I was comparing. The feature I was comparing was how much of your view was shadowed around the field of view through the scope. And I hate to break it to you, but the Specter TR fails miserably in this aspect, where as a cheaper scope like the Razor kills it. Now granted I feel the reason that Elcan does poorly in this area is do to trade offs that make the internl 1/3/9x change possible with out the standard scope dialing procedures.

Your the only one who walked away with the impression I was directly comparing the 2, especially after I further clarified my position between the 2. You sound like you are one of 2 people: a) an Elcan shill, b) a troll who has no experience even holding either of the optics mentioned.

I personally am an Elcan fanboy, and they are hard to beat products. But that does not mean under any circumstances that they do everything the best or are the best optic for every use. As such, this feature or in this case negative aspect should be mentioned to prospective buyers.