Armory Sponsor
Posted: 9/4/2007 1:22:49 PM EDT
|
How well do you like it and where's the best price? Thanks! |
For the price ($179.00), the universal adapter is working quite well. Hope this helpsar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=7&f=23&t=304452  |
Holy monkey that is quite an optic setup you got going on there 
|
| I would think that if it's built to survive an ejection, a harsh landing it should be alright. I've thought about trading it for a 2nd gen weapon mountable optic, just not sure right now. ( 2nd gen cuz they cheaper and I'm not rich). Recoil should be a non issue. My AR15 is a pussy cat and my Savage has a good can on it. |
MY THOUGHTS EXACTLY!! |
I would be very careful in your path thinking of a harsh landing/ejection vs. the ungodly recoil of a high caliber bolt gun. I'd hate to see you ruin your ENVIS. Monoculars are not made for heavy recoil rifles. I do not recommend a monocular mounted on a rifle above a .223 or 6.8SPC. Hope this helps. Vic |
Let me add to this. In the MUM and the PVS 14 ( I have been inside both but not an ENVIS) the tube housing is plastic. In both cases it is an injection molded plastic at that. So you have the tube in this cylinder with a metal (I have seen plastic) retaining ring that threads into this plastic housing and holds the tube. While these are quite strong, they can break. Now the AB Nightvision NVM monos are machined out of delrin and the threads are cut nice and deep, very precisely. Each mono is done one at a time, by hand on a lathe. These are much stronger. In this instance I might be willing to try it. In the Raptor for instance, the image tube is in a metal cylinder and the surface area of the retaining ring threads is about 500% larger than any mono. Vic is right, most monos are for lower recoiling weapons. Remember the PVS 14 was designed for use on the M-16 and the SAW. IPSC_GUY SIERRA II ALPHA |
Armory Sponsor