# ironsight for c7



## Jarnhamar (25 Oct 2006)

Hey all

I'm trying to find something but I'm having difficulty, my google skills suck.

I'm looking for iron sights for the C7 and C8. Either the M16 like handle/sight or just a rear sight (not the issued reflex sight) that fits on the weaver or pictanny rails. (What ARE they called anyways?)

Can anyone refer me to a good website for these?

Very appriciated, thank you


----------



## RHFC_piper (25 Oct 2006)

Google 'BUIS' (Back up iron sight)

Heres a link to get you started:
http://www.talonarms.com/talonarms/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=42

enjoy.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Oct 2006)

Thanks man,

Mcdonald  (PWOR type)  won't pretend he lost his eotech and give it to me 

Good to see you made it through too.


----------



## RHFC_piper (25 Oct 2006)

Flawed Design said:
			
		

> Thanks man,
> 
> Mcdonald  (PWOR type)  won't pretend he lost his eotech and give it to me
> 
> Good to see you made it through too.



'Cause he can't... It's still in Afghanistan, and he's not.  Cheers.

(besides, they're junk.. they break too easily and consume the entire rail... no magnification... I could go on.. but I know theres a lot of fans here...)


----------



## MG34 (25 Oct 2006)

RHFC_piper said:
			
		

> 'Cause he can't... It's still in Afghanistan, and he's not.  Cheers.
> 
> (besides, they're junk.. they break too easily and consume the entire rail... no magnification... I could go on.. but I know theres a lot of fans here...)



 Yes there are fans of the EOTech here, they are excellent for their intended purpose (in fact better than most) which is close quarter engagements of not more than 200m. It's when they are used by folks or organizations that have no understanding of that concept that preceived problems arise,but have more to do with training than any failures of the sight . That being said any optic requires a BUIS the key word here being "iron" as in metal not the plastic piece of crap as issued. The ARMS #40 is a good BUIS but will require some modification to fit the non-NATO standard rail on the C7/C8..COLT CANADA ARE YOU LISTENING...The KAC 600m sight is goods as well,I wouldn't (and don't) deploy without one or the other. 
 Stay away from cheap detactable carry handles and BUIS as they are usually not up to specs in the first place and will not allow the rifle to be zeroed properly,as the sight/carry handle is usually sitting lower than the front sight.


----------



## Big Red (25 Oct 2006)

RHFC_piper said:
			
		

> (besides, they're junk.. they break too easily and consume the entire rail... no magnification... I could go on.. but I know theres a lot of fans here...)



The Eotech is designed for CQB, hence no magnification required. For longer work get a Short Dot, ACOG, or slap a magnifier on the rail behind the Eotech.  

As for durability, the Eotech can take as much abuse as any other battery operated combat optic out there, maybe you recieved a bad lot.

I am running Troy front and rear BUIS on my M4 right now and love them. I'm not sure if you'd need to do a little work on the rear to make it fit the non-spec 1913 picatinny on your C7/C8.  As MG34 said KAC 600m and A.R.M.S. #40 are also good options.


----------



## RHFC_piper (25 Oct 2006)

I'm not saying the Eotech is absolutly useless, thy're great for CQB... but how many times does a CF soldier conduct CQB alone.  We're never in a situation where we're only going to be within 100m or so.  Even in Afghanistan, guys in my coy who gave up their ELCAN (which are absolute junk) had problems when they started engaging targets out to 300 and 400 meters... which happened every time we did a convoy and got bumped... so every day we were out of the wire.  Even in a CQB environment (eg. Panjwayi) some guys were trying to engage targets out to 400m with their Eotechs.  With that said, the issued Iron sights are junk and the nubs on top of the ELCAN are junk... the best compromise I've seen is an ACOG with a mini red dot CQB on top.  I would personally recomend that combo for anyone serious enough to drop $1600 on a tac sight system.  Its the best of both worlds; I'm guessing I don't need to discribe why... just imagine an Eotech on an ACOG.. BAM.. Best sight ever. 

As for the durability thing... might have been a bad batch, but I've seen a lot break under conditions where an ACOG or even an ELCAN would be fine (just out of allignment).  Also, some SF guys (both Canadian and American) I talked to over there didn't like them much... but that may be a personal choice thing.

My only other issues with them is the ammount of space they consume on a rail (most of it) which makes it hard to mount any other type of magnifying optics with out a long rail adaptor, and the whole Battery operated deal. (some guys batteries died just before going into operations, contradictory to the idea that Eotechs have a long battery life)

Personally, If I had the bling to spend, I would get the ACOG with CQB red dot on top combo... and If I just wanted a sight for what ever, I go with one that has just a little magnification over one with none.

As much as fighting in CQB is the big fad, you still need to be able to hit targets at range... why kill close what you can kill far.

But it does come down to personal choice.


----------



## MG34 (25 Oct 2006)

Good points ,my guys with EOTechs like them espescially in the city where we are currently deployed ,however on OP Medusa (all phases) there were no issues with engaging targets out beyond 300m with them as I didn't allow it. The max effective range of the C7 is 175m give or take to still have  good terminal effects with our issued ammunition,it's around 75m with the C8,beyond the effective ranges of the rifles and carbines is C9, GPMG and 60mm territory. Unfortunately this has been lost on alot of folks in leadership,who allow troops to bang away at enemy forces well beyond the effective range of their weapons,it's a morale issue I suppose. Most of the effective "target neutralization"we did was with the 60mm,25mm and C6,the riflemans's job is to support those weapons and ensure their security .
 The ACOG is a wonderful piece of kit I have one on my C7A2 right now I would recommend them as a total replacement for the POS Elcan if I were the king of the CF,but that ain't gonna happen soon.  but an adequate BUIS is still needed as any optic will fail.
   In a controlled range setting I have engaged targets out to 400m with an EOTech but would never attempt it in the heat of battle. As for the real estate the sight takes up once again the CF in all it's wisdom has totally screwed the pooch as far as small arms go,the EOTech is intended to be a long eye relief optic,meaning it should be mounted as far forward as possible,on a weapon equipped with an adequate rail interface system this is easily done, not so on the C7/C8 family. The best option would be to have the rail system issued but once again when pigs fly. I know of at least a dozen troops over here who have forked out the cash to get the rails or some method of mounting the EOTech to it's best advantage,it's unfortunate that troops are having to go out of pocket,but that is the reality of the situation.
  Batteries dieing in the optics is a chain of command issue,I have my guys swapping out batteries prior to every operation regardless if the optics were even turned on, we have never had a shortage of AA batteries in theatre yet, it's a simple " Prep for Battle" step.
  That's how I see it from my experience in Panjawai and other places


----------



## RHFC_piper (25 Oct 2006)

MG34 said:
			
		

> Good points ,my guys with EOTechs like them espescially in the city where we are currently deployed ,however on OP Medusa (all phases) there were no issues with engaging targets out beyond 300m with them as I didn't allow it. The max effective range of the C7 is 175m give or take to still have  good terminal effects with our issued ammunition,it's around 75m with the C8,beyond the effective ranges of the rifles and carbines is C9, GPMG and 60mm territory. Unfortunately this has been lost on alot of folks in leadership,who allow troops to bang away at enemy forces well beyond the effective range of their weapons,it's a morale issue I suppose. Most of the effective "target neutralization"we did was with the 60mm,25mm and C6,the riflemans's job is to support those weapons and ensure their security .



I agree.. When we first went in, we were engaged at 25 m or less, I ended up taking my ELCAN off and using my iron sight. But there were cases when we were being fired at from ranges greater than 200m (TIC on way to Wilson) and our bird gunner was hitting targets with his ACOG better then our SGT with his ELCAN.

Our SGT even refused to take an Eotech for himself sighting that we may end up engaging past it's useful range, and we did during some tics. He also refused to take a C8 because of the drop in mussle volicity due to the shortened barrel, which was pointed out to us by the PPCLI's that we did hand over with.

But you are absolutely right, the C7s / C8s primary role is to protect the support weapons and LAVs, theres no question there.



			
				MG34 said:
			
		

> The ACOG is a wonderful piece of kit I have one on my C7A2 right now I would recommend them as a total replacement for the POS Elcan if I were the king of the CF,but that ain't gonna happen soon.  but an adequate BUIS is still needed as any optic will fail.



I agree again. As I said above, I ended up using my iron sight the first day of Op Medusa, and I wish I had spent the money on an actual metal ironsight that could be adjusted better... oh well, hind sight is 20/20.



			
				MG34 said:
			
		

> In a controlled range setting I have engaged targets out to 400m with an EOTech but would never attempt it in the heat of battle. As for the real estate the sight takes up once again the CF in all it's wisdom has totally screwed the pooch as far as small arms go,the EOTech is intended to be a long eye relief optic,meaning it should be mounted as far forward as possible,on a weapon equipped with an adequate rail interface system this is easily done, not so on the C7/C8 family. The best option would be to have the rail system issued but once again when pigs fly. I know of at least a dozen troops over here who have forked out the cash to get the rails or some method of mounting the EOTech to it's best advantage,it's unfortunate that troops are having to go out of pocket,but that is the reality of the situation.



Yeah... I was one of those troops who forked out mass amouts of money to improve the C7A2.
I spent about $300 on rails, mounts, vertical grip, sling, etc. to improve the weapons useability, not including all the extra junk like drop bag, chest rig (yeah, I'm a kit monster). Anyway, the A2 is definitely in desperate need of a rail system on the forestock.
And again I agree, the mounting of a CQB sight like the Eotech is key.  The SF guys we ran into, who used CQB sight similar to the Eotechs, had theirs mounted on the forestock as opposed to the flat top mount.  They also had BUIS's and usually an ACOG or another type of magnified sight system.

Either way, the deficiencies in the system, I'm sure, will come out in AAR's and I hope they will be taken seriously as it is the kind of stuff that saves lives.



			
				MG34 said:
			
		

> Batteries dieing in the optics is a chain of command issue,I have my guys swapping out batteries prior to every operation regardless if the optics were even turned on, we have never had a shortage of AA batteries in theatre yet, it's a simple " Prep for Battle" step.
> That's how I see it from my experience in Panjawai and other places



We definitely didn't have a battery shortage in my boat... And we did have sufficient batteries and changes before operations, it was those odd ball TICs we got into that guys would notice they're Eotechs, flashlights (with the IR cover on), PACs and MNVG had been left on and were out of juice. I made it a point to check my battery operated gear regularly after the first night TIC we had and my MNVG were dead... freaked me out a little.

The way I see it, sights are a personal choice. I really didn't like the Eotechs, but I found the CQB sight on my section mates ACOG (optional feature) was very usefull.  Where some guys swore by the Eotech... Meh.. what ever works I guess.


----------



## midget-boyd91 (25 Oct 2006)

Just a question, but would it make sense to have a modification done to the A2 so that the ELCAN can be pulled off and replaced by an iron sight with just a quick pull and click? That way most of, if not all, could carry an iron sight capability on them at all times while in the field at the same time they have an ELCAN ready.


----------



## RHFC_piper (25 Oct 2006)

If you mount the issued iron sight just in front of (or behind.. personal choice) the ELCAN, you can remove the ELCAN anytime and use the Iron sight... you just have to zero both which involves getting your hands on an adjustment tool for the issued Iron sight... I think theres 2 in the entire CF.. j/k.. they're just hard to find... but you can use a multi tool

Either way, you can mount both and just remove the ELCAN when needed.


----------



## Thorvald (25 Oct 2006)

Out of curiosity, has anyone evaluated the new Elcan SpecterDR?   (I don't think it is a released product yet, just curious if anyone has seen/tested a pre-production unit)

It states a simple switch can change the mode from no mag to 4x mag.  Best of both worlds in a single scope (or so it would appear in the specs, I'm certainly not qualified to evaluate it).  This may (huge "may" here) suit your purpose.

Specs from the website:


> - Switches instantly from close combat (1x) to telescopic (4x)
> - Eye relief (cheekweld) and bore sighting remain constant
> - Large, low light exit pupil remains constant
> - High efficiency coatings for extended low light performance
> ...



 http://elcan.phpinternet.com/specter_DR/index.html


They even have a "fancy" Flash demo to show how it supposedly works:

http://elcan.phpinternet.com/specter_DR/DFOVDemo.html


----------



## PhilB (25 Oct 2006)

I-6 can give much more info but in general I have heard widely varying things about it. Ive generally heard negative comments in reference to the mounting system but good things about the overall operation. I have been seriously looking into this sight as I dont particularily like the ACOG/Dr Optic combo. Hopefullly if I go back on TF 1-08 the kinks will be worked out and it will be avail for purchase. 

As a side note because it has been bugging me. To guys that are looking at posts of all the kit troops are buying and balking at the cost, and to the guys that are trying to upgrade their kit on the cheap; If you are planning to go to Afghanistan your life is at risk, daily your place your life and the life of those that are counting on you in the hands of your equipment and training. Is your life worth the cost of a 1000 dollar sight and another thousand dollars worth of chest rig, wpns mods, etc? IMHO FUCK YES! Things that are an inconvenience while trg in Canada can be deadly overseas. Spend the money, do the research, ask questions, buy good quality gear. You'll thank yourself in the end.

P.S. If you buy good quality kit up front you can generally sell it once you get home. I have sold almost all of the kit I used in afghanistan on here, and on LF forum. 

All of the above is just my 2 cents, take it or leave it


----------



## KevinB (25 Oct 2006)

USSOC has basically scrapped the Spectre DR due to mount issues...


IF troops knew the trajectory of their weapons with the C8/EOTECH552 it would not be such an issue -- or IF the CF used a proper 50m zero for iron sighted / reflex sighted weapons (gives +/-3 " from 0-250m from a C8SFW)

 The EOTECH IF properly placed on the rail will not take up all the space -- however it was configured with the idea that weapons would have a RAS that was the same height as the receiver - the plastic handguard cause problems due to the increased height over the receiver rail.  BACK TO WE NEED A RAS...
  IF this is not an optic the Larue riser is necessary to place the EOTECH high enough to clear the plastic handguards (and also provides a nice rise to clear the irons and put them in the bottom 1/3 of the viewing window -- by dropping the head back into the irons the dot will co-witness dont worry)

While I think the S&B Short Dot is the heat -- the TA31DOC ACOG is also a rugged and versatile choice.
  
The Troy BIS is a good system -- and the only one I current buy or deploy with for a carbine.


----------



## COBRA-6 (25 Oct 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> The EOTECH IF properly placed on the rail will not take up all the space -- however it was configured with the idea that weapons would have a RAS that was the same height as the receiver - the plastic handguard cause problems due to the increased height over the receiver rail.  BACK TO WE NEED A RAS...
> IF this is not an optic the Larue riser is necessary to place the EOTECH high enough to clear the plastic handguards (and also provides a nice rise to clear the irons and put them in the bottom 1/3 of the viewing window -- by dropping the head back into the irons the dot will co-witness dont worry)



This is what I have on my Cobra Carbine, it works perfectly.


----------



## medic269 (29 Jul 2007)

Ive been looking around on here, google, and the EL for a publication on proper mounting and zeroing of the BUIS for the 'A2 and I'm coming up short.  Anyone have better insight as to where I could find anything? Thanks in advance.

Chris


----------



## DirtyDog (29 Jul 2007)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> USSOC has basically scrapped the Spectre DR due to mount issues...
> 
> 
> IF troops knew the trajectory of their weapons with the C8/EOTECH552 it would not be such an issue -- or IF the CF used a proper 50m zero for iron sighted / reflex sighted weapons (gives +/-3 " from 0-250m from a C8SFW)
> ...



Who sells the Short Dot in Canada?  And what will it cost....$2K?  What makes it a better option for a mag. sight then an ACOG?  Just better quality optics?

I'm a little confused as to what your saying about Eotech mounting.  RAS level with the receiver rail would be best, ok (does KAC sell a RAS that will fit without taking off the handguard cap and slip ring?), but what is the other option?  I don't understand how you mean the handguards get in the way.  It has been a long day though..........



			
				Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> The Troy BIS is a good system -- and the only one I current buy or deploy with for a carbine.



Would the Troy BIS be a good choice on the 20inch barreled C7?


----------



## DirtyDog (29 Jul 2007)

RHFC_piper said:
			
		

> ...the best compromise I've seen is an ACOG with a mini red dot CQB on top.  I would personally recomend that combo for anyone serious enough to drop $1600 on a tac sight system.  Its the best of both worlds; I'm guessing I don't need to discribe why... just imagine an Eotech on an ACOG.. BAM.. Best sight ever.



I remember it being said here (by I-6 I think) that there can be muscle memory issues when having two sight systems at diffrent "levels' and switching between them.  I can totally understand that but if it was something you could train for or overcome I always thought that combo would be the simplest and best answer.

Would recticle would one want when buying the TA31DOC or another ACOG?


----------



## FullMetalParka (9 Aug 2007)

Unfortunately, your choices do seem pretty limited because of the non-NATO-standard rails on the C7/C8 receiver (as already pointed out.) Perhaps someone sells an adaptor of some type? All that aside, if I could find an adaptor, I would probably go with an EOTech 551 or 552 for close combat situations (nice and open, allows a wider range of vision than the standard M16-style irons or an Aimpoint. For longer distances, an ACOG with the dot reticle does seem like the best option. I'm way too cheap to afford one, so I can't personally vouch for the quality, but from what I've heard they're rock solid. But, I can vouch for the quality of LaRue mounts. They're amazing! They keep their zero, they're strong, and they've been proven in places like Iraq and Afghanistan with the Americans. I know Mark LaRue from another gunboard (AR15.com) and I know he has discounts and other stuff for active US servicemembers. You could ask him what he could offer you in his personal forum: http://ar15.com/forums/forum.html?b=2&f=219


----------



## MG34 (9 Aug 2007)

Larue doesn't ship to Canada, the ACOG is rock solid if you can find one go for it. As for BUIS the idiotic Weaver rail on the C7/C8 does limit your options but with a modification to the sight you can use ARMs#40/40L and others, I have used cut down carry handles to great effect,as well the Knight's Armament 600m BUIS has been used by others. The piece of crap plastic sight issued should be a last resort, or used by those who are misguided enough to think that the Army will provide adequate kit


----------

