0nslaught Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 (edited) Agreed with the high mount or the optic it self. it doesnt just look right on longer/bigger rifles. it belongs on a mp7 or a cqb etc, the rifle looks naked!. but nice rifle none the less. im thinking if it was moved back where it was above the magwell or something it would look better Edited December 13, 2008 by 0nslaught Link to post Share on other sites
Mig1 Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 It needs the high mount to cowitness with the BUIS. Link to post Share on other sites
[BS]_MARS Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 I agree that it's not a looker but it's all go and no show. The high mount is required to not have to aim hella crazy. With it low you'd have to turn your head 90 degrees to get your eye to the optic. Also, the reason I run it up far it so the tube appears smaller so I see less of it. Link to post Share on other sites
The Crunchy Bunny Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 BTW, assuming thats the ACM replica AP Micro, if you buy the one on the high mount, you can also mount it low aswell? Link to post Share on other sites
blazed99 Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 Had to sell my G&G to pay the bills, but heres my Dboys Black Scar. Link to post Share on other sites
[BS]_MARS Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 BTW, assuming thats the ACM replica AP Micro, if you buy the one on the high mount, you can also mount it low aswell? Yes, it comes with both. I got mine from Dragonred airsoft. Link to post Share on other sites
thatoneguy92088 Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 My 249. It started as an MKII Link to post Share on other sites
Magsz Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 The low mount does NOT work on a Scar. It is WAAAYY too low. AP micros do look odd on the scar for some strange reason but the simple fact of the matter is that its an excellent optics platform so regardless of the fact that it doesnt look pro, its a stupidly functional optic. Function over form. Link to post Share on other sites
Mainspire Posted December 14, 2008 Report Share Posted December 14, 2008 The low mount does NOT work on a Scar. It is WAAAYY too low. AP micros do look odd on the scar for some strange reason but the simple fact of the matter is that its an excellent optics platform so regardless of the fact that it doesnt look pro, its a stupidly functional optic. Function over form. Yeah, they're good, but the EOTech 553 beats the hell out of it. Link to post Share on other sites
Mig1 Posted December 14, 2008 Report Share Posted December 14, 2008 (edited) In looks. But the military has been having lots of problems with them. They literally recalled them from the field at one point. EDIT: To make this post on-topic, I'll add that I think the T-1 looks fine. If you go back a few pages (page 37), you'll find mine with an M4 replica on top. Edited December 14, 2008 by Mig1 Link to post Share on other sites
Mainspire Posted December 14, 2008 Report Share Posted December 14, 2008 In looks. But the military has been having lots of problems with them. They literally recalled them from the field at one point. EDIT: To make this post on-topic, I'll add that I think the T-1 looks fine. If you go back a few pages (page 37), you'll find mine with an M4 replica on top. Source? In my experience, my 553 is one of the most rugged sights I have ever used. It's tough, sturdy, and gets the job done quite well, IMO. Link to post Share on other sites
Mig1 Posted December 14, 2008 Report Share Posted December 14, 2008 (edited) It's been all over the internet for nearly a year. It's been discussed on Lightfighter, AR-15, ProfessionalSoldiers. It should be common knowledge at this point. EDIT: I was going to say Google it, but I'll save you the trouble: Here's an official release from Eotech: http://www.eotech-inc.com/553modification.php Edited December 14, 2008 by Mig1 Link to post Share on other sites
Mainspire Posted December 14, 2008 Report Share Posted December 14, 2008 It's been all over the internet for nearly a year. It's been discussed on Lightfighter, AR-15, ProfessionalSoldiers. It should be common knowledge at this point. EDIT: I was going to say Google it, but I'll save you the trouble: Here's an official release from Eotech: http://www.eotech-inc.com/553modification.php Ouch. That would suck if your 553 shut off right in the middle of a firefight. Well, it sounds like they are fixing the issue. And this was how long ago? I got my 553 around August, so it is relatively new. Link to post Share on other sites
Magsz Posted December 15, 2008 Report Share Posted December 15, 2008 Ok so your sight is the most reliable sight you've used. Its been reliable after what...four months of use? Seriously man, really now... Do you even use it on a real rifle? Its fairly common knowledge with anyone that shoots seriously that eotechs are NOT as reliable as aimpoints, no ifs ands or buts. Most of the major shooting instructors endorse aimpoints over eotechs despite the fact that they stand to benefit greater financially if they're backing eotech. Eotechs are as popular as they are beause they spent a gajillion dollars on marketing to LE agencies and civilians that dont know any better. Back on topic. Mars, why the 14.5 inch barrel over the 10.5? For me, the scar seems a little weird with a longer barrel and i typically prefer assault rifles over sbr's. Link to post Share on other sites
Mainspire Posted December 15, 2008 Report Share Posted December 15, 2008 (edited) Ok so your sight is the most reliable sight you've used. Its been reliable after what...four months of use? Seriously man, really now... Do you even use it on a real rifle? Its fairly common knowledge with anyone that shoots seriously that eotechs are NOT as reliable as aimpoints, no ifs ands or buts. Most of the major shooting instructors endorse aimpoints over eotechs despite the fact that they stand to benefit greater financially if they're backing eotech. Eotechs are as popular as they are beause they spent a gajillion dollars on marketing to LE agencies and civilians that dont know any better. Back on topic. Mars, why the 14.5 inch barrel over the 10.5? For me, the scar seems a little weird with a longer barrel and i typically prefer assault rifles over sbr's. Jeez. You done calling me stupid for preferring one sight over another, buddy? Its all about what is comfortable to shoot with, but at the same time is effective. EOTechs are comfortable for me, and I can shoot effectively with them. Aimpoint, not so much. I tried an aimpoint on my SCAR for awhile and absolutely hated it. Its all user preferance, man. And yes, I do switch the EOTech back and forth from my SCAR to the family AR-15. Edited December 15, 2008 by Mainspire Link to post Share on other sites
[BS]_MARS Posted December 15, 2008 Report Share Posted December 15, 2008 Back on topic. Mars, why the 14.5 inch barrel over the 10.5? For me, the scar seems a little weird with a longer barrel and i typically prefer assault rifles over sbr's. I don't really see any advantage in running a shorter barrel in my situation. 99% of all airsoft I do is outdoors so it's of no benefit to reduce the size, it would only really serve to make the gun louder (which is a good thing). I also don't have a short tightbore and if I cut down my M4 length one it would be useless in the long barrel config. Link to post Share on other sites
Mig1 Posted December 15, 2008 Report Share Posted December 15, 2008 (edited) I run a PDI 6.01 285mm (MC51 length) in my CQC SCAR-L with a firefly hopup bucking. It's easily as accurate as any 14.5" AEG. I've had distinct advantages manoeuvring in very thick brush, and it is lighter and overall easier to swing around. EDIT: I believe the SOCOM warning letter and recall was back in March. Edited December 15, 2008 by Mig1 Link to post Share on other sites
Mainspire Posted December 15, 2008 Report Share Posted December 15, 2008 I run a PDI 6.01 285mm (MC51 length) in my CQC SCAR-L with a firefly hopup bucking. It's easily as accurate as any 14.5" AEG. I've had distinct advantages manoeuvring in very thick brush, and it is lighter and overall easier to swing around. EDIT: I believe the SOCOM warning letter and recall was back in March. I suppose for my situation, I generally use the 14.5 incher, because we play in woodland environments. Soon, though, a new SCAR is coming in the mail, because my current one has so many internal issues. However, the outer barrel unit is still usable, so I'll have that barrel set for the 10.5, and the new one set to 14.5. Then, I can easily switch from woodland to CQC whenever I need to. And yeah. I figured by now, any issues with the 553 would have been solved. My 553 was built quite a few months after, so I don't think I need to worry about anything. I promise I'll get some pics up as soon as the new SCAR comes. Link to post Share on other sites
Castle Bravo Posted December 15, 2008 Report Share Posted December 15, 2008 KA FAL PARA Link to post Share on other sites
Victory Posted December 16, 2008 Report Share Posted December 16, 2008 (edited) I hid the tip as Redwolf raped it. Not sure if I want to try to remove the orange, or paint over it. (And make the frame tan/FDE while I'm at it.) Didn't buy this as a skirmish pistol, no. And if I had, yep, I would have been disappointed. -Vic Edit: And yes, I added a filter. Only because the picture looked worse without it. Edited December 16, 2008 by Victory Link to post Share on other sites
thatoneguy92088 Posted December 16, 2008 Report Share Posted December 16, 2008 Didn't buy this as a skirmish pistol, no. And if I had, yep, I would have been disappointed. What is so bad about it? Power? Link to post Share on other sites
zentaurus Posted December 16, 2008 Report Share Posted December 16, 2008 replace the barrel and some green and it might do, victory. at least until marui gets off its *albatross*. Link to post Share on other sites
Victory Posted December 16, 2008 Report Share Posted December 16, 2008 (edited) The frame, I'm not sure which. Brown or Khaki? (I think this color chart's a bit...off...but it gives you an idea.) I'll do the controlls in Light Gray. -Vic Edit: Power, construction, and the overall quality. I'd label all as "Meh." Edited December 16, 2008 by Victory Link to post Share on other sites
thatoneguy92088 Posted December 16, 2008 Report Share Posted December 16, 2008 The frame, I'm not sure which. Brown or Khaki? I'll do the controlls in Light Gray. -Vic Id reverse it Light gray frame khaki controls Link to post Share on other sites
The Crunchy Bunny Posted December 16, 2008 Report Share Posted December 16, 2008 Definatly Khaki Vic. It should look sweet. To all STAR FNC owner, I have a couple questions: 1. What is your biggest gripe about the weapon? 2. What internal parts are compatable with standard aftermarket parts? What Aren't? 3. Do STAR Green Label PMAGS (specifiaclly the 20 rounders) fit and feed? 4. Do you have a accurate Chrono reading for the stock weapon? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts