Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Posted: 4/1/2006 4:28:36 PM EDT
Does anyone have a pic of an Aimpoint mounted to a carryhandle using the A.R.M.S. # 16? More importantly; is it comfortable regarding cheekweld and eye relief assuming a nose-to-charging handle style shooter?

Thanks in advance.
Link Posted: 4/1/2006 4:51:38 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/1/2006 5:00:00 PM EDT by QUIB]
This topic comes up at least once a week! And I’ll say it again, I like it just fine. It’s not too high for me or my son who runs an Aimpoint clone on his carry handle.

Last weeks question: www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=18&t=274818

Now, again "Let loose the CH mounted optics NAZIs!"







Link Posted: 4/1/2006 5:31:59 PM EDT
And, just like last week... Mounting the optic on the carry handle is a mistake for most but not all people, for several reasons including the following:
1. The cheek weld or lack thereof, is too high. That is, unless you have facial features that closely resemble Jay Leno or John Kerry and enjoy your chin being your anchor point.
2. The use of a carry handle mount doesn't allow for co-witnessing in any desirable form.
3. The use of the iron sights for back up purposes is greatly diminished (if not eliminated) even if the mount has some "tunnel" for using them.
Some people like them but they are very few and very far between. Do as you please but it is really a poor choice when one considers the low cost of flat-top uppers these days. Furthermore, one could sell there A2 or A1 upper, if they choose, and almsot break even on the flat-top upper purchase.
Link Posted: 4/1/2006 6:44:40 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dxdgenert:
And, just like last week... Mounting the optic on the carry handle is a mistake for most but not all people



Well I agree with you there, on the “most people” part. But this past Thursdays shoot just reaffirmed my belief in the CH mounted Aimpoint. And I'm FAR from the John Kerry profile type!
Link Posted: 4/1/2006 7:27:00 PM EDT
Thanks for the pics....and the sarcasm
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 2:21:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By buddyhoohaw:
Thanks for the pics....and the sarcasm



Your welcome, and the sarcasm was not meant for you. It's meant for the optics nazis who always slam this type of Aimpoint set up when the topic comes up.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 3:59:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By QUIB:

Originally Posted By buddyhoohaw:
Thanks for the pics....and the sarcasm



Your welcome, and the sarcasm was not meant for you. It's meant for the optics nazis who always slam this type of Aimpoint set up when the topic comes up.



No worries. BTW......nice carbines

Cheers.
Link Posted: 4/3/2006 12:31:46 PM EDT
I FIND THOSE WHITE VELCRO SNEAKERS HORRIBLY UNTACTICAL. hock.gif

OF COURSE, TACTICAL IS WAY TOO OVERUSED IN SELLING GEAR TO RECREATIONAL SHOOTERS.


I HOPE YOU GUYS CAUGHT ON THAT I HAVE A BENT SENSE OF HUMOR
Link Posted: 4/3/2006 6:04:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By HerrJaegermeister:
I FIND THOSE WHITE VELCRO SNEAKERS HORRIBLY UNTACTICAL.

OF COURSE, TACTICAL IS WAY TOO OVERUSED IN SELLING GEAR TO RECREATIONAL SHOOTERS.


I HOPE YOU GUYS CAUGHT ON THAT I HAVE A BENT SENSE OF HUMOR



My wife calls those my Grandpa tennis shoes.
Link Posted: 4/4/2006 9:08:43 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/4/2006 1:05:49 PM EDT
Just a FYI for those considering this setup.

Assuming a 3.75" HOB and M193.

If you don't mind +/- 4" for a trajectory. A 50y near zero gives you a 300y far zero and a usable range of 340 yards or so. Max height is 4.6" at 175y. Not a precise trajectory, but good enough for center-of-mass hits.

Note zeroing at 60y gives you +/- 3" from 10y out to 300y (far zero is 260yards).
Link Posted: 4/4/2006 2:02:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/4/2006 2:03:29 PM EDT by QUIB]

Originally Posted By Forest:
Just a FYI for those considering this setup.

Assuming a 3.75" HOB and M193.

If you don't mind +/- 4" for a trajectory. A 50y near zero gives you a 300y far zero and a usable range of 340 yards or so. Max height is 4.6" at 175y. Not a precise trajectory, but good enough for center-of-mass hits.

Note zeroing at 60y gives you +/- 3" from 10y out to 300y (far zero is 260yards).



Thanks Forest! It'll be interesting to compare your data with mine, I have yet to engage targets past 50m with this set up.
Link Posted: 4/4/2006 2:03:12 PM EDT
Hey QUIB,

Couple questions....I like your guns first off! What rail do you use on them? Does the thumbnut holtd them securely in place? Also, can you take the whole assembly off, then re-install, and not lose zero?....proabably not.

I just ordered the one from Centerfire...... Think its any good?www.centerfiresystems.com/miva/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=CSI&Product_Code=MNTAR101&Category_Code=ARACC

thanks alot
Link Posted: 4/4/2006 2:07:28 PM EDT

Originally Posted By M4_man_223:
Hey QUIB,

Couple questions....I like your guns first off! What rail do you use on them? Does the thumbnut holtd them securely in place? Also, can you take the whole assembly off, then re-install, and not lose zero?....proabably not.

I just ordered the one from Centerfire...... Think its any good?www.centerfiresystems.com/miva/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=CSI&Product_Code=MNTAR101&Category_Code=ARACC

thanks alot



I’m using the ARMS #2 mount. The nut holds it very secure. Haven’t tried R & R with this set up, don’t see a need to remove it.

That mount in your link would probably work just fine. I have a similar ARMS #2 copy on my sons rifle and it works.
Link Posted: 4/4/2006 2:51:57 PM EDT
I know you didnt ask but I really like the ARMS 39A2.
please disregard the M1A and the G17 in the pic
Top Top