Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 10/24/2002 8:30:07 PM EDT
I have made my mind up that I am getting the Aimpoint Comp ML2. I am going to mount it (forward) on my Bushmaster AR-15 with a fixed handle. I definitely want it to co-witness with my iron sights. I was looking at getting the A.R.M.S. #39 A2, but I see that Aimpoint makes a forward carry handle mount also. This requires the Aimpoint Quick Release Picatinny Ring Mount. Is the A.R.M.S. #39 A2 the same as the Aimpoint forward carry handle mount? And what exactly is a Picattinny Ring Mount and is is required for an Aimpoint ML2? Any help or suggestions would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Nick
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 9:01:05 PM EDT
Get the ARMS# 39 w/ ARMS# 22M68 and you will have a perfect co-wit. and top of the line mounts. I just got mine from Wes at http://mstn.biz/

I would post some pics. but still trying to figure out how?@#!
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 8:13:36 AM EDT
Thanks for the help Tzyck. I will look into that thanks. If anyone else has any other ideas I would appreciate it, but it it looks like Tzyck has a good idea.
Link Posted: 10/26/2002 1:00:19 AM EDT

The only thing I would add to Tzyck's post is the question, what kind of handguards do you have? If you have a shorty upper with M4 handguards you will need the P.R.I. gooseneck.

The A.R.M.S. and the Aimpoint apparently don't work.

I use the P.R.I. mount with the A.R.M.S. #22M68 on my M4 and it works great.

Cheers,
Chris
Link Posted: 10/26/2002 12:12:15 PM EDT
Chris, I have the standard A2 handguards. I decided to go with the Aimpoint brand AR-15/M-16 forward handle mount with the QRP quick release rings. I would have liked to have gotten the A.R.M.S. #39 A2 with #22 M68 but they were nearly double the price. So I figured to just go with Aimpoint's own mounts. Thanks again for you help Chris and Tzyck.

--Nick
Link Posted: 10/26/2002 7:52:24 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/26/2002 8:17:37 PM EDT by Tzyck]
The ARMS# 39 will not work with M4 handguards. They seem to be a little to big in diameter. I would recomend calling Wes at MSTN with any questions. He is very up to date on all configurations of mounts for the Aimpoint.

There are some good pics. of different mounts including a #39 under the post: AR Pic Post by edblevi.
Link Posted: 10/28/2002 4:19:17 PM EDT
I just received my Aimpoint ML2 and although I haven't sighted it in yet, I already love it. I used Aimpoint's mounts to mount it onto my AR-15. I would definitely recommend Aimpoint to anyone who has the money to purchase one. Thanks again for the help guys.

P.S. I purchased the Aimpoint and hardware from Riflescopes.com
Link Posted: 10/28/2002 5:01:49 PM EDT
The Aimpoint gooseneck mount had nothing but problems with the military of not holding zero as it only attached in one place in the carry handle and not also in the front. The #39 does work very well on the hand guards you have and will also work with the M4 if you remove the top oversize hand guard that you don't need in the first place since the hand is not up there. You won't have to worry about it being rugged and reliable as they are in use in tough places and doing just fine.
Good shootin, Jack
Link Posted: 10/28/2002 10:20:26 PM EDT
The ARMS mount locks in at 2 points as opposed to many gooseneck mounts (which I beleve includes the Aimpoint mount) that only utilizes the hole in the carry handle. The ARMS mount also has a piece that secures to the front of the carry handle, making it rock solid.
Link Posted: 10/29/2002 10:16:29 AM EDT
Good point 3rdtk and Vinnie about the A.R.M.S. #39 being supported in two places rather than one place like the Aimpoint brand mount. I noticed that but the main reason I purchased the Aimpoint brand mount was PRICE$$$. I saved well over $100 by going that route and I figured I'd give it a shot since I spent all the money on the Aimpoint ML2. But I will test it out and if it does not hold a zero then I will definitely invest in the A.R.M.S. #39.

Thanks for the recommendation guys,
Nick
Link Posted: 10/29/2002 6:33:59 PM EDT
I bought the ARMS# 39 because it was the sturdiest of all the carry handle mounts. I can't tell you how impressed I was when I first held it. It is also the only mount that uses two locks (that I know of).

If you are planning to USE your rifle in serious situations you may want to rethink your mount. It sure would suck to be off by 2" at 25yrd / God only knows at 100?

I'm not here to worry you, but you should always buy the best when the travel of your projectile is concerned.

I hope your mount works fine for u.



Link Posted: 10/29/2002 7:41:31 PM EDT
I bought the aimpoint gooseneck and railgrabber mount, to mount my M2. I bought them over the arms versions, due to cost. They however work for me, and have held zero as far as I can tell. You have to realize that this is a red dot sight, minor changes in zero will really have no great effect. The gooseneck mount fits in the carry handle snuggly with no side to side play. There are little tabs on the mount that straddle each side of the carry handle at the front to keep it from getting twisted. Granted the tabs are pretty small and would not hold up to a lot of rough treatment. The play in the mount fore and aft is fairly small, less than a 1/16 of an inch. As long at you keep the thumbscrew tight, the gooseneck mount will not move around on you.

The railgrabber mount uses a torque limited nut to tighten it to the gooseneck mount, so that zero will not be affected. At the ranges a red dot sight will be used, what very small compliance there may be in the system, it has not noticeably affected my zero. One possible drawback to the railgrabber mount, is that the torque limited knob stick out kind of far, much more than a throw lever on a arms mount. I haven't had any problems with it snagging on things, but it does look kind of odd.

I was able to successfully mount my gooseneck mount over M4 handguards. There isn't much of a gap between them, but it fits perfectly. Even if it doesn't fit, it shouldn't take too much to dremel off to get it to fit.

It comes down to this, if you plan on dropping your rifle on the ground repeatedly, using it as a club, or just beating the hell out of for whatever reason, get the arms setup, the aimpoint setup will probably not hold up as well. If you want to have a slick, high-speed, setup that you can show off to your friends, get the arms setup. If your like me, who doesn't care about looks, who transports his rifle in a case, and keeps it slung on a 3 point sling when in use, the chance that it gets hit hard is pretty slim, in which case aimpoint setup will work fine.
Link Posted: 10/29/2002 8:30:20 PM EDT
You made some very good points Jason. Everything you said is true. I don't plan to use my AR-15 as a club or go tramping through thick overgrowth. Most of my shooting will be in the rough, open country of west Texas. Like I said, I purchased the Aimpoint gooseneck and railgrabber for the same reason you did, it costs a buttload less than the A.R.M.S. I think I'll be fine for now with Aimpoint's own setup and if I have to, I will purchase A.R.M.S.
Top Top