Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 11/13/2003 5:04:48 PM EDT
I like the open view with no tube to look through and am considering one of their scout models for my A2 carbine. I recently read an independent report that stated that some of our SOF guys have been using them in Iraq and the 'Stan for CQB because the open design allows them to be very quick. It also stated that they have held up very well. Experience and opinions are most welcome.
Link Posted: 11/13/2003 5:35:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/14/2004 5:03:25 PM EDT by Troy]
Link Posted: 11/13/2003 7:08:17 PM EDT
Thanks for the links, but the sight can not possibly be as fragile as some suggest if some of the best fighters in the world use them in the field. I seriously doubt experienced SOF guys would stake their lives on a a piece of equipment that, according to some here, is barely stable enough for range use. Those guys can have any optic they want, and the article specifically states taht some of the operators have SWITCHED to the C-more.
Link Posted: 11/13/2003 7:23:55 PM EDT
Just a little advice from a small-time operator. C-more sights are the pits. If you work a lot of CQC,hit, bump and run or do a lot of tactics, you will immediately notice that the adjustments i.e. windage and elevation no matter how much you tighten them down, voodoo has its play on them and your zero is for SH@#!!! Pardon the pun!!! Another thing is they are not parallax free and are not made for the tactical environment, they are made for civilian raceguns. Night time operations are not as good, because they can be seen close up if you are panning or scanning. Leaves a nice little red signature and a mir flash by day. Just my opinion, if someone else would like to comment? Stay safe and watch ur "6", Larry
Link Posted: 11/13/2003 7:27:27 PM EDT
Articles in gun magazines are among the worst place to get info. I read an article that said the military was supposed to use C-More free float tubes on their SPRs instead of the PRI and Knights. Puhleeze! This is not to say that there probably arent some people with C-more optics over there. I dont know. There very well may be. Heck, someone posted pictures of BSA dot sights being used. Gun mags have a very special way of twistin things around and telling half truths. Another time I read that the military was using the Olympic Arms FIRSH system. When you looked into it more, what it really meant was that some private individuals, who are in the military, have FIRSH systems on their personal ARs... See how this info can be so misleading. Again, I dont know of there are C-Mores being used or not. I dont have that info... But manke no mistake, what you read in the other report is true. They are much more fragile than other options in the same price range, they can be very frustrating to zero, battery life is pittiful when compared to an Aimpiont... the list goes on and on.
Link Posted: 11/13/2003 7:58:49 PM EDT
The basic design of the C-more is excellant, even if the execution is sub-par. I had an Aimpoint that I recently traded off for a pistol. While the Comp is a very well made piece of equipment, I do not like the overall design pf the unit. While was probably tougher than the Tasco Pro-Point I have on another rifle, it was no quicker in use, because they are very similar in function. A couple of months ago I shot a Uzi carbine with a C-more, and it was without a doubt the fastest sight system I have ever used. Does anyone have an suggestion for an optic that is similar, but more rugged?
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 3:28:48 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 3:47:06 AM EDT
Agreed, if you like the design of the C-More's single window... Get an EoTech.
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 4:51:58 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/14/2004 5:03:47 PM EDT by Troy]

Originally Posted By triburst1:
....I recently read an independent report that stated that some of our SOF guys have been using them in Iraq and the 'Stan for CQB ....



I would be interested in learning the source of this independant report and where we can get a copy.

I would be surprised if expereienced SOF guys were using the C-Mores. Having used one for a short time I can say they are less than optimal. If you like that open style the OKO and the Reflex use a similar concept and both are better executions.

The EO Tech is an even better execution of the 'open sight' concept.
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 5:01:48 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/14/2004 5:03:56 PM EDT by Troy]
JUNK
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 8:55:11 AM EDT
If you like the C-More concept, check out the OKO (www.oktarget.cz). Czech-made; available in the USA through Cav Arms, Dillon, Brownells and elsewhere. In-use with Eastern European military and police units, as well as civilian competition shooters. There's a stamped-steel "roll cage" available for the OKO, if the sight's bare plastic body doesn't strike you as being particularly durable for hard use. I've got them on two of my ARs and have been quite impressed; sold both my C-More and my Aimpoint Comp-M XD and never looked back.
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 9:48:16 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/14/2004 5:04:05 PM EDT by Troy]
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 10:04:41 AM EDT
Just to add my 2 cents. I like the C-more, but have a new view of them. I've used them in IPSC for 5+ years. This year at the nationals mine broke. A crack where the windage set screw is. It did not effect zero. When I called them to have it fixed, they said they could put on a new body for $100.00 A new one is only $200.00. I now have some spare parts if one of my others break. I'm looking real hard into the EOTech
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 3:15:52 PM EDT
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 3:21:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/14/2004 5:05:30 PM EDT by Troy]

Originally Posted By Forest:

I would be interested in learning the source of this independant report and where we can get a copy.



You can find it in the new 2004 Surefire Combat Tactics magazine. The article, entitled "Get Some" is written by Travis Mitchell. It is one of the most interesting articles I have read in some time. Mitchell gives overview of much of the personal weapons and equipment currently used by our forces and the troops opinions of it. It is concise, informative, and covers rifles, pistols, lights, NVDs, packs, optics and blades. The DOD photos used in the article alone are worth the price of the mag.
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 4:27:21 PM EDT
I read a review of the C-more which panned it, one reason being the absence of positive clicks, when dialing it in you were guessing. Has this been fixed?
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 4:37:57 PM EDT
Why ask for opinions if you've already made up your mind? Go buy it and prove everyone wrong. Try sighting it in with it's pathetic adjustments. Abuse it and see if the PLASTIC breaks. Take it off to change batteries and see if it holds zero. Have fun.
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 5:29:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/14/2004 5:05:46 PM EDT by Troy]

Originally Posted By Lumpy196:
Why ask for opinions if you've already made up your mind?

Go buy it and prove everyone wrong. Try sighting it in with it's pathetic adjustments. Abuse it and see if the PLASTIC breaks. Take it off to change batteries and see if it holds zero.

Have fun.



What leads you to believe I have already made up my mind?

I have only limited experience with this Optic and wanted the opinions of some that have used it more extensively. I always research different options and inquire with people who have used the equipment I am interested in before making any decision.
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 4:09:53 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/15/2003 4:11:56 PM EDT by underdog75]
When I got my first AR I put a C-more on it...Took the C-more in trade so it didnt cost me much and i thought "what the hell"..... Likes?..As other and yourself have stated..It is Very quick,and the 2 MOA dot works at 100 YArds or so,Not very heavy and includes its own mount Dislikes?...Wont hold a zero to save its own ass,moreless yours,...No click adjustment suck! and it costs almost as much as a real optic(Eotech) Ive used The c-more and Eotech,Aimpoint and now have an ACOG..Out of the "dots" i prefer the aimpoint but for nearly the same price and with its own mount and 1MOA center dot the Eotech has its points The ARFCOM motto is "get both!" but in this case it should be "Get Eotech!"....Hope this helps....UNDERDOG
Link Posted: 11/17/2003 6:45:06 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/14/2004 5:06:02 PM EDT by Troy]

Originally Posted By triburst1:
You can find it in the new 2004 Surefire Combat Tactics magazine. The article, entitled "Get Some" is written by Travis Mitchell.



Triburst,
Much appreciated - I'll get myself a copy and check it out. Did you get this from Surefire at one of the Mil/LEO shows or from the newstand?
Link Posted: 11/17/2003 7:40:17 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/17/2003 9:09:14 AM EDT by u-baddog]
I have seen them (c-More) fail in IPSC matches and that in itself steered me away from them on my AR15. If you ever think you might need to use it when its raining or wet out, its a bad choice. If you want one for games such as 3 gun or IPSC type shoots or the range its a good choice if you just want a dot. The EO-tech has the dot within the circle. I find it faster on center mass shots.
Link Posted: 11/18/2003 7:51:58 AM EDT
C-MORE IS NOT AS GOOD AS THE EOTECH ,SO AS EVERYONE HAS SAID GET THE EOTECH
Link Posted: 11/18/2003 5:29:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/14/2004 5:06:12 PM EDT by Troy]

Originally Posted By Forest:

Originally Posted By triburst1:
You can find it in the new 2004 Surefire Combat Tactics magazine. The article, entitled "Get Some" is written by Travis Mitchell.



Triburst,
Much appreciated - I'll get myself a copy and check it out. Did you get this from Surefire at one of the Mil/LEO shows or from the newstand?



Newstand.
Link Posted: 11/19/2003 9:58:31 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/14/2004 5:06:25 PM EDT by Troy]
Triburst,
Once again thank-you, I went out today and picked up a copy (ouch it was $7!).

After reading the article I have some comments.

The article is basically a nice overview of the gear - stuff we've been reading in more detail elsewhere over the last year, and some stuff that looks questionable (not much call for 300M shots in Iraq).

I noticed he said C-More alot, but didn't mention any specific group. It may be they called all open type sights 'C Mores' as they were one of the early marketers of the sight. Much like many people call red dot type sights either Aimpoints or Reflexes (when those are trademarked names). Maybe. I do know I haven't seen ANY shots of soldiers with C-Mores (even in that article) but I've seen lots of shots of soldiers with Aimpoints and Spec-Ops typs with Trijicons and EO Techs, I even seen a couple of PJs with Trijicon Reflex IIs.

BTW what is up with the variable C-More scope he mentions the spec ops guys like. I've not heard of it and there is no mention of it on their website. Anybody know anything?

Link Posted: 11/19/2003 11:13:27 AM EDT
Forest, you might want to ask Wes at MSTN, since, IIRC, the C-more scope was going to play some role in the SPR program at one point. I DO know its not currently available to civilians.
Link Posted: 11/19/2003 2:29:23 PM EDT
I was wondering if the variable C-more scope is something similar to the Leupold Mk4CQT. As far as my rifle, I am leaning towards the EOtech. I checked out some for $295 today, and though not as inherently quick as the C-more it is sturdier and an overall better made optic. Are their any A2 scout style mounts for the EOtech, besides the bi-level rail that ads another pound to the front of the rifle? really like the scout mount I had for the Aimpoint. It was sturdy, quick to mount/detach, and fairly light.
Link Posted: 11/19/2003 5:40:38 PM EDT
They sell the C-More on Ebay all the time for about 300.00
Link Posted: 1/8/2004 6:02:33 PM EDT
I shot one of Cav Arms FA shortys at an ARF.com shoot and it had the OKO sight on it. I must say, I shot that weapon like I was born with it in my hands. Had to have one. I do, on my Panther shorty. Love it. Got it at Dillon. EXCEPT...Their Scout mount is $70. It wasn't until weeks after I bought it I found out that DPMS offers the scout mount for $45. Yeah, my ass hurt.
Link Posted: 1/14/2004 5:33:47 AM EDT
Just getting in on the tail end of this... Do all the c-more sights have the zero problem? I have been looking into the A2 c-more for my current build...
Link Posted: 1/23/2004 12:40:57 AM EDT
I saw that mag when it came out... I think I even picked it up based on a couple of the pics you mentioned. If I recall, the whole thing actually read more like an advertisement for Sure Fire products, and other advertisers that took part in producing the single issue mag. Like I said, the pics were cool, though. Not long after, I bought an Aimpoint M2. Haven't regretted the decision one bit.
Link Posted: 1/23/2004 5:38:03 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/27/2004 10:42:59 AM EDT by u-baddog]

Originally Posted By jnewt:
Just getting in on the tail end of this... Do all the c-more sights have the zero problem? I have been looking into the A2 c-more for my current build...



Unless they change the basic design I dont see how they cant all have the same problem.

Link Posted: 3/12/2004 6:21:26 PM EDT
I have a c-more tactical 4-5yrs old and it has click adjustments. I change the battery from the top, I've had it off the rifle about a dozen times and have never lost zero.I doubt it would take the abuse an Aimpoint or EO-Tech would, but at least you have your iron sights in ready position. I trust mine for protection of home & family.
Link Posted: 5/12/2004 8:24:17 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/12/2004 8:25:56 AM EDT by CAR-AR-M16]

Originally Posted By Forest:

BTW what is up with the variable C-More scope he mentions the spec ops guys like. I've not heard of it and there is no mention of it on their website. Anybody know anything?




I have seen one of these scopes during a conference at Fort Sill. It is a 1-5x24 illuminated ring dot scope with a BDC. They were nice enought to let me take pictures of it, but I can't shed any more light on them. Anyone know anything new?

Link Posted: 5/17/2004 1:28:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/17/2004 1:29:51 PM EDT by 00-MP5K-PDW-00]
TriBurst,
I went out and bought a new C-more, click adjustment(keep in mind the click adjustment means the brightness of the dot) not windage/elevation. Everyone told me to buy a EOTech, I told them I liked the style and the circle view of the C-more. I have had the sight on an AR10, AR15 and MP5. I don't like it, sighting it in is a pain in the ass.... I don't feel like I can beat on it and it's not as fast as an EOTech. I just bought 10 552's for my company and I'm keeping one for myself.

For what ever it's worth. I would look at EOTech in a shop, or shot one before you make your decision. The EOTech is only about 80 bucks more.
Mark
Link Posted: 5/22/2004 8:08:55 PM EDT
I have an old C-More that uses the A2 forward mount. I have it on an 11.5" barreled M16. It seems to be holding it's zero, easy to tell as I have it cowitnessed with my iron sights. I don't like the intesity switch as it doesn't have any clicks. It doesn't seem that durable, so I wouldn't take it into combat, but it works fine for me at the range.
Link Posted: 5/25/2004 1:20:09 PM EDT
In my limited experience, the C-More's SUCK.

The adjustments were nonlinear, and changed when you tried to cinch down the lock screw.

The C-More was virtually impossible to even get sighted in.

The body seems pretty flimsy, but that's just an observation.
Link Posted: 6/15/2004 10:45:58 PM EDT
I used to have a C-More Tactical on an AR15A3 LE Tactical Carbine. I got it because of the built in backup sight, which was the same as the standard A2 AR sight, and because the C-More was quick to bring on target. Right after I got it on and spent about 30 minutes trying to get it sighted in, the dot floated everywhere. Called C-More, they had me send it back and replaced the unit then sent it back to me. It did much better holding zero, but after a while of sitting in the squad car cage mounted gun rack, eventually the dot would go off center again. I eventually sold it and went back to the standard iron sights with a Trijicon night sight set up.

Another problem I noticed, that glass would fog up real bad going from an air conditioned car to a hot muggy outside, or from a warm squad car to a cold outside. Made it absolutely useless to use.

Am now considering an Aimpont Comp M2. Do the lens fog on it also under the same conditions?
Link Posted: 6/17/2004 6:50:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Guntoter:
I used to have a C-More Tactical on an AR15A3 LE Tactical Carbine. I got it because of the built in backup sight, which was the same as the standard A2 AR sight, and because the C-More was quick to bring on target. Right after I got it on and spent about 30 minutes trying to get it sighted in, the dot floated everywhere. Called C-More, they had me send it back and replaced the unit then sent it back to me. It did much better holding zero, but after a while of sitting in the squad car cage mounted gun rack, eventually the dot would go off center again. I eventually sold it and went back to the standard iron sights with a Trijicon night sight set up.

Another problem I noticed, that glass would fog up real bad going from an air conditioned car to a hot muggy outside, or from a warm squad car to a cold outside. Made it absolutely useless to use.

Am now considering an Aimpont Comp M2. Do the lens fog on it also under the same conditions?



I think any lens will fog when removed from A/C to a hot muggy condition. It has to do with the condesation from the outside air and the different temps. Same thing will happen with sunglasses.
Link Posted: 6/22/2004 12:40:44 AM EDT
I purchased an LE 6920 from a member here with an EO Tech 511 on it, VERY nice sight, just seems really refined. As far as the C-more goes, one of my suppliers was giving them away with certain weapons, so we thought we would try one out. Performance seemed good, but overall fit and finish appeared cheap. I'll put a different way, IF I would have paid the $230 plus dollars for the C-More, I would have been very upset at someone. The C-More is a good sight, but IMHO falls well short of the EO Tech. Especially when you concider price.
Link Posted: 6/29/2004 10:18:18 AM EDT
I love my c-more on my glock 34.. accurate enough for amateur competition.. but I would not put it on a shotgun or rifle.. i'd go with a eotech for shotgun and a aimpoint for rifle probably.
Link Posted: 7/20/2004 12:59:56 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/20/2004 1:00:45 PM EDT by SMGLee]
Link Posted: 7/20/2004 3:26:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SMGLee:
C-More sucks. but if I fnd one for sell around a hundred dollars, i might just pick one up for the hell of it.



Funny you should say that, can I make your day?
Link Posted: 7/25/2004 8:06:39 PM EDT
Just wondering,does anyone have their catalog?I do.It is so frickin convincing I actually started to doubt what you guys are saying!!I will put some stuff they say in it.

"With the C-More systems sights,your accuracy improves so much,anyone can succeed.Beginners learn to shoot with ease.With the dot,you can physically see yourself flinch as the dot goes aff target.This system allows you to see your mistakes before the are made.It provides one point of reference instead of two,as wit hiron sights."

"Brilliant dot with super-efficient current consumption for longer battery life."

"Positive locking screws for windage and elevation."

"At the next world shoot in 1996,Todd Jarrett won the trophy,proving again that C-More systems is the best,most reliable sight you can buy."

"As parallax free as any dot sight in the marketplace."

See,convincing isnt it!!Oh,and the pictures in the catalog rule too.This sight is definitely the coolest LOOKING sight I have ever seen.Then I heard(from arfcom)that some guys in Iraq like these sight on their rifles.Oh,and "These sights are used by branches of the military and law enforcement.The atlanta police department was equipped with scout sights fo the 1996 olympic games."Almost makes me wanna change my mind from ******(my secretly chosen sight) to the C-More tactical.But im not that stupid.Or am I......
Link Posted: 8/6/2004 10:27:02 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/6/2004 10:30:26 AM EDT by MT_Pockets]
For a while FN Herstal was throwing in free C-More Sights with their FN Tactical Police Shotguns (Winchester/AR-Hybrid).

They are easy to zero, light-weight, non-bulky, bright to dim if you choose, battery life is great, you can get different MOA diodes & I guess they are tough enough.... I rattled the hell out of it with 12GA slugs, buck and target loads...zero never changed.

The improvements I would make...
*different size knob for the brightness (with gloves it can be a bugger to adjust...with both the click adjust and the fully variable)
*a metal guard for those who are rough on their toys
*and an optional pressure switch (so you can leave the brightness set)
*price (basic sight with no mount I think would be easier to swallow at $150)

MT
Link Posted: 8/23/2004 1:51:24 PM EDT
I agree with Sinstral about the OKO.
I bought one and put in on my CAV.
After i put a 1/2 Riser so my LMT BUIS wasnt taking up 3/4 of the OKO's sight picture i actually perfer it over my friends aimpoint because i dont have to look through a tube.
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 5:33:58 AM EDT
New guy here w/first post. I recently purchased a slightly used Colt AR15 Target Match with
a C-more Scout already attached; this makes the third "poodle shooter" (according to Kim DuToit)
in the inventory (others are a Armalite M15A4 and a Ruger Ranch rifle).

Yesterday I took it to the range for the first time and what a PITA that sight turned out to be!.
I optimistically set my target stand at 50 yds and had a buddy watch my shots through my
spooting scope behind me. Couldn't hit paper at all at that distance!. At the next cease fire, brought the stand into 25 yds and tried again By the next cease fire I finally had elevation and after
the following cease fire, *finally* got windage right ( three 7's, two 8's, two 9's and a bull in a 4"
target). At 100 yds, a 5" target is totally obscured so I ass-ume this is a 6 MOA dot.

Contrary to C-more's claim, the Scout obscures the rear iron sight so there's no backup should it
fail. I'm new to AR15 nomeclature so bear with me, the carry handle is detachable so what 'kind'
is it ?

I b*tched about this sight to my FFL (and friend, nice when they're both) who was at the shoot as
well). His reply was, "that's a $400 sight", sorry $318 at C-more's web site!, and would take
the sight back for credit. I think I might take him up on the offer hatme with a carry mounted option I presume. My Armalite is a flat top w/ 3-9x scope mounted so
I don't think I want a second one like that as well.

Sorry if this was a long post, too much coffee this early in the day!.
Link Posted: 9/24/2004 11:20:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/24/2004 11:25:29 PM EDT by Cans4you]
I covered the glass on the shooter side of the tactical c-more with thick masking tape, marked its center and drilled small hole about 1/3 the way threw the glass. The diameter ended up being about .035.

Sighted it at about 50 yards with its light off, if you look at a dark background the hole or (sight dot now) appears light, against a light background the dot appears dark. It works great.

I wasn't planning on useing the sight again so started hacking on it and it turned out to be good deal. I hated the red dot.
Link Posted: 10/14/2004 4:41:09 PM EDT
I own a C-More and have it on my Colt LEO AR15. I was able to purchase a LEO/military version of the ATAC. It is an all metal version built to handle the abuse that comes with LEO use. I also own a EOtech 512 on my Beowulf .50 upper and an Aimpoint M2 on my 10.25" Bushmaster Entry AR15. I would have to say that I like the C-More the best then the Aimpoint and then the EOtech. All are excellent optics and it really comes down the individual preference in my opinion.
Link Posted: 10/17/2004 9:55:32 AM EDT
my best friend jsut placed 12th in the IPSC nationals, and swears by the C-More, even though he just had one that the diode broke a few weeks prior. at the same time, i will strongly argue that c more is crap, and i will never even put on one a pellet pistol.

cory
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 7:10:12 PM EDT
C-more at the range/target shooting - forget it!
Tactical use/entry/cqc sight - they are the quickest


Link Posted: 1/8/2005 4:23:05 AM EDT
Top Top