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: 10/30/2001 6:59:53 PM EDT
Been thinking of scoping my M4gery with a 4X20 scope (maybe Colt). Got to shoot with one the other day, liked it. But am wondering if it would be a case of adding more gizmo's to a rifle that aren't really necessary.

I've already got a surefire mounted on the front sight (which is awsome), and am wondering if adding a 4X20 scope would just be adding weight that I don't need.

It seemed that the target aquisition was good, but am not sure under pressure how good it would be, or if using the irons would be hindered too much by the scope?

Just wondering if it would be of much tactical advantage. I've seen Isreali troops with them, but am not convinced my that.

I thought about Aimpoint, but since I have a fixed carry handle on my M4, I've heard that the gooseneck mounts don't work.

So should I 4X20, is their an Aimpoint mount that would work on a fixed handle M4, or should I stick with the irons and save the weight?
Link Posted: 10/30/2001 8:05:17 PM EDT
Why don't goose neck mounts work? I was looking at one and was planning to get one with either a Reflex or EOTech.
Link Posted: 10/30/2001 8:20:34 PM EDT
ACOG is the way to go. I have a Colt 3x scope but it can't hold a light next to an ACOG. As I learned in the urban rifle courses, an optic is paramount in a shoot/no shoot scenario. With iron sights, especially at night, it's very difficult to tell what you're aiming at. An ACOG with a BAC reticle can be used with both eyes open, its fiber optic lit (during the day, at night it's lit by tritium) circle, chevron or triangle is so bright it's like an Aimpoint with its dot brightness turned all the way up. You really owe it to yourself to test drive a couple of them before making up your mind. The ACOG is not that heavy like the ELCAN, which is another great scope.
Link Posted: 10/30/2001 8:26:45 PM EDT
Seamus! You might buy something that says C-O-L-T on it? Say it ain't so!

Seriously I would only put a scope on a flattop, putting a scope on the handle makes getting a proper cheekweld difficult. It works, it just isn't optimal. OTOH, I dunno what a "gooseneck" is. *Sounds* cheesy though for mounting optics . . .

Duffy hits the nail on the head about the ACOG.
Link Posted: 10/30/2001 10:22:43 PM EDT
"goose neck" like in the Arms 39. It attaches to the handle then drops forward ontop of the handguard.
Link Posted: 10/31/2001 4:45:09 AM EDT
Yes Chairborne, it's true (hanging head in shame), I'm thinking about getting a Colt product.

But seriously, I know what your saying about the cheekweld. But the Colt scope seemed to have a low enough profile, so target aquasiition was quick and easy, and cheekweld didn't seem too bad.

The gooseneck mount is designed for the Aimpoint. It mounts on the carry handle and positions the Aimpoint just forward of the handle, giving it a real low profile so you don't have to look up to see through the reticle.

The reason the gooseneck mount doesn't work on the M4 is because the handguards are fatter than the regular A2's. You can take an A2 handguard however, and put it on the top (while keeping the M4 guard on the bottom), thus making it possible to use the mount.

Does Acog make a scope or mount for for carry handles that anybody knows about?

I've always preferred the carry handle because there's just something so that eases the mind about having those durable fixed iron sights. But of course, that makes mounting optics a bit difficult. I guess I just want the best of both worlds.
Link Posted: 10/31/2001 4:58:46 AM EDT

Does Acog make a scope or mount for for carry handles that anybody knows about?


My TAO1-NSN came ready to mount on the carry handle. You have to buy a separate adapter for the flattop mount.

Now I know what you mean by the "gooseneck." I have never tried one of these, but it always at least appeared kinda fragile hanging out there unsupported over the handguards.
Link Posted: 10/31/2001 5:36:58 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/31/2001 5:32:52 AM EDT by fattym4]
surefires are great, i keep mine handy, but not mounted. its just too heavy with the ACOG TAO-1 NSN. if i were you, i would get a Compact ACOG with BAC, carry handle mount. there are different reticule/magnifications available, so it would be good to do your research, even try a few out before buying.

www.trijicon.com/

but yes, definitely use some kind of optics to realize the full potential of the weapon system.

happy scoping!
Link Posted: 10/31/2001 7:29:13 AM EDT
My Aimpoint Comp2 mounts just behind the rear sight on my early M4 Carbine using the ARMS #39A2Plus mount. Getting the sight as far forward as possible aids greatly in target acquisition and hitting multiple targets easier.

For a handle top the Colt's 3x20 or 4x20 work well and are about the largest diameter telescopes which work on top of the handle without craning our neck up real high. Telescopic sights pretty much need a flattop receiver. My flattop lightweight Dissipator has an ELCAN sitting on top.

-- Chuck
Link Posted: 10/31/2001 7:44:17 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/31/2001 7:58:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Chuck:
My Aimpoint Comp2 mounts just behind the rear sight on my early M4 Carbine using the ARMS #39A2Plus mount. Getting the sight as far forward as possible aids greatly in target acquisition and hitting multiple targets easier.

For a handle top the Colt's 3x20 or 4x20 work well and are about the largest diameter telescopes which work on top of the handle without craning our neck up real high. Telescopic sights pretty much need a flattop receiver. My flattop lightweight Dissipator has an ELCAN sitting on top.

-- Chuck



Chuck, with an ARMS #39 just behind the REAR sight, one hell of a mount you got there
lol
Link Posted: 10/31/2001 5:36:42 PM EDT
OK, everyones given me advice about the ACOG's. But haven't really gotten any feedback about the Colt 4X20.

Anyody got an opinion on those?
Top Top