Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 6/30/2003 6:28:18 AM EDT
After a considerable amount of mental, uh, anguish, I've decided to go ahead and get the damn Aimpoint...it's what I've really wanted, and I think it'll do what I need it to do.

What's the least expensive way to mount it on a standard flat top, so that I can use it with a BUIS, most likely an A.R.M.S. #40, and what's the best Aimpoint mount under these circumstances? It'll most likely be the Comp C due to budget problems...and I'm wondering if the mount that comes with it will suffice for a while.

I've been looking at the middle lenght #38, which'll take care of the iron sights. Will that mount allow me to use the Comp C mount right out of the box and give me the height I need to co-witness, or at least come close? Thanks in advance for the help.
Link Posted: 6/30/2003 12:41:28 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/30/2003 1:28:28 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/30/2003 3:05:25 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/1/2003 6:41:24 AM EDT by Dog1]
Bullshit....I have to disagree with the "YOU'LL NEVER BE ABLE TO GIVE THE "C" AWAY." comment...everytime one comes for sale here, it's gone in a heartbeat...I have one, and since I'm not going to dive to 80 feet of water, or use it in -50 to +160 degrees, I'm pretty sure the CompC will serve me well... As for the mount that comes with a CompC, it's a pretty good mount, for which will serve well until you get a 22m68. You can get either the ARMS #40 a 22m68 and the cantilever spacer, or a #38 and the 22m68 without the spacer....either way is a great combo.... I have the #38 std, with a CompC with the factory mount and I will be getting the 22m68 in the near future....Shoot me a e-mail, I would be happy to answer any questions, I have gone through the same agony in my red dot optic/mounting problems...
Link Posted: 6/30/2003 3:16:49 PM EDT
thanks for the help...I was checking prices last night on the 22M68 actually...couldn't decide on the cantilever spacer or the regular one. I know some folks prefer the Aimpoint a little further out on the rifle...I don't know if it matters that much to me. I *may* try and snag the Aimpoint tomorrow, based on how much it is locally here, if anyone has one in stock. Once again, thanks for the help.
Link Posted: 6/30/2003 5:13:27 PM EDT
I went with the ARMS#40 flip up rear, the ARMS #22M68 and I also ended up needing the longer front sight post as well. Some people say they don't need it and some people say they do. Check out Bushmasters web page, they claim with the ARMS #40 or a Colt flat top upper you need the taller front sight post. I like my setup a lot.
Link Posted: 6/30/2003 8:40:35 PM EDT
Settled for an Aimpoint? You settle for a BSA or Bear red dot, not an Aimpoint.
Link Posted: 7/1/2003 4:58:06 AM EDT
I think what he means is that he was languishing between which Aimpoint to get because of his budget, not that he "settled" on the Aimpoint as a brand...
Link Posted: 7/1/2003 5:45:19 AM EDT
How much difference in price is there from a Comp C to a ML2? Can not be that much. I picked up my ML2 for $300 new. I imagine a Comp C is at least $250 new or more. Definitely wait an extra week or two to save the additional $50 for the ML2.
Link Posted: 7/1/2003 7:11:22 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/1/2003 7:53:24 AM EDT by Dog1]
There is not a thing wrong with the CompC for use on a AR...I simply do not understand why everyone but me in this thread has a hang-up with the CompC... So it's not the one the military, so what? I'm not in the military, I don't dive to 80 feet, I don't do HALO jumps, I don't have the right NVD scope to use with a M2-ML2, and I don't operate in -50 to +160 degree temps..and if I did, then I would have been [i]ISSUED[/i] the M2 or ML2.. It's just as good as the M2-ML2, it has the same CET technology, it takes all of the rings, mounts and accessories that are for the M2-ML2... I too, like John, have a budget and I look at relality, and that is that the CompC will do me just fine thank you... If the CompC is what he wants then fine, in fact what he [i]really[/i] asked was the best iron sight/mounting combo....
Link Posted: 7/1/2003 11:32:11 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 223Rem: Settled for an Aimpoint? You settle for a BSA or Bear red dot, not an Aimpoint.
View Quote
settle "on", not settled "for"...my mental debate was which one to get...by no means do I mean I'm stepping down to an Aimpoint.
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 7:46:46 AM EDT
I have a CompC with the QRP (with spacer) mount. I think it great -- allows co-witnessing of BUIS and quick removal/reattachment while maintaining zero (I especially like this because I remove the sight every time I clean my rifle). It is also worth noting that the CompC is EXACTLY the same instrument as the CompM. Only difference is that Aimpoint charges more for the CompC to cover the more rigorous conditions outlined in the warranty. Their actuaries calculated the probablity of failure (and the future cost of honoring the warranty) for a CompC in the more rigorous conditions and added it to the price of the CompC -- calling it the CompM. Still a "rose by any other name."
Link Posted: 7/2/2003 2:09:30 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Dog1: It's just as good as the M2-ML2, [u]it has the same CET technology[/u], it takes all of the rings, mounts and accessories that are for the M2-ML2...
View Quote
Wes of MSTN had mentioned that the CompM/ML used a masked diode as its aiming point, whereas the M2/ML2 used an unmasked, "straight" diode, which made the dot better defined. Also the M2/ML2 has a much improved battery life than the previous Aimpoint models. I think the extended battery life is what alot of us are looking at when buying the M2/ML2 over the older ones. Chris
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 4:31:58 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/3/2003 4:32:19 AM EDT by Dog1]
"Aimpoint has now introduced the [i][b]CET[/b][/i]echnology, a radical advancement in red dot sighting performance with over 30 times longer battery life than the previous XD-sights" Page 2 All Models- "Battery Life-1000-10,000 hours, depending on brightness setting" Page 2 Directly from the manual, and I followed that up with a phone call to the technical people...ALL Aimpoint Comps-CompC, CompM2 and ML2 have the [i]same[/i] CET diode....battery life is constant across the Comp line...
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 4:46:52 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Dog1: "Aimpoint has now introduced the [i][b]CET[/b][/i]echnology, a radical advancement in red dot sighting performance with over 30 times longer battery life than the previous XD-sights" Page 2 All Models- "Battery Life-1000-10,000 hours, depending on brightness setting" Page 2 Directly from the manual, and I followed that up with a phone call to the technical people...ALL Aimpoint Comps-CompC, CompM2 and ML2 have the [i]same[/i] CET diode....battery life is constant across the Comp line...
View Quote
I wasn't aware that there's a current generation CompC. I thought that it was a previous generation CompC that was being referred to. In a few years of checking out this forum, I cannot really remember anyone considering "C" models over the "M". Anyways .... it shouldn't be a problem with how you spend YOUR money. If you want a "C" model, get the "C" model. Chris
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 9:10:21 AM EDT
Anyways .... it shouldn't be a problem with how you spend YOUR money. If you want a "C" model, get the "C" model.
View Quote
That was the point I have been trying to make, along with trying to correct the mis-information that has been posted about the current generation CompC....
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 12:59:09 PM EDT
On the bushmaster website the ARMS #22 is available in low, medium, and high rise. http://www.bushmaster.com/shopping/scopes/arms22l.asp Which height would be used on just a normal flat top?(would be used with ARMS #40 and the taller front sight post) Also this is the same thing as the "22m68" right? or no? Also how hard is it to install the higher front sight post for use with the ARMS #40 rear sight? Can it be done buy any average "dude"? Thanks for the help
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 1:42:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/3/2003 1:45:09 PM EDT by Dog1]
The ARMS #22 are scope rings to be used with rifle scopes... The 22m68 is made for the Aimpoint Comps only... If you are mounting the 22m68 on a flat-top using the ARMS #40, will also need the spacer the goes between the 22m68 base and ring to bring it up to co-witness with the iron sights. If you use a ARMS #38, which is the Swan Sleeve, like I have, you would then use just the 22M68 with-out the spacer. As for the front sight, although Bushy says it's recommended, many have found that the higher front post was not needed...on that one, to each his own.... As for installing it, anyone can do it, just when you remove the lower front sight, don't loose the dedent ball and spring, then reverse install...
Link Posted: 7/3/2003 8:24:58 PM EDT
None of my rifles needed a new/longer front site post for use with the ARMS#40! I have it on 2 of 'em!
Link Posted: 7/11/2003 6:29:51 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Dog1: ...If you are mounting the 22m68 on a flat-top using the ARMS #40, will also need the spacer the goes between the 22m68 base and ring to bring it up to co-witness with the iron sights. If you use a ARMS #38, which is the Swan Sleeve, like I have, you would then use just the 22M68 with-out the spacer....
View Quote
Regarding the mounting of the Aimpoint: how tall is the spacer used with the #40 to co-witness AND/OR what is the rise given by the #38? The reason I am asking is I'd like to know if Bushmaster's 1/2" modular mini risers would suffice for co-witnessing with just the #40 and mounting ring. Second question---what is the outer diameter of the Aimpoint units. (30mm?)
Link Posted: 7/11/2003 7:10:29 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/11/2003 7:51:30 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/11/2003 7:58:10 PM EDT by venturini]
OK, so if the spacer and #38 are .460 and the Bushmaster mini risers are actually .500 then the sight would be .040 shorter using the spacer or #38. Would this provide better co-witnessing then using the #40 and the optional .040 taller front sight per Bushmaster's recommendation? Also, what is the height of the gooseneck/cantilever extension used with the #22m68? It seems to raise the optics up bit more than the spacer and #38? Thanks for your help thus far----this whole red dot optics usage is very new to me and financialy I don't have the option of trial-and-erroring so I defer to you.
Link Posted: 7/13/2003 11:59:46 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/14/2003 6:00:06 AM EDT
Thanks Troy---the ARMSs unit is what I'll go with then. BTW---what's with the "Bushmaster=Yankee Hill" story. A noob like me is curious.
Link Posted: 7/14/2003 11:47:08 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/14/2003 1:36:51 PM EDT
Troy, What would you or the others on here recommend in a flip up front and rear sight? I got the Bushmaster 25th Anniversary model which came with the BMAS flip up sights front and rear. What mount (the ARMS 22m68?) for an Aimpoint would you recommend to go with whatever flip up sights you prefer so I can co-witness? What do you think of the BMAS freefloat rail handguards?
Link Posted: 7/14/2003 1:43:40 PM EDT
Here is an alternative to the ARMS#22M68 & ARMS#40 BUIS or Swan#38 Rock River Arms makes a removable tactical carry handle mount that provides a mounting platform that when used with the 30mm Aimpoint ring will co-witness w/ the iron sights perfectly. Check out the link here: http://www.rockriverarms.com/upper_receiver_&_related1.htm Pros: I like that I didnt lose my elevation adjustment which is not availible on the ARMS 40 or Swan sleeve #38. Its cheaper than the Swan 38 with Arms 22M68 & spacer thats why I decided on the RRA mount which I picked up on Ebay for $155.00 & $15.00 for the Aimpoint 30mm ring Cons: Some people may not like it because they prefer to mount it farther down on top of the handguard but my eyes didnt notice much difference either way.
Link Posted: 7/14/2003 6:21:27 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/14/2003 6:29:23 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/15/2003 7:15:35 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/15/2003 7:18:04 AM EDT by venturini]
Originally Posted By Troy: All of the "BMAS" stuff is really designed and manufactured by Yankee Hill Machine. Now, Yankee Hill's Phantom flash suppressor is excellent, but for many of their other products, they're competing against companies like ARMS, GG&G, Knights Armament, and others who have REALLY done their homework....
View Quote
Not to further digress from the original topic but I'm curious about Bushmaster subcontracting. "BMAS"---is this a term referring to Bushmaster assessories? Some one in another thread made the statement that Bushmaster basically doesn't make diddy squat of the component used in making their rifles. I am under the impression that Bushmaster makes the major components and (like many other manufactures) subcontracts the more basic components. BTW--what was the connection between Bushmaster and "Quality Parts" years ago? Was Quality Parts just a subcontractor?
Link Posted: 7/15/2003 12:26:53 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/15/2003 3:13:57 PM EDT
Thanks much, Troy! [^]
Link Posted: 7/15/2003 5:09:47 PM EDT
Ouch! "The "Tac Handle" is wrong in so many ways that I probably wouldn't take one if someone was giving them away. If I did take one, it would be to cut off the front to use as a cut carry handle. -Troy" Ok, can you explain why the Tac Handle is such a bad choice? I already have the 22M68 & a spacer give me a reason or 2 why I should "can" the Tac Handle & order a Swan sleeve or #40 BUIS.
Link Posted: 7/16/2003 11:04:16 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/16/2003 11:22:19 AM EDT
Top Top