AR Sponsor
Posted: 5/13/2007 8:49:50 AM EDT
| Is there a big difference when sighting in a red dot on a carry handle compared to a flattop. |
|
Mounting any optic ON TOP OF the carry handle presents 2 potential disadvantages: 1) You lose your cheek weld (unless you add a cheekpiece). 2) The height of the sights above the bore increases. Problem 2 is particularly troublesome in a fighting or 3-gun rifle, where you may have to engage targets quickly at a variety opf distances, as the offset increases the apparent offset between point-of-aim and point-of-impact at distances other than the zero distance. In general, I would STRONGLY encourage you to mount the optic as low as possible, either by switching to a flattop upper (you can sell your carry handle upper on the EE), or try one of the gooseneck mounts. |
|
I loved how FAST my A1 shorty with a gooseneck and a ML2 was on Target on top of carry handle will work but rather have a gooseneck on a Fixed carry handle Im running a LMT M4 DEFENDER 2000 SOPMOD 14.5 with a LARUE cantilever and aimpoint ML2 its not to bad. also have a LMT/Bushy FLAT TOP with 551 |
Beauty is as beauty does. The trajectory problem with high-mounted optics is not conjecture, but is well-know ballistic fact. My primary use is 3-gun competition, as so minimizing the delta between POA and POI is critical. Who cares what it looks like. |
TRUE I do like the gooseneck mounts My Flat tops aint to bad |
My exact point. ![]() __________________________________________________________________________________ If he goes with the CH/Aimpoint set up and it works for him great. I also agree with the POA verses POI aspect as well. But I will not shoot down the whole idea of the CH/Aimpoint set up. Let the man try it for him self. ETA: Don’t forget, at one point in time this was THE method for mounting optics. If it worked then it’ll still work today. It's just "not as popular". |
AR Sponsor

