AR Sponsor
Posted: 8/19/2007 8:43:13 PM EDT
|
Thinking about getting my first Aimpoint, but know nothing about them or where to satrt as far as purchasing one. What do you guys prefer and why. Also, where is the best place to purchase one? Thanks! Tack |
|
What are your particular needs & budget? Some of the older models can be had for a very reasonable price on the EE. I chose the new Aimpoint CompM4 because I like the improved QD mount, 2moa dot, included ARD killflash, included riser for different platforms, improved & more rugged rotary switch & W/E caps and that it takes AA batteries (nearly all my gear uses AA's so this simplifies logistics plus it will run 24/7 for 8yrs on a single AA). However, it's also the most expensive Aimpoint. Tomac |
|
i've got similar questions on differences between aimpoint models. reading their product descriptions on their website didnt help all that much. I know that the ML versions are NOT NV compatible. but whats the differences between the 2, 3, and 4? What about the CompC? then theres the debate as to whether to get 2 or 4 MOA dots. |
|
Aimpoint models basically are either night vision or non night vision models. The non night vision models have a slightly lower prices, if you won't be using NV they're the ideal type to get. If you're mainly going to use it at close range the 4 MOA dot size is fine but for longer range or use with a 3X magnifiers the 2 MOA dot size is better. The 2 MOA dot could also be used at close range, to make the dot to appear larger just turn up the brightness. Aimpoint non night vision models: Comp ML2, 4 MOA dot Comp ML3, 2 MOA dot Comp ML3, 4 MOA dot The ML3 model have a longer battery life. Night vision compatible models: Comp M2, 4 MOA dot Comp M3, 2 MOA dot Comp M3, 4 MOA dot Aimpoint Comp M4, 2 MOA dot The M3 model have longer battery life and better water resistance but the M4 have the longest battery life and even better water resistance and as stated before uses AA size battery, it lasts for 8 years in constant operation. I've got a M2 (4 MOA dot) model because I just use mine for home defense close range only and I'm a long time Aimpoint user since the early '90s, I still have some early old Aimpoint models that still works now. Take a look at the ARFCOM Equipment Exchange, I got mine there at a very good price.  ETA - There is also a 2X model but I would just recommend getting the standard model and if you need magnification just get the 3X magnifier, that way you could go 1X to 3X and back to no magnification very quickly. |
The 2 power model for the comp M2 has a 2moa dot. So you gain the smaller dot size and the ability to have a magnified optic. For anything 1x you might as well use your sights. If you always use the optic then you will always be using a crutch. IMHO Also with the 2 power you can add a power magnifier and have a 6 power optic with a 2moa dot. Which means you can really reach out with it. Optics should always come second when shooting. Never before irons. The main reason the mil went to aimpoints and eo-techs is to use them as a reflex sight. Specifically for faster tgt acquisition for engagement. Irons are co witnessed for this reason. You are not trained to use the dot for long range engagement. That is why BRM (Basic Rifle Marksmanship is still taught with irons not optics. If you keep a quick disconnect mount on your rig you can use a magnified model with zero problems. However having the magnified version on 100% of the time will drive you nuts. With a 2moa magnified optic it is far easier to engage tgts from 150m to 300m accurately and effectively. Good luck with your purchase. |
I'd use a crutch that made me walk twice as fast and kept me from tripping. |
 My Aimpoint M2 and 2.5X magnifier setup with LaRue QD mounts and Troy BUIS, there are other setups but this works for me  I could quickly use my magnifier by just flipping it, removing a 2X Aimpoint on a QD mount in able to use the BUIS would be slower
The army prior to adopting the M68/CCO Aimpoint Comp M2 tested trained soldiers with and without use of dot sights, when they used the M68 their actual scores about doubled and had faster target acquisition than just iron sights, that's why they adopted the noted optic.
But it's quicker to switch short range/ long range by using 1X dot sight and a magnifier with a side flip mount than removing a QD 2X sight. I agree with you that Basic Rifle Marksmanship must be mastered first before going to the dot optics but after being good with the irons the dot sight have a definite proven advantage than just iron sights. |
Sounds like you need more practice with your irons. Training = excellence and proficiency. We have been fighting wars for decades without the use of todays red dots. Soldiers did not just fall while advancing because they did not have a red dot to look through.
Speed is really dependant upon the mount you are using. There are some damn fast hookups out there. You are correct it is much faster to flip the magnifier in place. However you still are using a 4moa dot with the M2 series. Also it is only as practical if money is no object. Its easy to spend $1500 on an aimpoint, magnifier, and mounts. It is really Dependant upon the end users use of the product. If its needed, there is no substitution for a setup like your own. But there are other options if the application is different. There is no dispute that a red dot enhances the ability of a shooter. We all agree on that. But we must crawl before we can walk, and walk before we can run. Kinda like throwing the keys to a Ferrari to a 18 year old drive thats only been on the road for a couple of years. Remember hits do not equal kills. You can neutralize or destroy. Its really your choice. Just because you hit the tgt and it goes down does not mean it will not pop back up again. |
|
If this is to be used for 100 yards and less, I'd go with a ML2. If you plan to use a magnifier with it, you might consider a ML3 with a 2 moa dot which costs more than a ML2. Without the magnifier, the 2 and 4 moa dot looks the same at full power which is the setting I use for the close stuff. I turn down the intensity for long shoots with a magnifier so I can see a clearer dot and that's where the smaller dot comes in handy. Unless you plan to use NV, don't bother paying extra for M2 or M3 unless you find a good deal. I found a couple of M2s that were the same price of ML2s. Keep checking the EE board. People seem to be always moving these at pretty good prices at almost new condition. |
As a US Army certified sniper and a marksmanship instructor, I can assure you that I don't need more practice with my irons (although you could say that everyone could always use more practice), and I doubt you have much to tell me about training (although I certainly could be wrong). I've done my share of combat tours, as a regular infantryman, then as a designated marksman, and then as a sniper (just got back a week and a half ago). Experience has taught me what works and what doesn't, and reflex sights work. It's extremely hard-headed to discount the practicality of developments in weapons technology, just because you think you're "hard" or something with your KISS sights. Or do you defend your house with a cap and ball arm? ETA: It appears now that you're arguing that one must learn irons first. This is a given, but why are you arguing about that when no one disputed it in the thread? But then you say "for anything 1X you might as well use your [iron] sights", which seems to suggest that you discount the use of dot sights for 1X shooting. What exactly is your argument? If it's that shooters should use irons when they are learning, and keep that skill fresh, then I agree. If it's that reflex sights like the 1X Aimpoint don't have the utility to justify their use, or that using them is a "crutch", then I strongly disagree. |
 And yes everyone could always use more practice  IMHO as and experienced FSNCO. If a new shooter / sider learns BRM with irons and quickly transitions to an red dot he then has a crutch. He is not as experienced as he should be with irons and will not get the training he needs if he then relies solely on the optics. Unfortunately many shooters now rely on optics not irons. What kind of rifleman does it make if you can shoot a 1" group at 100m with optics but when optics are removed they can barely maintain tgt hits. I am different than you as I make it a constant in my training to use irons for anything out to 200m. For me in my experience with my squad it promotes faster more decisive tgt engagement. This is how we trained. Now for real time if you think I turned off my aimpoint for one min unless I was changing the battery you would be mistaken. But as I said before it all depends on the role of the user. If you are going to engage tgts at a greater distance than the 2 power is a economic way to go. If it is for multi role then the 1x and a magnifier would be a great way to go. I do not discount the use of any optics 1x or other in any scenario. But if thats all you train with then you have a crutch. That is all I am trying to get across. To the original thead poster sorry to take it off topic
A little full of yourself perhaps. You can always stand to learn from other shooters. Esp the enemy. No one shooter knows everything. We all learn through each other. |
|
basically ask yourself these 4 questions. what moa dot do you want? 2 or 4 do you care about NV? yes or no do you care about battery life? yest or no do you care about how far it is Submersible? yes or no If you answer those question the model will pretty much chose itself. for example if you don't care about how submersible it is or NV you propabaly want the comp c3. if you have to have 2 moa dot and nv compatible you proably want the m3. those 4 questions though are pretty much how the models differ from one another. |
|
You should get the ML3 2 MOA. It's newer than ML2 technology and way cheaper than ML4. The ML3 has long battery life, no NV (which you probably don't have if you're talking about the cost of an Aimpoint). The 2 MOA dot is small enough not to get in the way if you need to magnify with the 3x later on. Go with quality mounting such as LaRue or GG&G. The out of tolerance cheap mounting will make for a very shakey mount that you will not happy with. |
AR Sponsor