AR Sponsor
Posted: 4/18/2012 1:27:19 AM EDT
| I've been thinking of getting an Aimpoint red dot sight. Unfortunately my choice is so limited that I am now to choose between the CompM3 2MOA and CompM2 4MOA. Any inputs to help me decide guys? I want to get the kind of info out of experience of using these red dots and not info from the sellers of red dots. Thanks. |
| I have the Aimpoint PRO. Specifications seem to be nearly identical to Comp M3 except of course not mil-spec and lower battery life (and a lot less $). I've only brought it to the range maybe 3 times since I got it but so far so good –– certainly doesn't lose zero like some of the cheap red dots I've used before. |
|
Quoted:
I have the Aimpoint PRO. Specifications seem to be nearly identical to Comp M3 except of course not mil-spec and lower battery life (and a lot less $). I've only brought it to the range maybe 3 times since I got it but so far so good –– certainly doesn't lose zero like some of the cheap red dots I've used before. The CompM3 was never "mil-spec," the M68CCO went straight from the CompM2 to the CompM4. ~Augee |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have the Aimpoint PRO. Specifications seem to be nearly identical to Comp M3 except of course not mil-spec and lower battery life (and a lot less $). I've only brought it to the range maybe 3 times since I got it but so far so good –– certainly doesn't lose zero like some of the cheap red dots I've used before. The CompM3 was never "mil-spec," the M68CCO went straight from the CompM2 to the CompM4. ~Augee So, the CompM2 is better since it has more milspec qualities to it? |
|
So, the CompM2 is better since it has more milspec qualities to it?
No. The M3 is everything the M2 is, with updated/improved electronics that extends the battery life. It just depends on how much you want to spend and if you want the extended battery life. The older M2 (or ML2, if you don't need NV) should be less expensive. If you can find a supplier of a PRO, that would be the preferred route to take. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have the Aimpoint PRO. Specifications seem to be nearly identical to Comp M3 except of course not mil-spec and lower battery life (and a lot less $). I've only brought it to the range maybe 3 times since I got it but so far so good –– certainly doesn't lose zero like some of the cheap red dots I've used before. The CompM3 was never "mil-spec," the M68CCO went straight from the CompM2 to the CompM4. ~Augee So, the CompM2 is better since it has more milspec qualities to it?  I'm not sure that I ever insinuated that the M2 was better or that "mil-spec" was in any way superior - I simply clarified that there is / were not any MIL-SPECs governing the CompM3, nor any acceptance criteria. The implication by poster that I quoted and responded to being that the CompM3 was mil-spec and the PRO was not.
The CompM3 is no more "mil-spec" than the PRO. ~Augee |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have the Aimpoint PRO. Specifications seem to be nearly identical to Comp M3 except of course not mil-spec and lower battery life (and a lot less $). I've only brought it to the range maybe 3 times since I got it but so far so good –– certainly doesn't lose zero like some of the cheap red dots I've used before. The CompM3 was never "mil-spec," the M68CCO went straight from the CompM2 to the CompM4. ~Augee So, the CompM2 is better since it has more milspec qualities to it? I'm not sure that I ever insinuated that the M2 was better or that "mil-spec" was in any way superior - I simply clarified that there is / were not any MIL-SPECs governing the CompM3, nor any acceptance criteria. The implication by poster that I quoted and responded to being that the CompM3 was mil-spec and the PRO was not.
The CompM3 is no more "mil-spec" than the PRO. ~Augee Must have been the way my sentence was constructed, no offense meant there.  .
Anyway, I decided on the M3 for the reason that it has longer battery life and the nice rubber condom protector that comes with it rocks! |
|
Doesn't Mil Spec mean it was specified by the military. M3 might not be "mil spec" but that only means it was not specified for use? The PRO if adopted by the military would be instantly mil spec.
But if your goal is to have an AR and sight that is exactly what the military uses......just having an AR negates that. Personally, I just bought a PRO and it's on the UPS truck for delivery. IMHO, it's the best Aimpoint deal. And it looks mil spec. 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have the Aimpoint PRO. Specifications seem to be nearly identical to Comp M3 except of course not mil-spec and lower battery life (and a lot less $). I've only brought it to the range maybe 3 times since I got it but so far so good –– certainly doesn't lose zero like some of the cheap red dots I've used before. The CompM3 was never "mil-spec," the M68CCO went straight from the CompM2 to the CompM4. ~Augee So, the CompM2 is better since it has more milspec qualities to it? I'm not sure that I ever insinuated that the M2 was better or that "mil-spec" was in any way superior - I simply clarified that there is / were not any MIL-SPECs governing the CompM3, nor any acceptance criteria. The implication by poster that I quoted and responded to being that the CompM3 was mil-spec and the PRO was not.
The CompM3 is no more "mil-spec" than the PRO. ~Augee Must have been the way my sentence was constructed, no offense meant there. .
Anyway, I decided on the M3 for the reason that it has longer battery life and the nice rubber condom protector that comes with it rocks! Good choice, the dot size will help on longer range targets esp, if you ever get a 3x mag. for the Aimpoint. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have the Aimpoint PRO. Specifications seem to be nearly identical to Comp M3 except of course not mil-spec and lower battery life (and a lot less $). I've only brought it to the range maybe 3 times since I got it but so far so good –– certainly doesn't lose zero like some of the cheap red dots I've used before. The CompM3 was never "mil-spec," the M68CCO went straight from the CompM2 to the CompM4. ~Augee So, the CompM2 is better since it has more milspec qualities to it? I'm not sure that I ever insinuated that the M2 was better or that "mil-spec" was in any way superior - I simply clarified that there is / were not any MIL-SPECs governing the CompM3, nor any acceptance criteria. The implication by poster that I quoted and responded to being that the CompM3 was mil-spec and the PRO was not.
The CompM3 is no more "mil-spec" than the PRO. ~Augee Must have been the way my sentence was constructed, no offense meant there. .
Anyway, I decided on the M3 for the reason that it has longer battery life and the nice rubber condom protector that comes with it rocks! I think Aimpoint is BS'ing on the battery life.....I mean...I loose track after 20k hours. So 30k to 50k....meh,  .....just paper specs.
|
|
Is that even a question? The 4moa dot is too big IMO. I would go with the compM3 2moa or if you want to save some money you might as well go with the PRO which has the circuitry of the compM2 with the 2moa reticle of the compm3. I have only owned an Aimpoint CompM4 and PRO.. both were great optics but i have gone back to my EOTech 553 just because of the smaller dot and i think my vision causes the dot to look kinda oblong and I don't have that problem with the EOTech so that is what works for me.
But for you... Aimpoint CompM3 would be my #1 if you have the money. PRO if you want to save the money and get a free mount but if you are going to replace the mount anyways.. definitely compM3 (I think the factory QRPII mount that comes with the PRO works really well and is a reasonable weight) |
|
Quoted:
Is that even a question? The 4moa dot is too big IMO. I would go with the compM3 2moa or if you want to save some money you might as well go with the PRO which has the circuitry of the compM2 with the 2moa reticle of the compm3. I couldn't disagree more. I wouldn't even consider an RDS with a 2MOA dot. An Aimpoint isn't a bench rest optic. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have the Aimpoint PRO. Specifications seem to be nearly identical to Comp M3 except of course not mil-spec and lower battery life (and a lot less $). I've only brought it to the range maybe 3 times since I got it but so far so good –– certainly doesn't lose zero like some of the cheap red dots I've used before. The CompM3 was never "mil-spec," the M68CCO went straight from the CompM2 to the CompM4. ~Augee So, the CompM2 is better since it has more milspec qualities to it? I'm not sure that I ever insinuated that the M2 was better or that "mil-spec" was in any way superior - I simply clarified that there is / were not any MIL-SPECs governing the CompM3, nor any acceptance criteria. The implication by poster that I quoted and responded to being that the CompM3 was mil-spec and the PRO was not.
The CompM3 is no more "mil-spec" than the PRO. ~Augee Must have been the way my sentence was constructed, no offense meant there. .
Anyway, I decided on the M3 for the reason that it has longer battery life and the nice rubber condom protector that comes with it rocks! Good choice, the dot size will help on longer range targets esp, if you ever get a 3x mag. for the Aimpoint. If you get a 3x the relation of the dot to the target remains unchanged. So it doesn't really matter all that much. |
|
Have both M3 2 MOA and M2. I can tell you stated 10k battery life on the M2 is a conservative figure. Not sure if the M3's 50k est is, too. In any case, if you leave them off till you need them (depending on your application, this may or may not be doable) battery life is as long as a battery will last in storage - and there's likely no difference between an M2 and M3 battery life under those circumstances.
As to the 2 MOA dot size "advantage" of the M3, you ought to consider two things: application, and whether you have uncorrected astigmatism. If you desire a dot for fast close stuff 4 MOA is better. If you intend to do more precise work on small targets, 2 MOA is better. Notice I used the qualifier, "smaller targets". This is b/c you can shoot groups every bit as good with a 4 MOA optic. Group size has nothing to do with dot size. Target size is a factor, though. If the 4 MOA dot completely covers an 8" deep fox chest at 200 yds you would probably be OK, but for smaller stuff at that distance you'd prefer the 2 MOA........or a crosshair. Astigmatism can be an issue with either 2 MOA or 4 MOA. But advocates of 2 MOA for close work advise turning up the intensity to match the 4 MOA's quickness. Problem here is that increasing dot intensity increases flare if you have uncorrected astigmatism. The 4 MOA doesn't need to be turned up so much - ergo less flare. Like I said, I have both. I like both. Really no way to make a bad choice. Sam |
AR Sponsor