Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 8/27/2003 5:43:00 PM EDT
I'd like to mount an Aimpoint on my M1S90 w/o tapping the receiver , I saw this mount (below) and was wondering if anyone's had any experience with it.

Thanks , Jack

www.aimtech-mounts.com/index_files/Products%20and%20Services_files/id8.htm

Link Posted: 8/28/2003 6:50:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/28/2003 6:51:26 PM EDT by Scollins]
I don't have this mount, as I had my receiver drilled and tapped for a Weaver 93 base. I have an Aimpoint ML2 with an ARMS 22M68 mount on my Benelli, as well as 7 shot and 2 shot shell carriers (9 total.) My Benelli does NOT cycle reliably with the Aimpoint, all 9 spots filled and a full 7+1+1 loadout, even with a Wolff 25% reduced recoil spring. I'm sure the Weaver 93 weighs much less than this mount. If you don't have an shell carriers, you may be OK with this setup.

Good luck, and let us know how it works.
Link Posted: 8/29/2003 12:12:19 PM EDT
Just got off the phone with their Tech Rep and they really gave me alot of info on the mount so I ordered their ASM9 CQB Model .

I'll mount an Aimpoint Comp M on it and put it through its paces .

Soon as I get some of it done I'll post findings.

Thanks , Jack
Link Posted: 9/5/2003 3:01:25 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/5/2003 3:03:57 PM EDT by ColtM4]
Ok , got the mount on the gun and did some test firing today. The results were mixed , My worry was that the mount would affect reliability , causing malfunctions.

Well thats exactly what happened I ran about 25 rounds of Winchester Super X 00 Buck and every single round fired failed to eject. It appeared as if the Bolt was'nt blowing all the way back preventing the hull from ejecting. Kinda like short stroking. The only other time I've ever had this problem happen is when I fired low recoil rounds through it.

The good news was that all the slugs I fired cycled perfectly , obviously due to the increased energy of the slug round.

I'm open to suggestions , but here's what I'm leaning on doing :

1. Put in a lighter weight Wolf spring in the gun to reduce resistance to the bolts rearward travel.

2.Run some 3"magnum rounds through it to try to loosen up the spring/action.

FYI's : This gun is not new and has about 350 rds fired through it.

The gun was clean and lubed during testing.

After the initial round of malfunctions I loosened up the mount screws back a little to reduce possible binding on the receiver.

I made sure that the weight on the mount was below 14 ounces which is what Aim-tech suggested.

I would appreciate any advice or ideas.

Thanks , Jack

PS : I really like this mount and my Aimpoint on it and would like to keep this set up.
Link Posted: 9/7/2003 8:28:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ColtM4:
1. Put in a lighter weight Wolf spring in the gun to reduce resistance to the bolts rearward travel.



I tried this too on mine. Didn't help with ALL the weight I had on my gun (7+1+1 loaded, 9 shells in side saddle, Comp ML2 and 22M68 mount.) Now, if I take off just the Comp ML2, reliability returned with the loads I was using (#4 shot, 3 3/4 dram eq, 1 1/4 oz shot. HEAVY!) So, switching the spring may get you working again, if you don't have a side saddle.



Thanks , Jack

PS : I really like this mount and my Aimpoint on it and would like to keep this set up.



I want my setup to work as well, but I don't think I can accomplish that. Once the M4 comes out with the standard stock, 8+1 capacity and more reasonable prices (versus M1014) then I'll sell my M1 (preban.) I'll hate to give up the pistol grip, but hopefully the AW ban will go away....


Also, on the note about slugs, here is something I found. I bought a bunch of Lawman 12 ga slug ammo because it $2 per box of 5 (good price.) However, I found out that this ammo is not loaded as hot as other slug ammo. Federal Classic slugs are loaded to about 1600 fps, but the Lawman slugs are only loaded to 1300 fps. These slugs did not cycle my M1 very well, whereas the Federal Classic work very well. Just an FYI.
Link Posted: 9/7/2003 11:49:08 PM EDT
Hi,
I'm new to this forum but I read somewhere (maybe on this forum) that someone was using the elastic band shotshell carrier on the buttstock and that he had no problems cycling. Don't know what other goodies he had, if any, but it might be worth trying. BTW, what config was the M1? Ghost rings or iron sights? If ghost rings, did the Weaver mount use the existing holes? Same question for Jack, except I know the mount interfers with the ghost ring, so I'm assuming it was removed. I have the same mount (recent e-bay purchase) and am considering havin a buddy remove some of the rail to accomodate the ghost ring. Any pics of either of your setups?

Good luck,

CW
Link Posted: 9/8/2003 5:13:22 PM EDT
My M1 has Ghost ring sights. The Weaver 93 rail mounts in front of the rear sight, and ends just flush with the front edge of the receiver. So, I can have both an optic and the ghost rings. However, the Weaver 93 is not quite a Picatinny rail. I had to cut in a cross slot to fit the 22M68 scope mount. Also, the scope mount doesn't lock up as tight on the Weaver 93 as it does on Picatinny rails.

The Weaver 93 cost me $8, and drilling and tapping the receiver cost me about $60. I went through the hole thing with Benelli on finding the rail from the M1014, and got nowhere. Anyway, I'll probably sell it and go for an M4 when it comes out......

Top Top