View Full Version : US Military Standard Issue Aimpoint Mount
Can anyone tell me what brand/model the US military standard issue Aimpoint mount is? Im talking about the "fat L-mount" you see in all those military photos.:D
That's the AIMPOINT QRP mount I believe.
It is the Aimpoint brand QD and not worth the trouble, IMHO. Ruined two sets of Oakly lenses because of that #$% knob that sticks out...
It is the Aimpoint brand QD and not worth the trouble, IMHO. Ruined two sets of Oakly lenses because of that #$% knob that sticks out...
How did that happen?
Had my Oaklys hanging around my neck on "keepers" wearing full kit preparing to depart for a helo ride. Slung my M4 across my chest and let the rifle drop down. That knob hooked my Oaklys on the way down and gouged the inside of the lens right across where my left eye would look through. Replaced the lens and promptly did the same thing about six weeks later... Ugh...
That knob also did a number on my magazines since it rode in the center of my chest when I had the sling (VTAC) tightened down to prevent the rifle flopping around when not in use... This same design also made it very uncomfortable just slinging the weapon across chest or back when not in body armor. (Right handed shooter set-up.)
It had a tendency to loosen as well. It has a ratchet system so you can't over-torque it, but that seems to also make it easier to loosen up on ya...
Got home and switched to LaRue.
Quick Karl
08-12-08, 23:02
I intend no offense with this post, but my question is this:
The mil fielded the 1911, 03/A3, Garand, M14, etc. etc etc., yet today, everyone you talk to has some over-priced equivalent item with a fancy logo on it, that the mil won't use...
I know the arguments will be 'it's politics' or 'stupidity' on behalf of those responsible for designating what our troops can use, or it's 'back-room-payoffs', all of which I am highly skeptical about.
How is it the best military the world has ever seen, that has fielded the best military weapons the world has ever seen, can suddenly be so stupid, and all these small manufactures of 'pretty' items, are so much smarter???
Just a rhetorical question that I am sure will ruffle some feathers...
I intend no offense with this post, but my question is this:
The mil fielded the 1911, 03/A3, Garand, M14, etc. etc etc., yet today, everyone you talk to has some over-priced equivalent item with a fancy logo on it, that the mil won't use...
I know the arguments will be 'it's politics' or 'stupidity' on behalf of those responsible for designating what our troops can use, or it's 'back-room-payoffs', all of which I am highly skeptical about.
How is it the best military the world has ever seen, that has fielded the best military weapons the world has ever seen, can suddenly be so stupid, and all these small manufactures of 'pretty' items, are so much smarter???
Just a rhetorical question that I am sure will ruffle some feathers...
The U.S. military still has some GREAT gear out there, and it gets better all the time. Probably for the first time in a long time, the material developers are listening to the troops and getting quality gear made, procurred, purchased, scrounged, and issued to the troops. Yes, there are still some design flaws out there (like the Aimpoint mount), but they are pretty solid pieces of kit for the most part. If it's not solid, it doesn't get fielded, or it gets pulled from the field and other gear issued. There are a lot of top tier manufacturers that have contracts with the military and are providing good kit to the troops. I'm not just talking KAC, but folks you and I buy from daily because their stuff is GOOD.
And contrary to what the media tells ya, the M4 is a very good design and functions very well when troops 1) keep it relatively clean, but more importantly, 2) keep it WELL LUBED. The troops that have problems with their M4s usually just don't maintain them properly. The one real issue is ammo. SOF has use of the M262 rounds where the standard line units have M855. This is something that needs to be addressed, but who knows when/if it will be... As for the M9, I know SOF guys who own and use them in their personal lives as well. With good springs in the mags, good lube, and kept clean, they run very well. Again the issue is ammo. As long as we are constrained to ball ammo, this will be an issue...
Additionally, most line units have several different "weapon accessories" their troops can choose from: EOTechs, Aimpoints, ACOGs, tactical lights, VFGs, etc. There can also be a bit of leeway in some units for troops to purchase other items if they desire (S&B, Leupy, etc.), but this is not as common. Units are also allowed to purchase good nylon to outfit the troops. Many troops still purchase their own.
Bottom line is that if kit doesn't work, it doesn't get fielded, or it gets pulled and replaced. Our troops have some of the best gear in the world fielded to them right now.
Hope this helps...
Quick Karl
08-13-08, 01:48
I couldn't have said it better.
Inertia. The M4 carbine has not received significant modification since its inception, before I was born. They've made it a flat top, made the buffer heavier, changed the buffer in the extractor. Stuff like that.
When they designed the M4 they made the heavy part of the barrel on the wrong end, to copy a design that was full of fail. Except they were too cheap to replace their grenade launchers so they had to put the "M4 step" in.
RIS/RAS is around 15 years old now.
The QRP mount hasn't gotten any better, but they still use it.
Hell, most of the things the military uses were designed in the 1970's, and some before then.
But I can't be too upset. I was sworn into the Army DEP tonight.
I intend no offense with this post, but my question is this:
The mil fielded the 1911, 03/A3, Garand, M14, etc. etc etc., yet today, everyone you talk to has some over-priced equivalent item with a fancy logo on it, that the mil won't use...
I know the arguments will be 'it's politics' or 'stupidity' on behalf of those responsible for designating what our troops can use, or it's 'back-room-payoffs', all of which I am highly skeptical about.
How is it the best military the world has ever seen, that has fielded the best military weapons the world has ever seen, can suddenly be so stupid, and all these small manufactures of 'pretty' items, are so much smarter???
Just a rhetorical question that I am sure will ruffle some feathers...
Surely you have read the stories of questionable acquisitions even in your incredibly equipped military. I have seen them in the Canadian Military and more recently in my Department. As much good stuff as there is there is stuff that is seriously laking too!
Boltgun
How is it the best military the world has ever seen, that has fielded the best military weapons the world has ever seen, can suddenly be so stupid, and all these small manufactures of 'pretty' items, are so much smarter???.
Using the Aimpoint mount as an example, What was better at the time the contract was awarded?
The war has created a flurry of arms developers making innovative products in record times. Military procurement cycles just cannot keep up with this, and logistics units cannot just throw out stuff because someone came up with a better item this week.
Hopefully, no one gets their panties in a bunch over this. Instead of complaining about a piece of gear that doesn't seem to work for you why not buy another mount? Yeah, I know all about the "modifying military gear" spiel and honestly after some of the stuff I have seen over here no one is going to care.
When I was in the Army they wouldn't issue bayonets when we went to the field, so I bought my own knife. When I was in the Coast Guard if I didn't get a piece of kit needed before my deployment to the Mid East I bought or "procured" what I needed. I do the same now as a contractor. Whether it be body armor, mags, flashlight, whatever.
Hopefully, no one gets their panties in a bunch over this. Instead of complaining about a piece of gear that doesn't seem to work for you why not buy another mount? Yeah, I know all about the "modifying military gear" spiel and honestly after some of the stuff I have seen over here no one is going to care.
Many guys do this, and most units, as I stated earlier, let guys buy their own stuff (to a certain degree). Many of the mounts that come on optics are actually superior to most of the commercial variants. The exceptions are (IMHO) LaRue, ADM, and ARMS (all that I have had experience with). The Aimpoint mount is solid and reliable, but it requires a more attention to maintain and is not the best design for combat use with that knob sticking out to snag. But then, that's how items get improved upon... Feedback.
For me personally, it wasn't worth buying a LaRue mount in the middle of my deployment because I wasn't kicking in doors. However, I'd highly recommend a service member do the upgrade if their issued optics didn't come with it if their daily job is on the streets of Iraq or Afghan. One less thing to worry about...
When I was in the Army they wouldn't issue bayonets when we went to the field, so I bought my own knife. When I was in the Coast Guard if I didn't get a piece of kit needed before my deployment to the Mid East I bought or "procured" what I needed. I do the same now as a contractor. Whether it be body armor, mags, flashlight, whatever.
As I also stated earlier, there is a lot of good kit being issued now. Units are buying and issuing good optics and good mounts, good nylon, etc. There will always be those things that the military issues that guys don't like so guys/gals buy their own. Flashlights, knives, etc. fall in that catagory. I spent a lot of dough on things like Surefire batteries, mag springs, a solid knife (or two), spares of critical items (2 is 1, 1 is 0), etc. Personal preference does play a big part in what Soldiers want and need.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.