Is this nuts? What I was told re. Micro v. CompM4s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by markm

The compm4 will have a rotten alkaline battery much sooner than that. This happened to Pappabears Comp M4. I caught it before the damage was serious.

---

Yep. A high quality lithium MAY last 8 years. A micro is good for 5.

I don't envision a scenario where that extra three years will make a diff for you, bud. ;)

The good news is that they are both good optics. I personally prefer the micro and the problems the gun store employee explained to you are imaginary. However, you may prefer the m4s for other reasons.

My micro t1 with larue lt660 weighs less than the mount for a comp m3.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skyyr

If he's using it incorrectly, as a scope/with one eye closed, then yes, it would be true. The correct way is with both eyes open (as you probably know), which should not functionally affect field of vision or target acquisition.

I only mention that because a lot of people (with good intentions) misunderstand how to use optics (and other weapon and optic systems in general) and relay bad information, even with the best of intentions.

---

I agree completely.

I would love to hear his take on iron sights

Those heavy old thangs?

No, no, no, no...I said, "Now lookey here, boy, I said, lookey here! What you really want are some o' these fine, alū-min-ium peep sights, shaped like a matchstick."

(Use your best Foghorn Leghorn voice)

I had an Comp ML3 with LaRue Mount and now I have the T1 with a LaRue LT660 mount. I definitely think it is user preference.

Decidedly bigger and more 'robust' (any) "Comp M" RD Scope would probably fare better in the hands of a soldier (God bless all of them/you) during their 'work day;' although a Vickers Video showed a T1 taking outrageous abuse on top of a BCM (?) M4! Seriously strong, too!

I simply prefer the lighter T1 with the 2MOA dot on either an AD or an L-T mount (only experienced with these 2 brands).

Then again, I'm just an idiot disguised as a Floridian Voter! :secret:

FOV is obviously not a concern with a RDS because both eyes are kept open, so he's dead wrong with that terminology, as well as with the recommendation to keep the Micros off rifles.

But there is some truth to the idea that acquiring a sight picture, especially from awkward firing positions, can be somewhat more difficult with the smaller diameter Aimpoint Micro tubes. The CompM4 allows your eye to be further from the centerline of the optic while still seeing the red dot. This is not a major concern and can be overcome with training and a consistent cheek-weld.

So while there is a small amount of truth in what he was trying and failing to convey, his conclusion about which sights go on which weapons is just bogus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a0cake

But there is some truth to the idea that acquiring a sight picture, especially from awkward firing positions, can be somewhat more difficult with the smaller diameter Aimpoint Micro tubes.

---

That's literally the ONLY reason I manage to not fall the the floor, frothing at the mouth whenever I read somebody pissing and moaning about "FOV" with these devices.

a0's got it: SOME truth, but it's blown way out of proportion in terms of application...

Not unlike the idea of "parallax-free" taken as a stand-alone technical statement, when the reality is better described as "...as parallax-free as such a thing can be designed/made to be..." when talking about the same sort of device. It's easier to just abridge the statement for the sake of saving ink on a pamphlet or other advertisement, knowing that nobody'll want to actually look up what parallax actually IS, and learn how it works.

PT, he's less wrong than he is looking at an elephant through a hole in a fence, is describing what he sees, and doesn't know know that there's more to see...

Jsantoro and aOcake speak of valid points. Coming from a PURE NV aspect, an EO FOV does come into play with less body housing obstruction when a PVS-14 is mounted behind it vs. AP's.

There is also issues using a T1 with a PVS-14 3x magnifier screwed into it's lens causing some POA/POI issues stemming from F/Stops and lens size issues while looking through the T1. This does not happen with EO's. This is ONLY an issue with 3x PVS-14 magnifiers and NOT day magnifiers of AP or EO magnifiers.

Obviously the most effective way to use the 14 is to mount the 14 to your melon, place an IR laser on your shooting stick and let your laser do all the talking. But some hunters and others who want to remain totally passive, take the 14 on the gun approach. :-)

Vic

I've tried them all. The T1s are nice, but the C3 is the best balance of bulk and tube diameter for me.

The Comp M4 is nice, but the battery type and the fact that it's a ham hock on the top of your gun are the down sides.

Thanks for the thoughts and advice, I went with the Micro T-1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ptmccain

Thanks for the thoughts and advice, I went with the Micro T-1.

---

Good choice, you won't regret it.

I went from an M4s to a T-1 and have not looked back.

The smaller size and noticeable weight difference are definitely worth any disadvantage in battery type/life to me.

I have T-1s in 2 nad 4 MOA dots and like 'em both. I actually like the 4 MOA dot better because of how the 4 MOA dot works with the trajectory of a 5.56 out to 100 yards.