I've noticed a distinct lack of M4/M4S talk lately, and I don't think I've seen a pic of an M4/M4S posted in awhile now.
Did the T1 till off all the other Aimpoints?
Also, is there an absolute co-witness QD mount for the M4S?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I've noticed a distinct lack of M4/M4S talk lately, and I don't think I've seen a pic of an M4/M4S posted in awhile now.
Did the T1 till off all the other Aimpoints?
Also, is there an absolute co-witness QD mount for the M4S?
Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
What Happened to the American dream? It came true. You're looking at it.
I love my M4S.
http://stores.homestead.com/Laruetac...ail.bok?no=160
Larue makes an absolute co-witness QD mount, though the stock mount is relatively QD, it's not a throw lever but it's got a big screw knob that makes it pretty quick.
It is bad policy to fear the resentment of an enemy. -Ethan Allen
Mines in a larue side lever mount...
love it...
last time I shot it at distance ....
75 gr tap in my colt 6940..
6 shots - 3 in... 200 yds...measured...both the yards and the group...
from prone with a grip pod...
did I mention an aimpoint m4s?
aimpoint.. 3 in group at 200... cool...
Last edited by El Gato; 03-08-11 at 01:16.
In a word? Price.
The advantages the M4 offer are incremental at best for most users. Proprietary batteries are not an issue when you can leave the optic on for a year and change the battery once a year. NV settings are a non-issue for those without the other hardware. Mounting system improvement isn't really an issue for the kind of use most get.
and then there's the Micros...
The C3, and now maybe the PRO, just makes more sense for most commercial and LE users.
Agree.
The M4s may be the best-in-class selection for conventional Aimpoints, but the price of admission is rather steep when you consider that the same basic capability is available in the M2/M3/PRO line for far less. The T1 has siphoned off a significant portion of the market, but there are still many shooters who prefer the full-size solution.
If the M4s was $150 cheaper, it would be an obvious choice, but it is admittedly difficult to justify spending $700/750+ for a non-magnified RDS when there are so many alternatives -- even within the Aimpoint line -- that won't run anywhere near that high, even with a quality aftermarket mount.
AC
If you're buying a M3 and a mount then the M4S is really close in price.
The M4/M4S Aimpoints are the most rugged ones they make I also prefer the M4 and M4S when using a magnifier. Magnifiers work with all Aimpoints but with Micros it's weirds out my eyes.
Chief Armorer for Elite Shooting Sports in Manassas VA
Chief Armorer for Corp Arms (FFL 07-08/SOT 02)
The T1 and H1 certainly seem far more popular. I recently sold off my T1 and went back to an M4s. For me, the durability, battery life, and use of AA battery are what swayed me back to the M4s. The price of admission is far higher than the other options, but it is as bomb proof an optic as you can get right now. Like others have pointed out, the problem for the M4/M4s is there are more practical alternatives within the Aimpoint line.
"You have never lived until you have almost died. For those who fight for it, life has a flavor the protected will never know." - Written by an unknown soldier in Vietnam.
Every online "popularity" contest between AP Micro and M4 that I've seen was one by T-1 at 2:1 ratio, whatever the reasons (price, size etc) were. Throw in devout Eotech users, and available market share becomes small for M4.
OEM QRP2 mount offers absolute co-witness, is de-facto QD, and for me has always returned to zero without any issues. I run one M4s on QRP2, and another one on LaRue mount.
I run an M4s with a Bobro QD mount, and I see no reason to change... Yeah, they cost a penny or two more but, the absolute ruggedness coupled with the common availability of replacement power sources and extended battery life makes the difference. I have always subscribed to the "Buy once-Cry once" ethos on any hard use gear.
Bookmarks