Outfit a Colt 6920??

**markm** · 11-12-07, 11:29

Originally Posted by Skintop911

My experience as well.

Substantially better than those, in fact, as they refuse to compromise their QC for the sake of increased production.

I tend to disagree. Although the components seemed top notch to me, they didn't go the extra step of trimming the cases back into spec.

Not sure if this is still the case, since BH blue box is not easily found anywhere these days.

Their expander balls must be pretty brutal, because they use once fired Mil brass, but their case stretching is way beyond what I get on my Dillon with comparable brass.

BH has figured out one thing.... SHINEY SELLS! They polish the living shit out of their cases.... so much so that the head stamps on the rounds I bought were deteriorating.

**scottryan** · 11-12-07, 11:36

Originally Posted by C4IGrant

According to Aimpoint, the parts are all the same. So you do not get better "parts" in a M series.

If they are the same, then why is one rated deeper than the other? I'm technically educated and design stuff everyday. I don't need to be employed with Aimpoint to conclude one is made different than the other.

People get wrapped around the axle when it comes to having to have the Mil-Standard just because they see some guy in IZ with it on his weapon. The C3 will do everything the same as a ML3 (less pop out of a sub) for a lot less money. This is a simple fact.

I never disputed that.

**C4IGrant** · 11-12-07, 16:13

Originally Posted by scottryan

If they are the same, then why is one rated deeper than the other? I'm technically educated and design stuff everyday. I don't need to be employed with Aimpoint to conclude one is made different than the other.

I never disputed that.

Generally, they just seal the optic differently (or too a different standard) to get the greater depth allowance. I will contact the .Mil Aimpoint rep on this forum and he can clear things up for you.

C4

**GONIF** · 11-12-07, 16:23

+1 on the C3 ,Grant has sumed it up as well as you can . the only problem with aimpoints is the cost of a quality mount,it woud be great if the supplyed a good mount for a flat top for under $50.00.

**FJB** · 11-14-07, 04:46

Grant is absolutely correct regarding the C3. It is absolutely a very rugged optic and when placed in a quality mount like a LaRue it will retain and maintain zero as well as the CompM3 or ML3. The difference between the CompM3 and ML3 is 50 additional layers of lens coating and lower LED Red Dot settings for NVD use. The difference between the ML3 and the C3 is water depth pressure rating. M3/ML3 are built to withstand depths of 150ft and the C3 is built to withstand depths of 15 ft. The C3 is a model built to offer LE and Civilians a rugged optic with the same exceptional battery life of 50,000 hours (over five years - 365days X 24 hours = 8760 hours) constant on at setting 7 of 10 at a more affordable price, but with fewer features that they may not need. However, to say that the C3 is not as rugged or durable with regards to retaining and maintaining zero in a quality mount as an M3 or ML3 because it is not rated to 150 ft water depth would not be accurate.

Regarding Aimpoint Mounting solutions for the CompM2/ML2/M3/ML3/C3, we will be introducing improved versions of the QRP and QRW mounts at SHOT 2008. We will also be introducing our QLP (Quick Lever Picatinny) mount for the CompM4. More to follow.

S/F

**C4IGrant** · 11-14-07, 09:14

Originally Posted by FJB

Grant is absolutely correct regarding the C3. It is absolutely a very rugged optic and when placed in a quality mount like a LaRue it will retain and maintain zero as well as the CompM3 or ML3. The difference between the CompM3 and ML3 is 50 additional layers of lens coating and lower LED Red Dot settings for NVD use. The difference between the ML3 and the C3 is water depth pressure rating. M3/ML3 are built to withstand depths of 150ft and the C3 is built to withstand depths of 15 ft. The C3 is a model built to offer LE and Civilians a rugged optic with the same exceptional battery life of 50,000 hours (over five years - 365days X 24 hours = 8760 hours) constant on at setting 7 of 10 at a more affordable price, but with fewer features that they may not need. However, to say that the C3 is not as rugged or durable with regards to retaining and maintaining zero in a quality mount as an M3 or ML3 because it is not rated to 150 ft water depth would not be accurate.

Regarding Aimpoint Mounting solutions for the CompM2/ML2/M3/ML3/C3, we will be introducing improved versions of the QRP and QRW mounts at SHOT 2008. We will also be introducing our QLP (Quick Lever Picatinny) mount for the CompM4. More to follow.

S/F

Thanks much for clearing everything up.

C4

**scottryan** · 11-14-07, 10:31

Originally Posted by FJB

Grant is absolutely correct regarding the C3. It is absolutely a very rugged optic and when placed in a quality mount like a LaRue it will retain and maintain zero as well as the CompM3 or ML3. The difference between the CompM3 and ML3 is 50 additional layers of lens coating and lower LED Red Dot settings for NVD use. The difference between the ML3 and the C3 is water depth pressure rating. M3/ML3 are built to withstand depths of 150ft and the C3 is built to withstand depths of 15 ft. The C3 is a model built to offer LE and Civilians a rugged optic with the same exceptional battery life of 50,000 hours (over five years - 365days X 24 hours = 8760 hours) constant on at setting 7 of 10 at a more affordable price, but with fewer features that they may not need. However, to say that the C3 is not as rugged or durable with regards to retaining and maintaining zero in a quality mount as an M3 or ML3 because it is not rated to 150 ft water depth would not be accurate.

Regarding Aimpoint Mounting solutions for the CompM2/ML2/M3/ML3/C3, we will be introducing improved versions of the QRP and QRW mounts at SHOT 2008. We will also be introducing our QLP (Quick Lever Picatinny) mount for the CompM4. More to follow.

S/F

What is the difference in construction between a C and an M series?