Is this nuts re Aimpoint CompM4 v. Micro T-1

A

Amsdorf

Moderator
I was talking to a guy who works for a reseller of optics.

He said something that didn't sound legit, but I'd thought I'd put it our here for response.

He said that he would not recommend using a Micro T1 on an assault rifle, like the M4, because it's field of view is more narrow than a Comp M4 and it would not provide as easy an aquisition of targets as the CompM4.

He said he would use it on a pistol, not a rifle.

At that point I was like, "Dude, I doubt you have a clue what you are talking about."But....

What do you think?
 
I'm not sure about the characteristics of the two sights you mention. However, if the purpose of the weapon is close combat or hunting at short ranges, I'd rather have a wide field of vision with no magnification because you can acquire the target faster.

When using the M68 sight (an Aimpoint for the purposes of this thread) on the M4 Carbine, we made everyone practice with the front lens cover on. That way you have to shoot with both eyes open. That's about as wide a field of vision as you are going to get.

It also helps you from getting so focused on the target that you lose track of what's going on around you - which can also be bad.
 
Right, this is why/how the stuff the guy said makes no sense, to me, at least, since you should always use an Aimpoint 1x red dot with both eyes open, in fact, as you point out you actually can use it with the front lens cover down and you'll "see" the red dot with your left eye (assuming you are right eye dominant).

This has to some goofy nonsense.
 
Last edited:
I guess that, in principle, if you shoot with both eyes open with a red dot 1X sight, it shouldn't matter what the field of view of the sight is. Unless this other sight has such a narrow opening that you look into that it's hard to pick up the dot.

I don't know anything about this other sight so I can't say.
 
While I have no opinion on what he would use for any purpose, I (and many other, I believe) have a different opinion, for the reasons given above.
 
I learned a very long time ago to fire any scope or scope like fixture with both eyes open. Its a bit difficult at first to learn to put the concentration on your shooting eye as soon as target is acquired, but it sure helps getting that target into the scope. Follow up shots if needed are easier too because after you blink (we all do), you locate the target quicker. I now use this method on all sights. Really helps when using on running game and open sights. For me, running game is squirrels and rabbits and other varmits.
 
He said that he would not recommend using a Micro T1 on an assault rifle, like the M4, because it's field of view is more narrow than a Comp M4 and it would not provide as easy an aquisition of targets as the CompM4.
Click to expand...

Wow, that's ignorance at it's best right there. As others have pointed out already, both are intended to be shot with both eyes open meaning that they both have an unlimited field of view. Beyond that, if you look at technical specs they both have 30mm objectives meaning there's no physical way for the field of view to be any different. And having shot both, I'd say if anything the T-1 is actually allows for a clearer field of view because there is less housing around the optic to obscure your vision. So you're gut response was correct: The guy didn't know what he was talking about... :rolleyes:
 
What he may have been talking about, and I agree with him on, is the amount of "wiggle room" you have behind the optic.

The T1/H1/R1 series has a smaller viewing area in which the dot is visible which, if you run it way out towards the front on of the gun, means you have to have a more "precise" cheek weld to see the dot.

The M4/M4S has more area to see the dot, which means you have more room to have an imperfect cheek weld. Especially if you run it towards the front of the gun.

It is very noticeable to me.

One of the reasons I actually prefer the M4s, even if it is heavier than the T1 series.

However, they are perfectly suited to using on a rifle, just not as forgiving of poor cheek weld that the larger optics are.
 
Thanks, Crow, that makes a lot of sense.

I've had a Comp M4 and it was a brick.

I am looking forward to a much lighter Aimpoint.

Larry Vickers swears by them.
 
The are MUCH lighter, if you run it way back towards the BUIS it makes it much better in IMHO.

Of course, doing the same thing with a M4 gives you even more. :D That is they way I run mine.

I like the M4 because of the clear Aimpoint Factory lense covers, the 2 screws into the housing for the mount, the easy to adjust rheostat and the AA battery. Which being an X-box player, I have lying around in copious amounts.:D
 
HAHA.

My life revolves around that and guns. Can't help it.

There are always AA batteries in my house, for the X-box controllers.

Maybe that clarifies a bit. Especially with the Cancun 2 for 1.

Watch out for Montezuma's Revenge.:D
 
Life is about trade offs.

The T1 is much lighter with less bulk but may be a tad slower to acquire a good sight picture in less than ideal situations due to the narrower tube than the CompM4.

Since lighter is almost always an advantage in virtually every situation outside of bench rest shooting, I picked the T1.
 
And the other nice thing about the Aimpoints is that they hold their value, so they are easy to sell/trade.

I sold my Comp M4 a while back and got just about what I paid for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top