Aimpoint vs. aimpoint: PRO vs. CompC3 vs. CompM3?

[Clay]

From what I can see of the specs the PRO and the CompM3 are almost identical.

so between the 3 what are the advantages / disadvantages??

thanks!
clay

 

[shooter521]

Aimpoint has a great comparison tool on their website, where you can put up all 3 models and the differences will be highlighted.

http://www.aimpoint.com/us/products/product-comparison/

 

[esrice]

The specs on ALL Aimpoints are relatively similar, with minor changes in battery life or size. In the end it comes down to small preferences.

 

[Clay]

yup, I tried that comparison tool which lead me to believe they were almost identical except for battery life and case construction.

I dug deeper on the net and found people saying the PRO was a M2 w/ a 2MOA dot. Either way, I think I have my answer. I think the PRO is the direction Im going to go. Its less expensive, and will do exactly what I want, and still be fairly bullet proof.

 

[tradertator]

The PRO is an outstanding optic. Probably the best buy out there in heavy duty red dots.

 

[esrice]

PRO was a M2 w/ a 2MOA dot.

I liked my C3 that had the 2MOA dot.

The only thing I don't like about the PRO is the included mount. I'd have to swap it out for a LaRue anyway.

 

[Airborne33]

comp m3 comes with a rubber on it. Might be made out of a slightly more durable aluminum. Batter life a little longer. Comp Pro is a LE or civilian scope, the comp m3 is a military scope. About the only differences.

My money? I'd go with the m3 or save up for an acog

 

[Streck-Fu]

The Aimpoint PRO doesn't have the high efficiency electronics. That's a pretty expensive feature but otherwise, the PRO is the same. If you don't need 2 year battery life, why spend the extra money?

 

[ultraspec]

Whats the difference in the MOA's of various dots? I mean what practical difference does it make?

 

[esrice]

Whats the difference in the MOA's of various dots? I mean what practical difference does it make?

A 2MOA dot covers an area of 2" at 100 yards. A 4MOA dot covers an area of 4" at 100 yards. The smaller dot allows a slightly more precise aiming point at distance.

 

[lovemachine]

I've never used a 2 MOA, so I'm curious. If the 2 MOA is more accurate for longer distance, why would you want the 4MOA?

Is it just easy to see at 100 yards?

What would the difference be at, say, 25 yards?

 

[esrice]

I've never used a 2 MOA, so I'm curious. If the 2 MOA is more accurate for longer distance, why would you want the 4MOA?

There is very little difference. Usually turning the dot's intensity up or down slightly is enough to change the visible portion of the dot.

 

[03A3]

I keep looking pretty hard at the C3. I've never heard anything but good about them. They do not have NV capability which is not an issue for me.
The only real difference I see in them is the temperature range. Of (hopefully) lesser importance is a difference in the tube metal.
The price is decent and I may very well go with a C3 for my next purchase.
Did Aimpoint change their policy on selling the PRO to LE only? I have found a few places that sell to civilians, or they were not long ago. I am waiting, thinking that Aimpoint will change that policy at some point in time.

 

[Stainer]

I love my PRO. It is my first Aimpoint, but it is amazing. While yes, a longer battery life would be "better", it's not necessary for me as I am required to go to the range twice a year anyways so if I swap it out every other trip, I will always be good. Mine is still in the provided mount and works just fine for me. I am currently in the process of building an SBR and I plan to use a T1 on that just because a smaller sight looks better on a smaller rifle, but I would recommend the PRO to anyone. I purchased mine from DSGarms.com as their price seemed pretty good. Purchased on a Sunday night, arrived the following Wednesday.

 

[esrice]

The only real difference I see in them is the temperature range. Of (hopefully) lesser importance is a difference in the tube metal.

I had a C3. Great optic.

The underwater rating was lesser than the M3, but I'm not aware of any temperature rating.

What's this about different tube metal? Perhaps the anodizing was slightly different but I don't believe its construction was any different.

 

[Clay]

the C3 and PRO are 'high strength aluminum", while the M3 is "extruded high strength aluminum".

 

[03A3]

I'd say the difference in tube construction is a non-issue.

The temperature operating range could possibly be an issue if a C3 were on an Ultimak.
I'm speculating. I have a temperature gun but I've never taken any Ultimak/optic temperature readings so I don't have anything to go on.

Temperature range :
C3 = -20 to +140 degrees Farenheit.
M3 = -50 to +160 degrees Farenheit.

For all I know the Ultimak setup may exceed both.

This is probably another case of me overthinking something.

 

[Airborne33]

4 moa will be a little quicker. Depending on your eyesight you might want the slightly larger dot. If you end up with a 4 MOA you should be able to hit targets out to 300m no issues. If you are trying to shoot stuff past there, really should be using a different optic all together.

 

[ultraspec]

Would you guys pick an ACOG or Aimpoint given the choice?

I know the ACOG doesnt require batteries.....and is more expensive but which one given the choice?

 

[esrice]

Would you guys pick an ACOG or Aimpoint given the choice?

Two very different optics for two very different missions. Its apples to oranges.

An Aimpoint fills all of my needs.