Leaderboard

You wouldn't change your position no matter what amount of evidence was given, so why bother? Telling you about the M4s' with 10,000 rounds of high base through them with EOTech 552's would be a waste of time. Or the 100+ Benelli M4's that have come thru my shop for work in various configurations. So why argue? You can do as you like.

Well I thought it was an improvement on faded sticky plastic ?

When I first install the spring retainer, I leave it poking out the end of the magazine tube about 1/3 its height. When you tighten the magazine tube cap on the first time, it will push the retainer in to the proper depth. If the magazine spring is weak, it will fail to feed the last round in the tube onto the elevator. So load one in the chamber and one in the magazine tube. Fire and see if it loads correctly. Weaker loads are more likely to fail, so you can test this with some low dram valuepack ammunition.

I like that carbon fiber look! Looks like one of the older Sports minus the nickel plating.

The EOTech's were more popular 15 years ago on the Benelli. So I don't see many of them anymore. There are better, smaller options available now. The most popular ones are the Triicon RMR and Aimpoint T1. The Trijicon SRO's are starting to pick up. Sometimes we see an Aimpoint M4 or M5 come thru. One I have had a verified 10,000 rounds of buckshot and slugs thru it. Zero issues with it. We would have a lot more complaints here on this forum and others if it was an issue. Picking a couple complaints out of the internet is a fallacy since we do not know if it was installed correctly. Or if it was one of the Mesa Tactical mounts with the incorrect screws. The main complaint would be with the heavy shell carriers like Mesa Tactical which weigh significantly more than an EOTech. I don't recommend these heavier optics or shell carriers; but the platform will certainly handle them when installed correctly.

My goodness. Didn't mean for this to turn into a dick measuring contest.

I have a friend who is looking for donkey condoms.....can I give him your number?

And what's wrong with an Eotech on a Benelli??? I've had a Benelli M-3' mounted with an Eotech and currently own my M-4 with an Aimpoint Comp 4. I suppose you would have a negative opinion about that as well. At my age and with failing eyesight , for me it is a very effective tool to be used in a complete black out situation where simply pointing the shotgun at intended target may not be as effective as one may think. As a new member you seem to be very opinionated and critical of other members weapons platforms. Each individual is going to build his or her weapon as they see fit to serve them. Nobody really cares how many Eotechs or M-4's that you own. You would be better off sticking to your stenciled paint jobs and sticking them back in the safe where they most likely sit unused. And once again, I am saying a whole lot about something Pal !!!!!!! (Looking forward to our next exchange).

And there is nothing wrong with my Vortex. I like it and I have no problem using it. Works great.

That’s definitely not right. Looks like the brazing failed and the gas block has separated from the barrel. Definitely a back to Benelli situation. The Benelli forend is not available in the US currently.

not much to see since its a black foregrip with black rtv but here you go.

ok here are some pics. I put the RTV in the channel and let it set up over night I didn't degrease it first but maybe I should have. Not sure if its a permanent fix or something that would need to be redone occasionally. It beats the hell out of paying $500 plus for another M80.

I agree completely federal flite control all way. All you need to do is youtube up some tests of flite control vs non flite control and you'll see there's no reason that shouldn't be your first choice.

You talked a lot but said nothing, that fore-end is junk, allows dirt to get into the piston system. Its "it looks tacticool" piece of pure absolute JUNK period.

Ok that would make sense.

What does? The Salvo?

who on earth puts a honking EOTECH (i love eotechs, i own 6 of em) on a M4 !?!?!?!?! UghhhhhhhhhhHHH!!

Holy sweet Jebus.... what is that giant refrigerator sized monstrosity sitting on top of that M4? no, just noooooooooooooooo.

its called a SHEERING MASS. Benelli will flat out tell you not to mount an absurd mass like that on top of a Benelli. Are you a gunsmith? I am.

Lets see if I can dispel some myths here. The top rail is plenty strong to mount whatever optic you want. I've used EOTech 552's in the past on the M4 without any mounting issues. The problem is improper installation of the top rail to the receiver and the lack of thread locking compound to keep the screws tight. The receiver is quite thin where the top rail screws are mounted. Factory specification states that 12-14 inch pounds of torque be applied to the screws. This is very light. Two fingers on the screw driver will deliver that amount of torque easily. What you want to do is to prep both the screws and the receiver holes with an acetone based cleaner. If the screws have thread locker on them from past installations, you will want to clean them off mechanically. I prefer a wire wheel brush on a Dremel to remove this material. Then you want to use blue Loctite #243 which is formulated for bonding dissimilar metals together. In this case, steel screws and an aluminum receiver. You don't want to go past the torque specs given because the screws will protrude into the receiver and prevent the barrel from being inserted. Or, if you had the barrel installed during this, the screws will be making contact with the barrel extension and you won't be able to remove the barrel. Over torquing the screws can also damage the aluminum receiver and strip the threads. It was mentioned that Mesa Tactical had issues in the past. The reason for this was originally Mesa Tactical supplied the incorrect screws for the thread pitch. This has been corrected for a long time. Figure a Mesa Tactical shell carrier weighs around 6 ounces empty. I think some of them hold eight shells. At 2 ounces a piece, you're bolting on around 22 ounces.

If you don't like the obstructions from the rear sight, why not remove the entire rear sight assembly? You'll cut about 3 ounces of weight. You could also remove the front sight hood to unclutter the sight picture.

logical and reasonable, yes. nods head Contra-indicative use premise being however that all battery operated sights under adverse conditions take a dump on themselves given a chance, .....and redundancy is god. i.e. backup iron sights. hugs and kisses

not really, theyre both laser or laser from beam-splitter projections on semi-mirrored glass

some are (the junk ones), not all.

...and to my knowledge no red dot or holographic sights use a laser. They are all led illuminated. Most lasers today are led powered though... I'm a certified, bonafide optics repair technician, licensed by zeiss and Leica geosystems. I even have a fancy name badge!?

ROFL......... there are no MOUNTING ISSUES.... that goes without saying, the ISSUE is keeping an Eotech (or something even larger) MOUNTED over xxxx# 1000s of shots fired. 1. the M4 / M2 receiver is ALUMINUM 2. Mass / inertia SHEERING FORCED imparted by good old Newtonian LAW will SHEER the screws, and if the screws manage to NOT SHEER, the threads will STRIP,........PERIOD and NONE OF THIS has a single darn thing to do with loctite and or proper torque applied to those screws. You said "Lets see if I can dispel some myths here" the only MYTH on this thread are the countless people that think laws of Newton / Physics DONT APPLY to a HUGE MASS sitting on a rail screwed into an ALUMINUM RECEIVER

Is that what passes for an intelligent rebuttal here in the "Land of OZ"? tell it to this guy (below) that mounted a large-mass (same as an Eotech) Aimpoint on his M4 sheered off Im a gunsmith and seen it happen twice on Benellis. So, Marsha,.... facts are facts. The laws of Newton / Physics STILL APPLY

you: 1. NO EVIDENCE 2. your own anecdotal account. me: 1. one example posted above...yet another one below... ( i can post 2 more if you wish) 2. laws of Newton / Physics 3. Seen it happen twice myself.

Please report back: 1. how many of those people unintelligently mounted an Eotech or larger on their Benelli 2. Of those that DID,...... how many rounds down the barrel otherwise its called a hearsay fallacy.

most lasers ARE LEDs son..... both are point-source light emissions. glad i could fix that confusion for you

This is about TACTICAL USE / BUILD of a Benelli………NOT skeet, not birds from a blind! etc Typical accurate but 100% IGNORANT statement ::: “Again, go shoot skeet with an optic and see how good you do and how fast you are.”. TRUE, but skeet / birds is NOT a tactical setup for a Benelli M2 / M4 !! 99% of which is SLUGS and 00 BUCK for CQB use……Iron sights are wonderful for countless reasons, but a holographic display is best in most instances for accuracy in use of CQB, Eotech is the best holographic display, but an insanely ignorant, obnoxious horrific idea to put on a ANY BENELLI , ever. ….. I love EOTECHs and own 7 of them, but NONE OF THEM are mounted on any of my Benellis for what should be a totally obvious set of reasons >>>>>Option #1 below: Eotech are the best HWS (holographic weapons sight) but they’re HUGE and not for shotgun use, ever PERIOD… (I own 7 of them! I love eotechs)….They are the WORST IDEA imaginable to mount on any Benelli, the mass of same will SHEER the screws (seen it happen 2 times to others) holding the pic rail to the frame, also too, it will splay / enlarge the threaded screw holes on the frame……not only is this absurd, its like a elephant riding on a horse……Its both sketch and cringe worthy to see one mounted on a Benelli….. I love the heck out of EOTECHs!,…..but that is NEVER going on a Benelli for countless reasons! Ughhhh!. >>>>Option #2 below: (now we are talking!!!!) Either Vortex Razor Red dot (what I use on my Benellis) or the Trijicon are the ACTUAL HWS (holographic weapons sight) that should be used on a Benelli!! Incredible FOV for CQB or dropping a slug ACCURATELY on a subject at 50+ yards (if needed). ……….Option #2 (most logical in my conclusion , see option #3 below) does NOT co-witness with the iron sights and that is 100% exactly what I want, I do not want the busy &$%((^(#!!! Mess of iron sights in the window of my HWS (holographic weapons sight) !!. https://vortexoptics.com/vortex-razor-red-dot.html?vortex_reticle=942 >>>>Option #3 below: Sleek, low profile, the “sexy” option…..a Trijicon on the sclarworks……PROBLEM???? See picture below…..i tried this setup on a buddies gun and its HORRIFIC, I hated it, I do NOT NOT NOT want iron sights sticking its ‘butt’ in my face occluding my HWS (holographic weapons sight) WINDOW!! Of course this is subjective, but I hate to Hades and back of having my HWS (holographic weapons sight) occluded by anything, …….i laugh every time someone praises the co-witnessing of iron sights with optics…….Ughhhh! https://scalarworks.com/shop/optic-mounts/sync-trijicon-rmr-mount/ >>>>Option #4 below: Or something like this where an Elephant is riding on the back of a pony ……. (rolls eyes)…… Seen several Benellis have something like this The Benelli frame is ALUMINUM, the shock and sheer force from such a mass will , given time, SHEER the bolts from the frame, but will with 100% certainly splay / enlarge the holes on the frame….. this is NOT a STEEL FRAMED Remington 870 !! Top heavy disaster / mess,…….. you just do NOT put optics like this on a Benelli, …….. EVERRRRRRRRRRRRR.