Duggan

It's been introduced before, it's not going anywhere yet, not that we should get complacent but this bill is a joke. At least I'm told/read/believe/hope.

That's the same crappy rail that comes on an m4 regularly ...

Smooth bore? http://www.ammunitiontogo.com/catalog1/index.php/cName/12-gauge-slug Check out the Tru-Balls Use a looser choke for more accuracy. While you can shoot a slug out of any choke without damaging the weapon, shooting a slug through a "tight" constriction will deform the slug, degrading accuracy. Use a modified or looser choke if you want to get the most out of your patterns. Lots of people use IC it seems with slugs, but I'm not really a slug expert.

I use the same rounds .... excect the full recoil ones ... and the ones that are 1325 fps http://le.atk.com/general/federalproducts/shotshell/tacticalbuckshot.aspx The last one on the list. Too bad Federal has stopped selling their good ammo to us lowly civilians, looks like I'll need to find another cop to make my ammo purchases for me unfortunately. I just ordered 100 of their "TACTICAL LAW ENFORCEMENT RESTRICTED ULTIMATE KILL ZONE OH RAH" truball slugs though, I have high expectations for them ... http://le.atk.com/general/federalproducts/shotshell/tacticaltruballrifleslug.aspx

Oh come on, this place isn't nearly as rough as arfcom GD.

Excellent work!

You should let the gun do the work. That said, federal low recoil OO has worked fine for me, but I only use full power stuff now. The m4 will cycle 90% of low recoil stuff, there is one brand I found that it didn't want to cycle, I forget what ... but pretty much anything that isn't less than lethal it will cycle ... but every gun is different and you never know until you try it, so buy a bunch of types of stuff and get to shooting!

Sometimes I get knocked over from the recoil on my Benelli ... one time I landed on my elbow and got a really big bruise that my mommy had to put a band aid on ... help guys, is there any solution to this utterly unmanageable recoil? I want my 12 gauge full power 3.5 inch shotgun to feel like a 22LR.

Ya, GG&G's design seems to be less vulnerable to the stubby m4 rail, as if I recall correctly they use more of a screw type design than a bar to hold the optic in place and act as the clasp. The point remains the same though, you should be able to use any optic mount on a military grade weapon mount without fear of permanently mangling your equiptment. You shouldn't have to change mounts (going from larue to GG&G is a downgrade really) just to get acceptable performance out of your stuff. A rail that was actually in spec would solve this problem.

Yes. Anywhere you have friction in the same pattern for an extended period of time you will get wear ... it's just a matter of how much wear or how long it takes to become noticeable. Pictures on the internet hide a lot of flaws at times, I wouldn't stress it. heck, you want to see pics of the wear on my m4? http://www.benelliusa.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16695&highlight=m4+receiver+wear

M4's come with a built in ACOG now? Worry not, my m4 did the same thing ... it jammed like crazy for the first 100 or so rounds, with target shells, buckshot, everything ... then it miraculously went away and hasn't had a single failure since, 11,000 rounds later. My advice would be to just put as many shells as you can through it ... I bet the problem goes away. Let us know.

I've seen one supernova collapsible stock ever posted on here, and it wasn't a guy from the US. I imagine it would be worth quite a bit of money to the right person ... but then again supernova owners are cheap wannabe m4 owners, so perhaps they would not pay the outrageous prices m4 owners seem to be willing to pay.

Offer $1500. If he doesn't know the value of the stock, $1500 is a good price for a used old model m4. The actual gun is worth ~1400 in used condition ... the stock is worth ~700 sold as the 2 parts with no box probably on gunbroker. You'd have to get a ~100 dollar tube to make it able to collapse if you wanted to keep it, a replacement pistol grip stock if you were to sell the collapsible would be in the ~100-150 range, unless you can get someone on here to sell you their pistol grip stock.

This needs to stay bumped and updated!

Not sure, I'll look around I suppose, but I know next to nothing about machining and the process ... You're looking for blank lengths of pre-machined rails? Then you would cut to length, shape the bottom and anodize yourself?

cool stuff

I do what I can I'm just trying to help and explain things that I've learned work or don't work from my experience. I'll be waiting to see what type of ETA and info Kip has for us about a replacement rail

Use whatever you need.

^^That's the underside of my eotech mount after I dremeled off the metal that had been smooshed to eitehr side by the m4's stubs (you can see where the stubs grabbed on ... it's where the metal starts to be smooshed). The mount still works, but it isn't pretty, may have an altered return to zero when removed, and it shouldn't have been put under that type of stress. The fault lies 100% in the rail design, the optics mount is strong as an oxe and made to spec, while the rail is not. So, my point is that while you CAN use most optics mounts with the m4's stock rail, it is a pretty weak system that will fail if put under stress. If you have a really nice optic mount, plan on handling your weapon roughly, or plan on putting your life in your weapons hands, this may be something to consider. I'd link to a solution to the problem ... but I don't think there is one at the moment. I thought Mesa Tactical and Sidearmor both made replacement rails that used full bars instead of stubs, but upon closer inspection they both imitate Benelli and use the inferior stub design. This is just a heads up, and a post I will use later on to answer inevitable questions that will arise about the m4 and mounting optics. PS - Perhaps I can convince Carriercomp to make this simple replacement part to the proper specs Update - 9/28/10 - Justice has arrived. The replacement, vastly superior rail from Carriercomp is now completed and shipping. http://shop.carriercomp.com/product.sc?productId=6&categoryId=5 One of the M4s few weak links has now been fixed! Thanks to Carriercomp for making this possible. There also now is another alternative to the stock rail made available by Sidearmor ... it is a much larger rail, with options for forward light mounting above the handguard and 2 different shell carriers. This rail is available with and without the center cut rail groove ... be sure to order without if you order! http://www.sidearmor.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=28_30&products_id=70 Either option should be good to go and vast improvement over the stock option. Personal preferences are personal, etc.

In these 2 pictures you can kind of tell the height difference ... it is minimal but it is there (it's hard to capture on camera, the shadows make things look funny) In the second picture you can clearly see the problem with the rail, look at how small of an area the optic mount has to grab onto ... just 2 shallow stubs at either side instead of a big tall full length bar of rail. ^^See how small of an area the optic mount has to grab on to? If you catch that optic mount on something and put it under stress, it will likely cause problems, as it only has a tiny bit of rail to hold onto ... likely the following picture will happen.

Now, to compare the m4 optic rail to a legitimate 1913 picatinny rail, as seen on my LMT MRP: (The MRP is always on the left, the M4 is always on the right)

I've said this a bunch of times, but never really took pictures or explained my position until just now, when I was prompted by another thread to show exactly what the problem is. The problem is that the m4 rail is slightly "shorter" than a 1913 rail when you measure it's height from the receiver, but more importantly it is made up of "stubs" instead of a solid "bar" of rail. The result is that optics mounts (most all of which are made for 1913 picatinny spec) have 2 small, shallow "stubs" to grab onto in order to anchor the optic, as opposed to a full height, full width "bar" that lets it fully grab on as was intended. The end result of this is that your optic is not mounted to the receiver rail nearly as strongly as it would be the m4 used a proper 1913 rail. You can and will twist/scrap/contort/ruin your mount/rail if you use your weapon roughly, shoot heavy rounds consistently or drop/snag/smash your m4. It happens, rail damage occurs as a result in most cases. I personally botched up up a Larue Tactical EOTech mount a few years ago in this manner, as I did not realize that the m4's bootleg rail would cause an issue. I shot my weapon quite a bit and handled it roughly, and I have an optic mount that has been "pushed" out of shape as a result. You can see it in the last picture ... other members on this forum and on other boards have had similar things occur. As I was saying in the other thread, this is reason alone to consider getting a replacement top optic rail for your m4 ... but upon further inspection it seems that both Mesa Tactical and Sidearmor (the 2 companies I was going to suggest) both use the Benelli "stub" style rail, and they both claim it to be 1913 picatinny ... which it is not. Behold, the 1913 picatinny specification: As you can see, the spec calls for full "bars" of rail, not "stubs" as Benelli and all the benelli accessory makers seem to be copying.

Wow, now that's an SBS m4!

I must not be explaining it well. The rail that is attached to the receiver of the m4 is NOT 1913 picatinny spec, aka "mil spec". It is close, and thus you can get away with using mounts that are made for mil-spec rails, but it is not optimal or nearly as strong. Ideally, you would replace the rail on the receiver with one that is mil-spec (I dunno why it's not from the factory, maybe they all use these bootleg rails in italy?) and then you could use a mil-spec mount without having to worry about it. As it stands though, the rail on the benelli receiver is "shorter and stubbier" than a 1913 rail ... it's only tall enough to engage just the lower half to quarter of the optic mounts perpendicular "holder slot" that is designed to go fully into the rail and thus prevent front the back movement. The result is that you have an optic that can/will clamp onto the rail, but it is holding on by a much smaller margin than is intended. As such, it is much weaker than it was designed to be. It is VERY possible to jolt your optic, snag something, or even shoot enough heavy rounds that your optic mount will become damaged. As previously mentioned, I have beat up a larue tactical eotech mount from this fashion (it was a major wtf at the time as I didn't realize the rails weren't the right spec) and other members on this board have also stripped and ruined optic mounts from putting them on the m4 rail. So, to answer your question, you CAN use whatever optic mount you want on the stock m4 rail ... it's just a matter of how strong your optic will be held on, and what damage will occur when you start to use your weapon heavily. Meh, might as well take pics. Here you go, I made a nice big thread based on your question http://www.benelliusa.com/forum/showthread.php?p=100719&posted=1#post100719