Unobtanium

M4 entry 11.5-12.5 SBR 5.56 Glock 19 or equivalent This would cover everything pretty much that one could conceive.

Are you saying LE133 didnt cycle reliably?

The 940 heads are about reduction of signature, not performance with common intensifier tubes. If you were to step into a SWIR platform it may be nuts though, not sure.

M300v is going to produce much more detectable light than ML 940. Keep in mind...the ML is pumping out a TON of light...so dont look at it!!!! Its just in the range beyond what your intensifier sees. It can still cause mechanical and biological harm just like it was a modlite OKW.

940nm be like that. You have a spicy 14, but l3 filmless taps out at around 1000nm near completely.

I'd prefer a laser. User's choice of green or IR. Red is kindof played out. An IR laser in the snout cap would be worth losing 1 round of ammo over, for me anyway. I would want something 810g/IPX8 or at least IPX7 certified and properly made. Yes this would cost.

With the IR head it's annoying but it's not really any worse than what you get off of a can on an SBR with it. Point being, if you keep the gun in one position for too long while "looking over the barrel" with the light on, you will get some transient ghosting in your PVS14 tube that will go away after a few minutes of use, but it's not going to damage it unless you were to sit in position for a "long" period of time. Chalk it up to "looking at a street light" type exposure, but not as bad since it's very indirect. It especially isn't bad behind the gun as you are using it. The main "damage" is that it can cause the ABC to kick in and "dim" the tube a hair and you may lose some detail through your optic due to this. Just have to test it and find out.

The M600 AAV will offer M300V performance using AA batteries and push the head out further, still. My guess is by roughly 0.5". It will also open up L91 as a fuel source. Crazy shelf life. At the expense of 100 lumens vs m600V.

SBS and IWC. I took these to showcase the effects. Last photo is where left tube would be with binos, and a 14 wont even hardly see it if worn over dominant eye once the gun is up. Taken on viz, ir is same pattern/spill. Its a compromise between fouling the lens, and light pollution with NODs, for me.

Truthfully no. I remember them selling for $249, I believe it was, and I recall them sitting for some time both in stock at benelliparts, as well as people on the forums failing to sell them for rather low prices, as well. C-Stocks are DIRECTLY tied to availability for pricing. They are probably some of the most market-sensitive firearm related goods that exist. If you want to know how "guns are doing", price C-stocks.

I have assembly wear from Benelli. My shotgun was never done as such. It is what it is. Not saying the damage shown in the OP is the same, just saying.

Guns are assembled and test fired by Benelli.

Correct diameter cheap punch. Full send. She gone bend. Buy a few.

Department or officer wrote it off as operating expenses, got new guns, profit. Hospitals do this all the time as non profits with furniture for example.

This is what I tell people. The 1301 is good, but it's not the absolute hammer the m4 is.

This is the result of 10 rounds of Hydrashok (LE127RS) fired unsupported from the standing at a normal pace without trying too hard. The target is 12" wide. The firearm was a 14" CYL bore M4 Entry model with FFT rail, ADM Ti mount, and Aimpoint 4moa H2. The distance is 65y.

The M1014 has always been a fixed MOD diameter choked barrel. Regular Foster or Brenneke style slugs are fine. I am not familiar personally with these "Tornado" slugs and won't speak to it, but have read very lackluster accuracy reports about them on various forums.

The use of foster style or brenneke rifles slugs will not harm the m1014 barrel. I personally prefer federal LR hydrashok slugs. Accuracy looks like what OP got but at 75 yards or more, and barrel leading is minimal while 1300fps with 1oz is a pretty sweet spot recoil/cycling reliability wise. Terminally, they are tested by Vista to do great, and the gel test and barrier data is found online. Compared to trueball, accuracy in my m4 sbs is identical, but with less leading from the HS. https://le.vistaoutdoor.com/ammunition/federal/slug/details.aspx?id=706

The 1301 is being pushed hard by a lot of people who do shotgun training right now, as well. It's not a bad thing, the 1301 is a great shotgun, but it does due to mention that it is being pushed very hard.

I would be interested, but contingent on weight savings.

I borescoped my M4 sbs after several hundred rounds of slug and buck. No barrel side port orifice fouling buildup was noted.

To be fair, I think they are more popular and more available.

Are you Mr Yu, op?