Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Benelli Forums

calviroman

Members
  • Content Count

    156
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by calviroman

  1. Hi -- it appears to be an OEM C-Stock. As I recall the Promag ones had a glossier finish.
  2. Seems legit...excited to see a review. Mesa if you're seeing this get a demo unit over to mrgunsandgear for his M4!
  3. So which of us is going to fly to Europe and smuggle back 500 of these rails?
  4. One interesting item I saw was the Aridus Industries "CROM" mount which replaces the rear sight and also functions similarly to the Scalarworks SYNC Micro. They sell it as a Beretta 1301 part and I messaged them to see if it was M4 compatible (I suspect it is not).
  5. Looks great but must be very heavy with all those shells
  6. Welcome. 1. The magazine spring retainer ring sits in the tube under tension and does not "lock" or "snap" in. Because of this, it is not suggested to remove the thread on magazine end cap when the magazine is loaded as the magazine spring retainer can launch with a good amount of force (ask me how I know) 2. Sorry don't know. Back in 2010 when I put my seven shell tube on to replace the factory five shell tube I can't recall if Kip included a new / longer mag spring or not.
  7. Sounds like a good plan. So long as you're sticking with the factory fixed PG stock, I second going with the new Scalarworks mount for your Aimpoint Micro. Also second that AVA and IWC both make excellent weaponlight mounts for this application. Enjoy the new shotgun! My buddy & I took ours out this past weekend (his an 18.5" and mine a 14") and had a blast out in the desert.
  8. JosERW -- "Strangerdanger" on this forum is a M4 specialty gunsmith and would be a great choice for the work. Obviously the difficult part of PG stock cutdown is making the new buttpad look great. Back in 2010 I had cut down my PG stock but never quite figured out the "make the buttpad match" part and ended up trashing it for a C-stock.
  9. Interesting on the Nordic extension. Yes the cap is the same. While a bit goofy for serious uses, I could see someone running this in a 3-gun match where max capacity is required to be competitive.
  10. Yes - and it is my understanding that there are only two variants of the IWC mount (direct Scout attach or pic rail), so IWC's drop list should only show "Scout direct mount" and "1913 rail" verses the current four options which are somewhat confusing. Regardless of the confusion, great weaponlight mount!
  11. Since its just a short piece -- just post it here and crowdsource feedback
  12. Yes the only "upgrade" for the SBS magazine is a CarrierComp Ti unit. Same length & capacity, slightly lighter. One thing some folks with the SBSs do is pickup a full length CarrierComp Ti magazine (seven shell mag) plus an 18.5" barrel assembly so that they can swap over to a non-NFA configuration for impromptu interstate travel or other apps where the nine shell capacity is beneficial.
  13. From IWC...when selecting the mount there is a drop down list from which you can select the version which includes the rail segment. It's not very clear (poorly worded) on the IWC site which of the last two drop down options you want so you may need to email their customer service for clarification. When I preordered mine I don't recall there being any options and I was direct mounting a Scout so just needed the most basic version.
  14. For an X300 you'll need the picatinny rail attachment option. The basic mount is setup only for direct Scout light attachment so the small rail option will act as an interface adapter for your X300
  15. While I am a fan of oversized safety and bolt release, not digging the style shown.
  16. It's my understanding that it has a retaining bolt that threads, from the rear, into the receiver's recoil spring tube extension. From what I've seen looking at necro posts there may be issues with this bolt coming loose, or causing issues with the extension if threadlocked into place. So SD you don't recommend the Urbino to your customers & for the M4 builds you do now that C-Stocks are readily available for $250? I remember the bad old days where C-Stocks were selling all day long for $450-$500 and before then even higher! When they dipped down to $230 at one point I bought two in case I ever messed mine up!
  17. I've been running a factory C-Stock at the middle "setting" (approx. 12" LOP) for a while now and have always thought the cheek weld was ho-hum. While I do have an OEM Field stock and OEM PG stock (LOP is too long for me on those two) I've never had an Urbino stock. It at least appears to work OK in some video reviews back from when it was first released, but in nearly all cases it seems to have been bought as a budget substitute for a C-Stock at the middle setting and was replacing a OEM PG stock...NOT as a replacement for a OEM C-Stock. For those who have owned and used both the C-Stock and Urbino, preferably with a RDS such as an Aimpoint Micro, is there a general preference for the Urbino over the C-Stock? If buying an Urbino, I'd likely get the model with the LimbSaver and cheek riser (set in its lowest height setting). Thoughts? Current setup is below:
  18. I received mine last week and finally got it all put together. Over the years I've had all the different Benelli M4 light mounts and this one is right up there neck and neck with the AVA Mod 1. Great to see now two excellent weaponlight mounting options. My setup consists of a SF M600U w/ IWC Scout body, UE tailcap, and SR07 pressure switch, mounted to the new IWC Scout mount. The SR07 wire routes through the SF M80 handguard and beneath several LaRue rail covers. The pics pretty much explain the rest. In my opinion, this is a clean setup for those, like me, that do not like to activate their Scout using their weakside thumb and prefer a pressure tape switch. I have found in the past that when under stress I have had a hard time effectively operating the Scout w/ my weakside thumb while rapidly shooting and maneuvering with a shotgun. With this setup I never need to shift or break grip. Also, as a stubborn righthander, I prefer my weaponlights on the right side as it lets me more effectively use cover while not blocking the weaponlight's line of sight to the target.
  19. Received mine today and got it installed. I'm going to run it with a SF M600U in an IWC Scout body, and then with a UE tailcap and a SR07 tape switch. The light will be on the right side of the shotgun with the tape switch on the left side (on a SF M80 rail). No assembled pics yet as I had to order the UE tailcap and SR07. Fun fact is that it appears there may be a clearance issue when using a SF M80 with the standard Z68 tailcap and the new IWC light mount. Likely a non-issue for most as I suspect 90%+ will have the OEM handguards on and activate via a Z68 tailcap. I went with this light setup as it more closely resembles how my other longguns are setup for light activation, and I shoot them much much more than my M4.
  20. Pics look great! Can you please elaborate on what you mean by "extreme lower-third co-witness that is 36% improved over the BOR/RMR"? Thanks.
  21. Very interesting...great option for those running a full length of pull stock (fixed PG stock, C-stock fully extended, or field stock) with an Aimpoint micro. I run in the middle position on a C-stock and can't get a natural cheek weld with the super low mounts such as this, or the irons for that matter.
×
×
  • Create New...