View Full Version : Geissele super precision....
I hope this is correct section mods.
Can't wait to get some more info on this... Wonder how it compares to a larue mount.
http://www.recoilweb.com/quiet-dod-geissele-project-revealed-super-precision-mount-74351.html
I would be interesting if they jumped into the mount business.
sevenhelmet
10-08-15, 18:35
Looks similar to LaRue's LT mount... only better. :cool:
Looks similar to LaRue's LT mount... only better. :cool:
I'm gonna assume you've never actually seen a LaRue mount.
Looks like a NightForce Uni-Mount to me.
Interested to see weight.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm gonna assume you've never actually seen a LaRue mount.
Looks like a NightForce Uni-Mount to me.
Or a Badger Ordnance unimount with some lightning cuts.
http://www.badgerordnance.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/thumbnail/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/3/0/306-96.png
This is my NightForce Unimount weight. 30mm 1.375" height.
http://i.imgur.com/42K4OIN.jpg?1
sevenhelmet
10-08-15, 20:45
I'm gonna assume you've never actually seen a LaRue mount.
Looks like a NightForce Uni-Mount to me.
Assume whatever you want, but I think you missed my point, which was it looks way better!
Assume whatever you want, but I think you missed my point, which was it looks way better!
No, you're just trying to look cool by bashing LaRue for no reason.
No, you're just trying to look cool by bashing LaRue for no reason.
He is making a subjective post based on his opinion and you are telling him he is wrong and trying to look cool? Give it a rest, your opinion is yours, and his is his. This isn't the ARFCOM cheerleading section.
Anyways, actually talking about this mount....
Do we have any engineers or metallurgy guys here who can give us a hint at how much this might weigh and how strong it might be?
Would you guys be more interested in a throw lever version or the version shown?
Anyways, actually talking about this mount....
Do we have any engineers or metallurgy guys here who can give us a hint at how much this might weigh and how strong it might be?
Would you guys be more interested in a throw lever version or the version shown?
It will be significantly more rigid than 7075, and a few % lighter. However, mass will determine weight, not material, in this case/with this item. Engineering will determine rigidity, with the material enhancing the design. I am wondering what makes it better than a NF Unimount, in a technical sense, to be honest.
Anyways, actually talking about this mount....
Do we have any engineers or metallurgy guys here who can give us a hint at how much this might weigh and how strong it might be?
Would you guys be more interested in a throw lever version or the version shown?
I would be more interested in a throw lever.
He is making a subjective post based on his opinion and you are telling him he is wrong and trying to look cool? Give it a rest, your opinion is yours, and his is his. This isn't the ARFCOM cheerleading section.
Right. Because I'm sure everyone saw it and though 'Wow, just like a LaRue but better!'...
Note the striking similarities:
http://i.imgur.com/ndX2n.jpg
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/GA_01-660x393.jpg
Right. Because I'm sure everyone saw it and though 'Wow, just like a LaRue but better!'...
Note the striking similarities:
http://i.imgur.com/ndX2n.jpg
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/GA_01-660x393.jpg
There is only so many ways you can make a cantilever mount. The LT rings and the Bobro are totally different. So if anything, the mount looks more like a Bobro or KAC product than a LT mount.
http://www.bobroengineering.com/img/?filename=78ae0ad725d5e953d2748c0778170ed2.jpg&width=480
http://www.knightarmco.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/30_34mm_aimpoint_mount.jpg
What matters more than looks is how well it stays on the rail. I would be interested in seeing how it interfaces.
C4
sevenhelmet
10-09-15, 09:38
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rwPovyR9HY
For the record, I have an LT104 QD on one of my rifles, and it's a fantastically made mount. I'll sit back and keep my mouth shut from now on. Go LaRue! Go BoBro! Go Giessele! Go M4C! :cool:
The alloy is intriguing. The extra cuts just add cost and machine time. No QD? I don't quite understand the target market, other than people that run G everything. Which is fine. To each, his own.
I'm not turned off by the lack of QD capability. For a dedicated precision application, the nuts may be desirable because you can use a torque wrench to install and have everything just how you want it.
There is only so many ways you can make a cantilever mount. The LT rings and the Bobro are totally different. So if anything, the mount looks more like a Bobro or KAC product than a LT mount.
http://www.bobroengineering.com/img/?filename=78ae0ad725d5e953d2748c0778170ed2.jpg&width=480
http://www.knightarmco.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/30_34mm_aimpoint_mount.jpg
What matters more than looks is how well it stays on the rail. I would be interested in seeing how it interfaces.
C4
And that's not a bad thing at all, they're good mounts.
Lots of good options these days and I like that Geissele made this in DDC. Black is boring at times.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/GA_01-660x393.jpg
http://media.midwayusa.com/productimages/880x660/Primary/413/413480.jpg
The alloy is intriguing. The extra cuts just add cost and machine time. No QD? I don't quite understand the target market, other than people that run G everything. Which is fine. To each, his own.
Most people NEVER remove their mounts. I have QD everything and RARELY remove them. Also, if you use a witness mark or a calibrated torque wrench, you can return to zero any screwed on mount (done it many a time). QD's also drive cost. So hopefully this mount will be cheaper.
C4
Everything I have is QD, and yup, it's usually on there all the time. But a step backwards in capability? I've had optics fail. Magnified optics at that. QD is nice.
As for cost? I imagine these will rival Spuhr.
This mount looks great. I am sure it will be a hit. The Al-Li allow is very interesting; I wonder if we will see Geissle fore-ends made from this alloy.
That mount looks fantastic. I'm a huge supporter of Geissele and his team. Good on 'em.
Everything I have is QD, and yup, it's usually on there all the time. But a step backwards in capability? I've had optics fail. Magnified optics at that. QD is nice.
As for cost? I imagine these will rival Spuhr.
Very few precision shooters want QD. Nightforce, KAC, Spuhr are all fixed mounts. Let's not forget that the mount was designed for a specific request, not the mass market.
On that note, how is it that Geissele seems to get these contracts for things like the 416 rail, SSF trigger, Precision Mount, etc?
They should have put the nuts on the right side.
They don't dig into your chest or back when doing it that way.
They look good. Really good. I'd buy one on aesthetics alone.
Most people NEVER remove their mounts. I have QD everything and RARELY remove them. Also, if you use a witness mark or a calibrated torque wrench, you can return to zero any screwed on mount (done it many a time). QD's also drive cost. So hopefully this mount will be cheaper.
C4
Considering the whiz bang NASA alloy and the cost we typically see on KAC or NF mounts, do you think that's possible?
The more the merrier and more innovation to keep business. In the end it's good for us, the consumer.
Geissele generally isn't known for putting out crap so the mount will undoubtedly be good. Special alloy and all that will drive up pricing as this stuff isn't your run if the mill 6062 or 7075 that is pretty much prolific in the market. This is still specialty material.
elephantrider
10-10-15, 03:00
Not sure if everyone missed it, or just no one bothered to mention it, but this mount supposedly returns to zero without tools. Perhaps it is removable w/o tools as well? Even if it requires a tool to removal, that isn't a deal breaker for me personally.
I'm not sure what all the griping and sniping is all about, this mount isn't released yet and neither are all the details on it. There are lots of good mount choices out already, but knowing Geissele, they probably didn't design and mfg. a 'me to' mount. My guess is they probably sought to surpass existing mounts in a couple key areas or else they wouldn't have bothered. We're going to have to wait a little longer to get the full story and end the speculation.
Not sure if everyone missed it, or just no one bothered to mention it, but this mount supposedly returns to zero without tools. Perhaps it is removable w/o tools as well? Even if it requires a tool to removal, that isn't a deal breaker for me personally.
I'm not sure what all the griping and sniping is all about, this mount isn't released yet and neither are all the details on it. There are lots of good mount choices out already, but knowing Geissele, they probably didn't design and mfg. a 'me to' mount. My guess is they probably sought to surpass existing mounts in a couple key areas or else they wouldn't have bothered. We're going to have to wait a little longer to get the full story and end the speculation.
It requires tools. Its just not torque sensitive. They nearly fill the 1913 slot with multiple lugs, the screws are square, and it's made from a solid block with the ring caps cut with a jeweler saw after the rings are bored in the same operations. Its absurdly precisely made. 5.1oz or so total weight. Basically, remove and replace with a leatherman, and it will hold zero. It will actually hood zero even if you don't tighten it to the rail, as crazy as that sounds, as long as someone holds it in place so it doesn't fall off when you shoot. It indexes off the "v" and not the top of the 1913 rail. QD might be in the works later.
Considering the whiz bang NASA alloy and the cost we typically see on KAC or NF mounts, do you think that's possible?
350 dolla!
jerrysimons
10-10-15, 08:28
This thing sounds exceptional! $10 says Jim Hodge is lurking somewhere in the background of development with his buddy Bill G...
Dang awesome space metal must be real hard to come by too!
elephantrider
10-10-15, 18:02
It requires tools. Its just not torque sensitive. They nearly fill the 1913 slot with multiple lugs, the screws are square, and it's made from a solid block with the ring caps cut with a jeweler saw after the rings are bored in the same operations. Its absurdly precisely made. 5.1oz or so total weight. Basically, remove and replace with a leatherman, and it will hold zero. It will actually hood zero even if you don't tighten it to the rail, as crazy as that sounds, as long as someone holds it in place so it doesn't fall off when you shoot. It indexes off the "v" and not the top of the 1913 rail. QD might be in the works later.
Good to know. I found the same info on another forum, which is supposedly straight from Bill G. Overall a very nice looking mount with an early ballpark price of $350 (I also assume this price is for the standard Al version and not the premium 2099 version). Supposedly multiple 30mm and 34mm versions (this could be either various scope heights, cantilever lengths, or ring spacing) in both 0 and 20 MOA cant will be offed at initial launch in January.
Seems like this will be an alternative to current Nightforce and Badger Ordnance offerings.
Not sure if everyone missed it, or just no one bothered to mention it, but this mount supposedly returns to zero without tools. Perhaps it is removable w/o tools as well? Even if it requires a tool to removal, that isn't a deal breaker for me personally.
I'm not sure what all the griping and sniping is all about, this mount isn't released yet and neither are all the details on it. There are lots of good mount choices out already, but knowing Geissele, they probably didn't design and mfg. a 'me to' mount. My guess is they probably sought to surpass existing mounts in a couple key areas or else they wouldn't have bothered. We're going to have to wait a little longer to get the full story and end the speculation.
This was posted by Bill on TOS and it should give folks good insight to the product. These have been in production since the Spring so this isn't a "new" product for Geissele - just something that recently was shown at the Big 3 in Daytona and RECOIL caught wind of a Facebook post. I think folks will like it once they get it in hand.
"Gents,
Like many of Geissele's products the Super Precision mounts started with the DOD and a specific request. I didn't develop these in a vacuum, but put together the design specification from what I was told, and the things lacking in other scope mounts that are on the market.
What was needed was a mount that
*was very stiff and did not use the scope as a structural member
*highly accurately machined and true ring bores
*a specific way of clamping to the upper receiver picatinny (using the Vees, not the loosely toleranced top as a datum)
*integral shear lugs that had a close fit to the slots in the upper receiver
*QD, toolless was not needed
*no levers which don't hold up (don't shoot me, not my words but theirs)
*proper fit to the scopes that the mount is used for (no rings jammed up against the turrets or objective)
*the best possible return to zero that can be achieved
Here is how the design was approached:
Stiffness: using 5 axis machining, lightening pockets are generously used so that the structure of the mount is much stiffer than a mount with thin sections. A full length rib is used between the rings and also one coming off the back ring. No spindley flexible flyer extensions. The cross bolts are spread out, not close together
Accurate rings: The entire mount in the op's picture is machined from a 4.6lb block of billet 7075-T651 aluminum, the rings are "line bored" one to the other (no separate caps), exactly true to the bottom picatinny interface. The caps are then finely cut from the bottom ring with a 0.015" jeweler's saw and each cap seriaized to its corresponding ring base (each mount has its own unique serial number)
Clamping: Use of the U.S. Mil method by clamping to the Vee's, not the less accurate and secure "NATO" way.
Shear lugs: Both clamp screws are machined with flats to act as shear lugs and with a low height to the slot, there are also two integral machined in shear lugs that are a close fit to the receiver.....almost no movement backwards and forwards. This is the right way to set up for a semi-automatic weapon with recoil and counter recoil forces.
QD: My customer leaves the mount on the weapon and does not have a need to flip back and forth between guns and deal with the corresponding rezero. Also, they now jump with the optic on the gun instead of removed so there is no need to install after insertion. The cross bolts clamp the mount to the upper with over 1,400 pounds of force for each bolt. No lever system can compare to this kind of secure attachment.
Levers: their call. (That being said a "tool less" version of the Super Precision clamping system is being developed)
Proper fit: The mount in the op's picture was designed specifically to fit the Vortex 1-6x24. The rings are right in the center of the gap between turret and eyepiece when the scope is at the correct eye relief. Because we machine out of a solid block we have the ability to put the rings and cross bolts where ever we want....there are no constraints. That does not mean it won't fit other scopes.....its just made perfectly for the Vortex
RTZ: cross bolts that are spread out, full angle contact on the clamp wedges (not partial on the top angle), U.S. Mil picatinny interface, good shear lugs, stiff mount so that the scope is no longer loaded structurally, or the scope is what keeps the mount together, high clamp loads and ultra tight tolerances give The Super Precision excellent return to zero with NO torquing values needed for the clamp nuts. Just tighten by hand with a Letherman screwdriver or 1/2 wrench and go. RTZ has been reported with just hand tightened nuts, even loose nuts and the scope and mount held on by the spotter.
Here is a picture of the 4.6lb aluminum billet we use and a picture of the resulting 5.1oz mount. This is a 34MM mount in the picture. Note how the mount is made in one shot, all features precisely machined to each other.
At launch in Jan we plan to have 3 different types of 30mm mounts, 4 types of 34mm, black anodize and the DDC shown in the picture, 0 MOA, 20 MOA versions and mounts for the Aimpoint T1/T2, Trijicon MRO and others.
There are also two aluminum alloys available. 7055 Aluminum which is a stronger 7075 and also Alcoa's 2099 advanced Lithium/Aluminum alloy which is as strong as 7075 but lighter, stiffer and more corrosion resistant. 2099 is used in highly loaded airframes by Boeing and Airbus and is considered the cutting edge of aluminum alloy development.
Mount cost is around $350
WHG
and Mrs. ALG is bugging me for a mount of her own, target price of $75 with the ALG Square Deal "
Oh boy, the LT (and QD fan boys) are going to be butt hurt over the Military not wanting QD's! :-)
C4
TexasAggie2005
10-15-15, 08:47
...At launch in Jan we plan to have 3 different types of 30mm mounts, 4 types of 34mm, black anodize and the DDC shown in the picture, 0 MOA, 20 MOA versions and mounts for the Aimpoint T1/T2, Trijicon MRO and others...
That's awesome. With Geissele's reputation for quality and precision, I always wondered why they were not in the mount business yet.
Oh boy, the LT (and QD fan boys) are going to be butt hurt over the Military not wanting QD's! :-)
C4
Not me. I have the levers tightened down on my LaRue moint that rides on my SPR. I'd consider replacing it with a Geissele just to try it out.
Coal Dragger
10-15-15, 14:58
Interesting post on the design parameters for the customer. Made specifically for the Vortex Razor HD II 1-6×24 is very intriguing. Can we take it that the Vortex is considered good to go by some secret squirrel unit out there that has been testing it?
Interesting post on the design parameters for the customer. Made specifically for the Vortex Razor HD II 1-6×24 is very intriguing. Can we take it that the Vortex is considered good to go by some secret squirrel unit out there that has been testing it?
Most everyone knows that Vortex is top notch. When you go to Shot Show, most all the top quality AR companies have their products on their AR's. Clue.
C4
Coal Dragger
10-15-15, 15:50
Well I don't go to SHOT show, so forgive my ignorance. I've been curious how well some of the low power variables have been holding up under hard use. Wasn't aware that the Vortex was seeing actual combat use.
I have set of Vortex Viper HD 10×50 binoculars that are excellent but haven't played with their rifle scopes yet.
elephantrider
10-15-15, 17:53
Interesting post on the design parameters for the customer. Made specifically for the Vortex Razor HD II 1-6×24 is very intriguing. Can we take it that the Vortex is considered good to go by some secret squirrel unit out there that has been testing it?
I remember seeing an article (sorry can't find the article link anymore) by NSW member and M4c.net contributor "BigJoe" on using the Razor HD II 1-6 with the SCAR 17 for some official training. Not sure if that counts as "secret squirrel, but I think it is an indicator.
I've always viewed vortex as gamer only. They are just too fragile in my opinion, based on what I've seen of them. I only know one person who ran one, and his AR killed it in short order. Razor HD 2 1-6. Nightforce or Leupold are the way I'd go.
Coal Dragger
10-15-15, 18:37
Well that's the only time I've heard of one failing. What specifically happened to it?
I know gun game type equipment is often looked down upon around here, but where an optic is concerned I have a slightly different view. I figure that a serious competition shooter is going to expend far more ammunition on average than the average duty type user. So if an optic is popular with the competition set, it's probably not a bad bit of kit. Competitors don't like equipment failures either.
Well that's the only time I've heard of one failing. What specifically happened to it?
I know gun game type equipment is often looked down upon around here, but where an optic is concerned I have a slightly different view. I figure that a serious competition shooter is going to expend far more ammunition on average than the average duty type user. So if an optic is popular with the competition set, it's probably not a bad bit of kit. Competitors don't like equipment failures either.
He was zeroing it and it just lost focus and clarity all of a sudden. Had to go back to vortex. He dumped it and replaced it with something he could rely on after that as it was going on a duty gun I believe.
The was a thread on snipers hide where someone from nightforce was saying vortex is what they go to for a tough 1-6. I think accounts of it being good to go are far more prevalent than ones with issues, which to me is all that matters since everyone can let out a lemon once in a while.
P.s. Sorry for continued derailment.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've always viewed vortex as gamer only. They are just too fragile in my opinion, based on what I've seen of them. I only know one person who ran one, and his AR killed it in short order. Razor HD 2 1-6. Nightforce or Leupold are the way I'd go.
No, they are legit and in many ways superior to much more expensive optics.
I have the HD 2 1-6. It is awesome.
C4
No, they are legit and in many ways superior to much more expensive optics.
I have the HD 2 1-6. It is awesome.
C4
How can this be quantified, regarding durability? I know of no stats or tests, etc that can be trotted out. Only that a friend of mine killed his with light range use.
How can this be quantified, regarding durability? I know of no stats or tests, etc that can be trotted out. Only that a friend of mine killed his with light range use.
Easy, I know a lot of knowledgeable scope guys that swear by them. I have also been running their HD 1-4 and their HD2 1-6 for years now. Never an issue. We have also sold quite a few of them with no complaints. The other clue that they are the go to scope for many is seeing them everywhere at Shot. All the best combat grade weapon manufacturers typically have a Vortex optic on their weapon. You don't show case your $3k-$7k AR/sniper rifle with an optic you think is junk.
Everything made by man can fail. If we ignored a product do to one failure, we would never own a Colt/BCM/KAC/Noveske/DD/etc AR or drive ANY brand of car. ;-)
C4
Are BUIS being used with these mounts?
I understand the sentiment of never removing my QD mounts, but I don't have them to dick around with them. I have them so if the optic goes down I can quickly disgard the optic and switch to BUIS.
What is typically done with something like this? Are BUIS still useful?
I run mine with offsets from Magpul.
How can this be quantified, regarding durability? I know of no stats or tests, etc that can be trotted out. Only that a friend of mine killed his with light range use.
I have access to the vibration tests, mechanical shock tests, salt fog tests, sand dust test, sea water test, rain test, etc. What quantifiable data are you looking for specifically and I can see what I can share.
Everything made by man can fail. If we ignored a product do to one failure, we would never own a Colt/BCM/KAC/Noveske/DD/etc AR or drive ANY brand of car. ;-)
C4
Word....
I have access to the vibration tests, mechanical shock tests, salt fog tests, sand dust test, sea water test, rain test, etc. What quantifiable data are you looking for specifically and I can see what I can share.
I would like to know how it compares, objectively, to a MK6, or ACOG/VCOG, or Nightforce 1-4 regarding the vibration/shock tests.
I'm looking forward to seeing the pricing on their mounts. I tend to leave things in place after I install them as much as possible.
Coal Dragger
10-16-15, 20:15
No, they are legit and in many ways superior to much more expensive optics.
I have the HD 2 1-6. It is awesome.
C4
Not to keep this stuck on the Vortex, but I'm leaning heavily towards acquiring one and was curious if you would trust one enough to keep it in a non QD mount as long as the mount was solid? This would be on a carbine without an offset BUIS.
This is sort of on topic of the mount I guess, since a quality mount as the Geissele is likely to be is integral to keeping the optical system zeroed, and protected from some rough handling.
Are BUIS being used with these mounts?
I understand the sentiment of never removing my QD mounts, but I don't have them to dick around with them. I have them so if the optic goes down I can quickly disgard the optic and switch to BUIS.
What is typically done with something like this? Are BUIS still useful?
Etched reticle going down??? Not real likely. Really no need for irons.
C4
Not to keep this stuck on the Vortex, but I'm leaning heavily towards acquiring one and was curious if you would trust one enough to keep it in a non QD mount as long as the mount was solid? This would be on a carbine without an offset BUIS.
This is sort of on topic of the mount I guess, since a quality mount as the Geissele is likely to be is integral to keeping the optical system zeroed, and protected from some rough handling.
Sure. No worries.
C4
Etched reticle going down??? Not real likely. Really no need for irons.
C4
I'd be more concerned about condensation or moisture on the lenses rendering the scope unusable. Going from an air conditioned car to summer heat, for example, or from a frigid outdoor temp to warm indoor temp. It takes a good few minutes for optics to temp-stabilize so they stay moisture-free in these situations. I guess offset irons are a decent choice for backup in these conditions.
I'd be more concerned about condensation or moisture on the lenses rendering the scope unusable. Going from an air conditioned car to summer heat, for example, or from a frigid outdoor temp to warm indoor temp. It takes a good few minutes for optics to temp-stabilize so they stay moisture-free in these situations. I guess offset irons are a decent choice for backup in these conditions.
Cat crap.
How can this be quantified, regarding durability? I know of no stats or tests, etc that can be trotted out. Only that a friend of mine killed his with light range use.
I would like to know how it compares, objectively, to a MK6, or ACOG/VCOG, or Nightforce 1-4 regarding the vibration/shock tests.
Vortex did not provide me that data but you're more than welcome to email all those companies to ask them for their test results and you can share it with the rest of us.
Getting back on topic - the mount is machined to exacting tolerances. I can put a optic on the mount, not install the top rings, and lift the scope mount without it falling under its own weight.
MorphCross
10-18-15, 03:56
This may be a bit presumptive of me but the base price on the 7075 version is 350.00? If that is the case than it's less expensive than the only materially equivalent mount on the market (Spuhr). 6061 is how most other manufacturers go with their unibody scope mounts.
Vortex did not provide me that data but you're more than welcome to email all those companies to ask them for their test results and you can share it with the rest of us.
Getting back on topic - the mount is machined to exacting tolerances. I can put a optic on the mount, not install the top rings, and lift the scope mount without it falling under its own weight.
Nightforce tolerates 1250g impact, trijicon acog and vcog 900, iirc, and steiner military 950 I think? Their other scopes are a touch less (non military). I do not know mk6 and mk8 data. But that's a start.
This may be a bit presumptive of me but the base price on the 7075 version is 350.00? If that is the case than it's less expensive than the only materially equivalent mount on the market (Spuhr). 6061 is how most other manufacturers go with their unibody scope mounts.
Nightforce unimount is 7075. Retail is $252. Weight is 5.4oz.
I am waiting to see how the geissele is technically superior. Not that I'm implying it isnt, but based on the raw numbers, it seems equivalent and not necessarily superior.
Of note, the geissele is almost identical in appearance to the nightforce. Narrow rings, same clamp design, it's just got a more I beam base and is skeletonized vs. Thinner in some areas.
Nightforce tolerates 1250g impact, trijicon acog and vcog 900, iirc, and steiner military 950 I think? Their other scopes are a touch less (non military). I do not know mk6 and mk8 data. But that's a start.
Can you please share the source documentation for those numbers? I was not able to locate them using my google-fu.
I attached a screen shot from their mechanical test. I'm not going to pretend I know what this translates to in a real world setting but here it is. Someone somewhere thought this was good enough for what they needed it for.
35486
ETA: Google-fu worked. Found the nightforce numbers here: http://nightforceoptics.com/technology
That's an impressive number.
I'd be interested to hear from Vortex why 40G was chosen and not a higher number.
Can you please share the source documentation for those numbers? I was not able to locate them using my google-fu.
I attached a screen shot from their mechanical test. I'm not going to pretend I know what this translates to in a real world setting but here it is. Someone somewhere thought this was good enough for what they needed it for.
35486
ETA: Google-fu worked. Found the nightforce numbers here: http://nightforceoptics.com/technology
That's an impressive number.
I'd be interested to hear from Vortex why 40G was chosen and not a higher number.
Steiner is 900g, I misspoke. I remember they had a factory video on their website of the shock test. Some deadblow type fixture. It looked brutal on internals! Here it is:
https://youtu.be/Tw8UqJynmkY
The trijicon spec I could not find, but did find reference of it when go ogling as far back as 2002. I believe they deleted it from their site.the vcog was said to pass all the testing the acog did.
40G is absurdly low in comparison to the other optics being discussed, and the disparity may account for my friends 5.56 killing it rather fast.
Coal Dragger
10-18-15, 19:24
How do you explain the popularity of the scope then? Seeing as how the vast majority of users mount them to AR's. One would think the stories of failures would be rampant.
I reached out to Vortex to for their rationale.
How do you explain the popularity of the scope then? Seeing as how the vast majority of users mount them to AR's. One would think the stories of failures would be rampant.
EoTech is popular.
I'm not saying vortex is a pos. I'm just saying it's not in the same league as kahles, nf, Leupold mk6, steiner military, and others in the toughness dept.
Steiner is 900g, I misspoke. I remember they had a factory video on their website of the shock test. Some deadblow type fixture. It looked brutal on internals! Here it is:
https://youtu.be/Tw8UqJynmkY
The trijicon spec I could not find, but did find reference of it when go ogling as far back as 2002. I believe they deleted it from their site.the vcog was said to pass all the testing the acog did.
40G is absurdly low in comparison to the other optics being discussed, and the disparity may account for my friends 5.56 killing it rather fast.
You're friend probably had a rare issue. These scopes rarely come back for problems and we have sold a lot of them. They have been in use by certain groups for a while now, who need to be able to rely on their equipment 100%. So, I am absolutely 100% confident that the Razors can stand up to any optic on the planet.
What you are looking at is a mil-spec test that is meant to simulate a specific shock profile. It only tests one aspect of shock/vibration. Certainly not all of them. We did this test at the request of a specific group that required it for a contract. There were also many other tests performed, this is just one of them.
What a lot of people don't realize is that shock and vibration are a lot more complex than just seeing how high a g-force something can withstand. There are shock/vibration profiles we could run with very low g's that would easily destroy any optic on the planet. It's just a matter of hitting the correct resonant frequency of whatever is under test and it will come flying apart.
A test like you see above is meant to test something pretty specific, like a specific type of transportation of the optic.
That being said, at one point during testing we had it mounted on a different machine that could test much higher g-force. We quit at about 3500g's because the optic was still fine and we were approaching the limits of that particular machine.
You're friend probably had a rare issue. These scopes rarely come back for problems and we have sold a lot of them. They have been in use by certain groups for a while now, who need to be able to rely on their equipment 100%. So, I am absolutely 100% confident that the Razors can stand up to any optic on the planet.
What you are looking at is a mil-spec test that is meant to simulate a specific shock profile. It only tests one aspect of shock/vibration. Certainly not all of them. We did this test at the request of a specific group that required it for a contract. There were also many other tests performed, this is just one of them.
What a lot of people don't realize is that shock and vibration are a lot more complex than just seeing how high a g-force something can withstand. There are shock/vibration profiles we could run with very low g's that would easily destroy any optic on the planet. It's just a matter of hitting the correct resonant frequency of whatever is under test and it will come flying apart.
A test like you see above is meant to test something pretty specific, like a specific type of transportation of the optic.
That being said, at one point during testing we had it mounted on a different machine that could test much higher g-force. We quit at about 3500g's because the optic was still fine and we were approaching the limits of that particular machine.
And there you have it folks.
EoTech is popular.
I'm not saying vortex is a pos. I'm just saying it's not in the same league as kahles, nf, Leupold mk6, steiner military, and others in the toughness dept.
Respectfully, you would be wrong on that when comparing apple to apples, which is our Razor line. You will just have to take my word that there are certain groups using the Razor that don't compromise on their choice of equipment and can buy whatever they want. The Razor was put up against many of the companies you listed and was chosen over them.
Respectfully, you would be wrong on that when comparing apple to apples, which is our Razor line. You will just have to take my word that there are certain groups using the Razor that don't compromise on their choice of equipment and can buy whatever they want. The Razor was put up against many of the companies you listed and was chosen over them.
Our mount was designed to work specifically with the Razor HD Gen II. Just thought I'd mention that again.
You're friend probably had a rare issue. These scopes rarely come back for problems and we have sold a lot of them. They have been in use by certain groups for a while now, who need to be able to rely on their equipment 100%. So, I am absolutely 100% confident that the Razors can stand up to any optic on the planet.
What you are looking at is a mil-spec test that is meant to simulate a specific shock profile. It only tests one aspect of shock/vibration. Certainly not all of them. We did this test at the request of a specific group that required it for a contract. There were also many other tests performed, this is just one of them.
What a lot of people don't realize is that shock and vibration are a lot more complex than just seeing how high a g-force something can withstand. There are shock/vibration profiles we could run with very low g's that would easily destroy any optic on the planet. It's just a matter of hitting the correct resonant frequency of whatever is under test and it will come flying apart.
A test like you see above is meant to test something pretty specific, like a specific type of transportation of the optic.
That being said, at one point during testing we had it mounted on a different machine that could test much higher g-force. We quit at about 3500g's because the optic was still fine and we were approaching the limits of that particular machine.
Thanks! Have you guys mirrored the SCAR'S Profile and tested it to that frequency? Also, have you ever done a head to head with a known tough scope like an acog or nightforce or something? Again, great data!
Respectfully, you would be wrong on that when comparing apple to apples, which is our Razor line. You will just have to take my word that there are certain groups using the Razor that don't compromise on their choice of equipment and can buy whatever they want. The Razor was put up against many of the companies you listed and was chosen over them.
Was it chosen for mission profile, or because it is tougher?
Thanks! Have you guys mirrored the SCAR'S Profile and tested it to that frequency? Also, have you ever done a head to head with a known tough scope like an acog or nightforce or something? Again, great data!
You're welcome.
We haven't done any lab testing to mirror the SCAR, but they have been extensively live fire tested on SCARs without issue.
As far as "head to head" testing against other scopes, we do have a lot of the competition's scopes in-house and we have tested them quite a bit. I'm confident that we stack up very well against any of them.
Was it chosen for mission profile, or because it is tougher?
I think it was chosen for multiple reasons. The optic quality, extremely wide FOV, daylight bright dot, features, as well as surviving brutal test conditions. I don't think just being "tougher" all by itself would probably make or break the decision. If I had to guess, they probably have a threshold in which an optic has to be able to survive (beyond the standard mil spec tests), which I'm sure is a pretty high standard, and then beyond that they are looking at things like features, optic quality, etc.
You're welcome.
We haven't done any lab testing to mirror the SCAR, but they have been extensively live fire tested on SCARs without issue.
As far as "head to head" testing against other scopes, we do have a lot of the competition's scopes in-house and we have tested them quite a bit. I'm confident that we stack up very well against any of them.
Thanks. I'm very blunt and speak my piece. I appreciate how you've respnded, and have a much more enlightened view of your product line! Looking at it, my fantasy is a 1-4 like your 1-6, only at 16-18oz and maintaining the FOV, etc. That would be tits for my application!
Thanks. I'm very blunt and speak my piece. I appreciate how you've respnded, and have a much more enlightened view of your product line! Looking at it, my fantasy is a 1-4 like your 1-6, only at 16-18oz and maintaining the FOV, etc. That would be tits for my application!
No worries!
Glad I could help out and thanks for the suggestion on the scope. It's always good to get feedback from customers and we try our best to listen.
No worries!
Glad I could help out and thanks for the suggestion on the scope. It's always good to get feedback from customers and we try our best to listen.
Well, while I'm making my Christmas list...integrated throw lever/fin/ whatever and locking diopter?
^^^^i would buy one
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well, while I'm making my Christmas list...integrated throw lever/fin/ whatever and locking diopter?
Definitely good suggestions and feedback that I've heard fairly often. I can't promise anything anytime soon, but I will definitely keep those ideas in mind for future projects.
Definitely good suggestions and feedback that I've heard fairly often. I can't promise anything anytime soon, but I will definitely keep those ideas in mind for future projects.
Basically...a nightforce nxs 1-4 with the objective flared out like your razor HD 2 and daylight illumination.
Regarding the Geissele mount, I am frustrated with the design. It looks like quick/dirty methods of leveling the scope using something like the Arisaka or some other wedge-under-turret-housing tool will be rather annoying. Is that just the prototype, and will there be a notch/wider flat area to use to level in this manner?
Also, what is the actual projected delivery date, if, say, I plan to buy one ASAP, what month is it predicted that one will be in my hands?
This is not a prototype and the mount was purposely designed with the ridge for strength. These have been in production for a DOD customer since the Spring and we're still filling orders till probably the end of next month or so. Last I heard, these should be available after SHOT Show 2016.
This is not a prototype and the mount was purposely designed with the ridge for strength. These have been in production for a DOD customer since the Spring and we're still filling orders till probably the end of next month or so. Last I heard, these should be available after SHOT Show 2016.
Will a model specifically be made for a Nightforce 1-4 NXS compact? Will a model be made which fits it correctly, if not "just for it"?
It was made specifically for the Vortex Razor HD Gen II 1-6x 30 mm tube. It should fit any 30mm scope really but the spacing for the rings puts the turrets exactly in the middle. There are plans for a 34mm version as well.
It was made specifically for the Vortex Razor HD Gen II 1-6x 30 mm tube. It should fit any 30mm scope really but the spacing for the rings puts the turrets exactly in the middle. There are plans for a 34mm version as well.
Can you share the inner/outer distance of the rings in relation to each other?
I don't have any spec information available. When they are made available then I'll update here.
I don't have any spec information available. When they are made available then I'll update here.
This is a Unimount, which fits the 1-4 NXS just fine: http://i64.tinypic.com/15p5ugp.jpg
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/a1/b2/d1/a1b2d18a300277c9de07a563ec1180ae.jpg
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/GA_06-660x426.jpg
I am sure that the inner space is sufficient, my concern is the "outer" space. I think the NF Unimount looks "longer" in how much tube it needs than the Geissele. Is my perception correct? If so, the Geissele should work great on the NF.
I see what you're saying but I'm hesitant to say yes or no without having something to back up the statement.
No worries!
Glad I could help out and thanks for the suggestion on the scope. It's always good to get feedback from customers and we try our best to listen.
The 1-6 Razor has a killer dot, no doubt! The reticles are lacking though (not just my opinion either). The reason I have a Mk6 instead of a Razor is that the Mk6 can be had with half-mil marks and/or wind dots. I also like to buy American, and I realize both those factors can drive price up. I am ok with that.
My Mk6 just has half mils and no wind dots coupled with a vastly inferior dot, but I chose it because smaller than one mil (and whatever dot/line width) sub tensions are very useful.
Basically every scope is a compromise. If you made the Razor with more user friendly rets, there wouldn't be much compromise for a lot of folks.
elephantrider
10-30-15, 01:31
It looks like quick/dirty methods of leveling the scope using something like the Arisaka or some other wedge-under-turret-housing tool will be rather annoying. Is that just the prototype, and will there be a notch/wider flat area to use to level in this manner?
I had the same thought. It looks like there is enough of a flat spot on the spine that the Arisaka tool might work. If the Arisaka leveler doesn't work the old stacked feeler gauge method should work, just not as fast and easy as the Arisaka tool does.
I've mounted scopes indexing off the flats on the turret housing for a long time. With a good mount or rail I use a deck of cards.
Have had zero problems doing this on several guns that get shot using up to 40MOA of elevation correction.
I've mounted scopes indexing off the flats on the turret housing for a long time. With a good mount or rail I use a deck of cards.
Have had zero problems doing this on several guns that get shot using up to 40MOA of elevation correction.
Do most mounts have 0 cant and can I true the turret off the mount, or must I true off the rail? I know GDI is canted, but what about others?
Do most mounts have 0 cant and can I true the turret off the mount, or must I true off the rail? I know GDI is canted, but what about others?
I've only done it with no cant mounts (LaRue LT104). I don't think a canted mount would be a problem. If you had a perfectly flat and parallel block, it would probably be easy, just make you keep it perpendicular to the mount. Your scope has to have turret body that is square with the reticle or it won't track right.
Nightforce, MK4 Leupolds, and one Zeiss Diavari have been fine for me.
I've only done it with no cant mounts (LaRue LT104). I don't think a canted mount would be a problem. If you had a perfectly flat and parallel block, it would probably be easy, just make you keep it perpendicular to the mount. Your scope has to have turret body that is square with the reticle or it won't track right.
Nightforce, MK4 Leupolds, and one Zeiss Diavari have been fine for me.
I meant left to right cant. Do most mounts sit flat on rails? Can you index off of them? I know GDI is very canted. Until I owned a gdi mount I thought no mounts were, but now I'm not so sure.
I don't know. I've only used LaRue and they pull down flat on the rail.
Are these still slated for Jan '16 release?
TexasAggie2005
12-29-15, 08:23
Are these still slated for Jan '16 release?
According to Geissele's Instagram page, their full line of mounts will be shown at Shot Show. Haven't seen anything about ship dates.
According to Geissele's Instagram page, their full line of mounts will be shown at Shot Show. Haven't seen anything about ship dates.
I think we should have some of the scope mounts available by SHOT Show. We're giving some away at the money booth that is going to be set up at our location.
The charging handle and Aimpoint mount is going to be a little further out.
I think we should have some of the scope mounts available by SHOT Show. We're giving some away at the money booth that is going to be set up at our location.
The charging handle and Aimpoint mount is going to be a little further out.
By "we", do you mean "Vortex will have some", or "We, the People, will have some"?
"We" as in the Geissele booth will have our scope mounts available on display, some for folks to win in the money booth, and I think order availability is not too far behind.
Out of curiosity, do you know the ring cap torque specs Geissele puts out for this mount? I want something compatible with the optics I plan to put in it. Some mounts require a bit much, IMO
There are torque specs; however, I don't have the numbers at this moment.
I'm gonna assume you've never actually seen a LaRue mount.
Looks like a NightForce Uni-Mount to me.
yeah this doesn't look like it's quick throw, these are solid mounts. probably going after competition companies like spuhr.
yeah this doesn't look like it's quick throw, these are solid mounts. probably going after competition companies like spuhr.
The DOD customer that requested these mounts did not need a QD option; they jump with their optics attached to the rifle. That said, QD options are being explored.
Regarding the Geissele mount, I am frustrated with the design. It looks like quick/dirty methods of leveling the scope using something like the Arisaka or some other wedge-under-turret-housing tool will be rather annoying. Is that just the prototype, and will there be a notch/wider flat area to use to level in this manner?
Also, what is the actual projected delivery date, if, say, I plan to buy one ASAP, what month is it predicted that one will be in my hands?
isn't the quicker dirtier way to just use a level on the receiver and a level on the scope cap? if the scope cap is domed then a level on the receiver and a plumb line aligned with the reticle.
Still no updates yet?
One user on another forum has one and LOVES the fit/finish, and to me, it looks like the ring caps all but touch when tightened, unless OP in that thread is an idiot, which I did not get that vibe. It does make me nervous, however, because even on my Nightforce, which has a rather thick tube, the gap closed from 0.035" to 0.025" using 25 inch-pounds of torque, as per NF's instructions, for their mount and their scope. So one wonders...what margin exists? I'm sure it's accounted for, but I am still curious. They have not tested RTZ yet.
One user on another forum has one and LOVES the fit/finish, and to me, it looks like the ring caps all but touch when tightened, unless OP in that thread is an idiot, which I did not get that vibe. It does make me nervous, however, because even on my Nightforce, which has a rather thick tube, the gap closed from 0.035" to 0.025" using 25 inch-pounds of torque, as per NF's instructions, for their mount and their scope. So one wonders...what margin exists? I'm sure it's accounted for, but I am still curious. They have not tested RTZ yet.
Do you mind posting a link to that thread?
I have been looking for any info on it but haven't found anything. I have seen people with the super precision T1 mount but that is it.
Do you mind posting a link to that thread?
I have been looking for any info on it but haven't found anything. I have seen people with the super precision T1 mount but that is it.
Go to the optics section of TOS. Should be fairly simple to find. Links to TOS are not okay here.
Primus Pilum
02-08-16, 11:12
Just my .02.
As a huge Geissele Fan who runs their rails and triggers on almost everything, I really am not seeing the rub here.
IF I am going to run a 1 piece, non QD mount, there are already two steller options on the market.
1. The badger 1 piece is the standard. It is machined dead on, had incredible pedigree, can use accessory caps for RDS/Coind/ect and comes in less than $200. They are built like a brick shit house. Ive run these on precision bolt and semis out to 1600 yards and they also RTZ with the right torque.
2. The ARC M10 mount. This really is the best of both worlds. Hands down the finest rings that will ever touch your scope. A innovative thumbwheel QD design that RTZ while not sticking out to far. If you are running a bolt gun and not using M10 rings, you are missing out. Designed by an engineering & manufacturing geniuses who happens to be a shooter. Ted's products have a ton of thought in them and just work. They are a shy under $300, which is on the high end.
So back to the new superprecision mount. The only thing this offers is lighter weight. It still has an inferior ring setup and the price is not worth 100% to shave a couple oz from the Badger (that are made that way for a reason). Furthermore, After seeing how magnesium KMR rails have faired, using something that is going to be weaker than 7075 to hold my S&B or Kahles is not going to happen. Its a good looking mount, but I cannot justify paying over a $100 more than a Bobro which has real QD and is proven RTZ, for a plain jane 1 piece non DQ mount with some pretty scallops. Had bill come up with a new innovative QD with RTZ, while keeping it light and slimmer than a Bobro, then maybe he would have something.
SMU or whoever can have them. It really offers nothing that other products already on the market all ready do better or cheaper.
Just my .02.
As a huge Geissele Fan who runs their rails and triggers on almost everything, I really am not seeing the rub here.
IF I am going to run a 1 piece, non QD mount, there are already two steller options on the market.
1. The badger 1 piece is the standard. It is machined dead on, had incredible pedigree, can use accessory caps for RDS/Coind/ect and comes in less than $200. They are built like a brick shit house. Ive run these on precision bolt and semis out to 1600 yards and they also RTZ with the right torque.
2. The ARC M10 mount. This really is the best of both worlds. Hands down the finest rings that will ever touch your scope. A innovative thumbwheel QD design that RTZ while not sticking out to far. If you are running a bolt gun and not using M10 rings, you are missing out. Designed by an engineering & manufacturing geniuses who happens to be a shooter. Ted's products have a ton of thought in them and just work. They are a shy under $300, which is on the high end.
So back to the new superprecision mount. The only thing this offers is lighter weight. It still has an inferior ring setup and the price is not worth 100% to shave a couple oz from the Badger (that are made that way for a reason). Furthermore, After seeing how magnesium KMR rails have faired, using something that is going to be weaker than 7075 to hold my S&B or Kahles is not going to happen. Its a good looking mount, but I cannot justify paying over a $100 more than a Bobro which has real QD and is proven RTZ, for a plain jane 1 piece non DQ mount with some pretty scallops. Had bill come up with a new innovative QD with RTZ, while keeping it light and slimmer than a Bobro, then maybe he would have something.
SMU or whoever can have them. It really offers nothing that other products already on the market all ready do better or cheaper.
The Geissele mount is stronger than 7075, in just about every measurable way. Further, the Badger you are so fond of, is much weaker than 7075, being 6061, itself.
Primus Pilum
02-08-16, 14:49
I was referring the the mag blended alloy. But you are right about the 7075 being stronger on paper, however practical applications is another matter.
Marty @ Badger knows what he is doing. I have not heard 1 bad report or breakage report on any of the badger 1 pieces.
My concern is exotic super lightweight alloys that may shedd weight, will not hold up as well as proven designs/materials.
The BCM KMR is a perfect example.
I was referring the the mag blended alloy. But you are right about the 7075 being stronger on paper, however practical applications is another matter.
Marty @ Badger knows what he is doing. I have not heard 1 bad report or breakage report on any of the badger 1 pieces.
My concern is exotic super lightweight alloys that may shedd weight, will not hold up as well as proven designs/materials.
The BCM KMR is a perfect example.
It's not an issue with AlLi 2099.
http://www.smithshp.com/downloads/2099_SHP.pdf
Digital_Damage
02-08-16, 14:57
I was referring the the mag blended alloy. But you are right about the 7075 being stronger on paper, however practical applications is another matter.
Marty @ Badger knows what he is doing. I have not heard 1 bad report or breakage report on any of the badger 1 pieces.
My concern is exotic super lightweight alloys that may shedd weight, will not hold up as well as proven designs/materials.
The BCM KMR is a perfect example.
First... "But you are right about the 7075 being stronger on paper, however practical applications is another matter." Wut?! LOL.
Secondly ... My concern is exotic super lightweight alloys that may shedd weight, will not hold up as well as proven designs/materials. Wut?! Again?! What do you think 6061 was considered in the 30's?
I was referring the the mag blended alloy.
I think you are confused. It's not the mag alloy used in the KMR. It's Lithium Al.
Primus Pilum
02-08-16, 22:12
First... "But you are right about the 7075 being stronger on paper, however practical applications is another matter." Wut?! LOL.
Secondly ... My concern is exotic super lightweight alloys that may shedd weight, will not hold up as well as proven designs/materials. Wut?! Again?! What do you think 6061 was considered in the 30's?
It could be made of unobtainium, but if everything around it (rails, optic,ect) are destroyed before the failure of the mount then it is a moot point. The weakest link is going to be the optic 9 times out 10. After a certain point, the diminishing returns are too great to justify the added expense. There is no added utility such as QD or smaller footprint to justify the price. The small weight savings are negligible on the type of rig these will typically be used on.
The design is more important that the materials and the hardware is still being made from top grade fasteners from most of the manufactures.
Bill Geissele makes his triggers from castings that are EDM cut. Mark Larue makes them out of S7 tool steel that is EDM cut. On paper the Larue trumps the Gman and it looks great in marketing and justifying purchases to ignorants. In the real world, they both will probably last a lifetime and I have yet to see a G trigger break due to its inferior "investment casting".
The materials need to match the application. Kaizen is a great thing for the industry but I don't need a fancy exotic mount that costs 2x as much the same as I don't need a Ti-6Al-7Nb spoon to eat my chili. I would rather run a M10 QD-L which has the best ring securing method in the industry.
It could be made of unobtainium, but if everything around it (rails, optic,ect) are destroyed before the failure of the mount then it is a moot point. The weakest link is going to be the optic 9 times out 10. After a certain point, the diminishing returns are too great to justify the added expense. There is no added utility such as QD or smaller footprint to justify the price. The small weight savings are negligible on the type of rig these will typically be used on.
The design is more important that the materials and the hardware is still being made from top grade fasteners from most of the manufactures.
Bill Geissele makes his triggers from castings that are EDM cut. Mark Larue makes them out of S7 tool steel that is EDM cut. On paper the Larue trumps the Gman and it looks great in marketing and justifying purchases to ignorants. In the real world, they both will probably last a lifetime and I have yet to see a G trigger break due to its inferior "investment casting".
The materials need to match the application. Kaizen is a great thing for the industry but I don't need a fancy exotic mount that costs 2x as much the same as I don't need a Ti-6Al-7Nb spoon to eat my chili. I would rather run a M10 QD-L which has the best ring securing method in the industry.
I don't feel like any thumb-screw design offers nearly the security of a Bobro, or a torque-to-spec mount.
I like more options. The fact the Al-Li's offered as an option is great. V7 is starting to make products out of this stuff too.
Pay accordingly. If you don't want to pay for fancy high-dollar, stronger, lightweight metals on your rig, then don't. Different strokes, different budgets, different priorities.
2099/2199 is amazing stuff. Until a QD mount is made from it, I don't really have a need at this point.
Just my .02.
As a huge Geissele Fan who runs their rails and triggers on almost everything, I really am not seeing the rub here.
IF I am going to run a 1 piece, non QD mount, there are already two steller options on the market.
1. The badger 1 piece is the standard. It is machined dead on, had incredible pedigree, can use accessory caps for RDS/Coind/ect and comes in less than $200. They are built like a brick shit house. Ive run these on precision bolt and semis out to 1600 yards and they also RTZ with the right torque.
2. The ARC M10 mount. This really is the best of both worlds. Hands down the finest rings that will ever touch your scope. A innovative thumbwheel QD design that RTZ while not sticking out to far. If you are running a bolt gun and not using M10 rings, you are missing out. Designed by an engineering & manufacturing geniuses who happens to be a shooter. Ted's products have a ton of thought in them and just work. They are a shy under $300, which is on the high end.
So back to the new superprecision mount. The only thing this offers is lighter weight. It still has an inferior ring setup and the price is not worth 100% to shave a couple oz from the Badger (that are made that way for a reason). Furthermore, After seeing how magnesium KMR rails have faired, using something that is going to be weaker than 7075 to hold my S&B or Kahles is not going to happen. Its a good looking mount, but I cannot justify paying over a $100 more than a Bobro which has real QD and is proven RTZ, for a plain jane 1 piece non DQ mount with some pretty scallops. Had bill come up with a new innovative QD with RTZ, while keeping it light and slimmer than a Bobro, then maybe he would have something.
SMU or whoever can have them. It really offers nothing that other products already on the market all ready do better or cheaper.
Those mounts were made for a high end .Mil customer. That means that the user was not happy with what was currently available on the market (and yes, they would have known about badger, etc).
So that is quite telling IMHO.
C4
Those mounts were made for a high end .Mil customer. That means that that user was not happy with what was currently available on the market (and yes, they would have known about badger, etc).
So that is quite telling IMHO.
C4
My thoughts exactly.
Those mounts were made for a high end .Mil customer. That means that the user was not happy with what was currently available on the market (and yes, they would have known about badger, etc).
So that is quite telling IMHO.
C4
So was the massively clunky eotech magnifier mount offered through TNVC...doesn't mean it's good kit for anyone but who wrote the requirement/bid. When justifying something via .mil contract sourcing, ask yourself...who is it for? Why? Is that me?
So was the massively clunky eotech magnifier mount offered through TNVC...doesn't mean it's good kit for anyone but who wrote the requirement/bid. When justifying something via .mil contract sourcing, ask yourself...who is it for? Why? Is that me?
Could be (not up to speed on EOTech after market mounts). It is true that both Civies and LE need to evaluate their needs and then choose. In this instance, it appears that they wanted to add strength and remove weight. From a Civy POV, I cannot find fault with that for MY needs.
C4
Could be (not up to speed on EOTech after market mounts). It is true that both Civies and LE need to evaluate their needs and then choose. In this instance, it appears that they wanted to add strength and remove weight. From a Civy POV, I cannot find fault with that for MY needs.
C4
No, you can easily argue "It's strong enough for the contract, you won't likely kill it", for sure. I simply meant jumping on the "Well secret squirrel unit uses it, so it must be the best!"
Otherwise, these might sell more...
https://tnvc.com/shop/wilcox-flip-mount-for-eotech-aimpoint-magnifiers/
No, you can easily argue "It's strong enough for the contract, you won't likely kill it", for sure. I simply meant jumping on the "Well secret squirrel unit uses it, so it must be the best!"
Otherwise, these might sell more...
https://tnvc.com/shop/wilcox-flip-mount-for-eotech-aimpoint-magnifiers/
If it is the "unit" I think it is that bought these, then they know better than most everyone about precision shooting at distance. So that would tell me that they found a problem that they wanted corrected. Again, does that mean that I will do this mount any kind of justice? No probably not.
That EOTech flip mount looks fantastic (way more rugged than the factory stuff). So I can see why they would want it.
C4
No, you can easily argue "It's strong enough for the contract, you won't likely kill it", for sure. I simply meant jumping on the "Well secret squirrel unit uses it, so it must be the best!"
Otherwise, these might sell more...
https://tnvc.com/shop/wilcox-flip-mount-for-eotech-aimpoint-magnifiers/
The Wilcox flip mount is awesome, if you haven't used one then I wouldn't knock it. It isn't cheap, after all it is from Wilcox, but it works very well. The skeetir version is pimp as well.
If I recall, part of the design on the Super Precision Mount included a change in how the mount indexes to the rail and offers precise RTZ. The alloy used isn't the only unique feature, but it seems to be all folks want to discuss.
If I recall, part of the design on the Super Precision Mount included a change in how the mount indexes to the rail and offers precise RTZ. The alloy used isn't the only unique feature, but it seems to be all folks want to discuss.
I'm still a Bobro or Nightforce fan. The NF mount is only .3oz more, and is made of 7075, which is about 95% as strong as the Geissele 2099. It's also $100 less. The Bobro is less than 2.5oz more, and offers true RTZ without tools. It is also $100 less.
The Geissele, I am sure is a well made unit, and carries some unicorn jizz appeal, for sure. Functonally, I'm just not sold. That said, ultimately I bet it's better than the NF Unimount. It's different and cannot be compared with the Bobro, though.
I was going to buy a Geissle, but went Bobro instead to slap my K16i in. Mainly, I wanted QD. Why? because I don't "jump with my weapon", and I do like to shoot my irons.
I'm still a Bobro or Nightforce fan. The NF mount is only .3oz more, and is made of 7075, which is about 95% as strong as the Geissele 2099. It's also $100 less. The Bobro is less than 2.5oz more, and offers true RTZ without tools. It is also $100 less.
The Geissele, I am sure is a well made unit, and carries some unicorn jizz appeal, for sure. Functonally, I'm just not sold. That said, ultimately I bet it's better than the NF Unimount. It's different and cannot be compared with the Bobro, though.
I was going to buy a Geissle, but went Bobro instead to slap my K16i in. Mainly, I wanted QD. Why? because I don't "jump with my weapon", and I do like to shoot my irons.
Fair enough. All my mounts are Bobro At the moment as well. I'm certain that the G mount will be of extremely high quality and offer good RTZ.
What I'm curious about is how the mounting system / index system compares to the KAC equivalent? Does the KAC mount index off the angles versus the top flat of the rail?
Does anyone know what height(s) this mount will come in for 34mm tubes?
Here is an interesting interview with Bill Geissele from SHOT 2016. He talks about the new mounts at the 7:00 min mark of the vid, he also talks about a new lube they are coming out with at the 25:15 min mark . ALG Defense's Purple Go Juice (PGJ) is a Bio-Synthetic oil that has been formulated from the ground up for use in small arms.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HSEWVEdaVY
Here is an interesting interview with Bill Geissele from SHOT 2016. He talks about the new mounts at the 7:00 min mark of the vid, he also talks about a new lube they are coming out with at the 25:15 min mark.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HSEWVEdaVY
"Drizzle some Geissele gissel on yo nizzle, pewpewpew fo thousands of rounds fo shizzle!"
Am I the only one wishing they would build rifles......
I wish they would release a date for that super precision...
I wish they would release a date for that super precision...
8-9 weeks from today, says Geissele
8-9 weeks from today, says Geissele
....NO!!!!
BufordTJustice
02-18-16, 18:33
Am I the only one wishing they would build rifles......
Hell no.
Geissele will be releasing Extended and Hyperextended version of the Super Precision Mount in 30mm and 34mm with both 0MOA and 20MOA slopes. Black and DCC, 7075 and 2099 versions all will be available.
I did a quick mockup of how the Hyperextended and Extended mounts might work on an AR. These mounts look very promising.
http://personal.visualitymedia.com/personal/ar15/hyperextended_1000px.jpg
Find ManBearPig!
02-25-16, 17:28
So I've been doing some of my own research on this mount, and I just want to see if the other people in this thread can confirm what I'm about to say.
1.) So the primary point of this scope mount, it seems, is to have a stupidly tough and precise mount that features extremely good return to zero, correct?
2.) The idea behind the hex nut system is that because these things are made to such exact tolerances, you can just torque the the mount down without needing a torque wrench, and it will still return to zero. Does that sound right?
It seems that the selling point of this mount over a traditional lever based mount is that it is more precise, more durable, lighter, returns to zero better, and is simpler. However, versus the other more traditional unimounts made by Nightforce and Badger, I'm not quite sure I see as many advantages. Yes, I know that this mount will be lighter and stronger (thanks primarily to the exotic metal its made of), plus likely more precisely made, than the NF and Badger mounts. However, I've never heard of anyone ever complaining that Nightforce or Badger made mounts that where not tough enough and/or precise enough, and the weight savings the Super Precision Mount has over the NF and Badger really aren't all that much. That means, I assume, that the Geissele's advantage here rest in it having a superior return to zero mechanism. My question is though, how is Geissele's hex nut attachment system different than the ones on the NF and Badger? Why is it that the Geissele is "torque insensitive", but the NF and Badger apparently are not?
Also, I watched a video where Bill Geissele himself was talking about the mount, and he said that independent test showed the maximum standard deviation the Geissele mount had when it was re-mounted in a weapon was 0.05 mils. Notice that that is the maximum too- that means on average, it should be lower. If I'm doing my math right, that means if you where to shoot at something a kilometer away, the most difference you'd see in zero is about 5 cm. In imperial terms, that's about 1.8 inches at 1000 yards. That's impressive, to put it mildly. Hell, as far as I'm concerned, for your typical 5.56 or 7.62 AR, for all intents and purposes that might as well be a perfect return to zero.
Video of Mr. Geissele talking about the accuracy of his mounts return to zero (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToGS2O2uJR4).
Geissele will be releasing Extended and Hyperextended version of the Super Precision Mount in 30mm and 34mm with both 0MOA and 20MOA slopes. Black and DCC, 7075 and 2099 versions all will be available.
I did a quick mockup of how the Hyperextended and Extended mounts might work on an AR. These mounts look very promising.
Do you know what height the mount will be for the 34mm version? The only way I would shell out for this mount is if it was less tall than the NF offering.
Lightweight, non QD extended mount options for 34mm tubes are limited.
Geissele will be releasing Extended and Hyperextended version of the Super Precision Mount in 30mm and 34mm with both 0MOA and 20MOA slopes. Black and DCC, 7075 and 2099 versions all will be available.
I did a quick mockup of how the Hyperextended and Extended mounts might work on an AR. These mounts look very promising.
http://personal.visualitymedia.com/personal/ar15/hyperextended_1000px.jpg
No release date?
TexasAggie2005
02-26-16, 15:19
I bought one of the 200 units that Geissele sold as a fundraiser for a sick member of TOS. They are shipping those within 3-6 weeks. Full retail is a few after that I heard.
Grant,
Are you going to be offering any deals on this mount when they come out? Any word on release dates? I am starting to see them pop up on other stores now.
Grant,
Are you going to be offering any deals on this mount when they come out? Any word on release dates? I am starting to see them pop up on other stores now.
We have some of the scope mounts in stock now.
C4
Jwknutson17
03-05-16, 11:32
We have some of the scope mounts in stock now.
C4
Any black 34mm 20moa? Looked on the site, didn't see them yet. Thanks
Any black 34mm 20moa? Looked on the site, didn't see them yet. Thanks
Don't normally stock those (special order as not many people need that combo).
C4
StevieJ309
03-05-16, 12:00
Grant, any word on the Aimpoint mounts?
Grant, any word on the Aimpoint mounts?
Yes, those and MRO mounts are coming early next week.
C4
Grant,
I am still not seeing them on the store website.
Grant,
I am still not seeing them on the store website.
Correct. We won't load them up until they are in our hands.
C4
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Grant, please tell me you have the 30MM extended (preferably 10/20moa) in that burnt bronze?
Grant, please tell me you have the 30MM extended (preferably 10/20moa) in that burnt bronze?
Sorry, we have not received those yet.
C4
Sorry, we have not received those yet.
C4
If you happen to get any 30mm 20moa DDC hyper extended mounts I will pay in full before release if that's what it takes to secure one.
We have added the Geissele MRO and Aimpoint Micro mounts to our package deals page for those interested.
MRO: http://www.gandrtactical.com/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi?preadd=action&key=2200003P
Aimpoint Micro's:http://www.gandrtactical.com/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi?search=action&category=PKGS
C4
Is there any word on the charging handle?
Grant, when do you anticipate selling the Aimpoint mounts by themselves?
StevieJ309
03-08-16, 17:08
Grant, when do you anticipate selling the Aimpoint mounts by themselves?
Also wondering if you have them in lower third?
Anyone know who has their Aimpoint Micro mounts in stock yet ? Lower third co-witness in black .
Anyone know who has their Aimpoint Micro mounts in stock yet ? Lower third co-witness in black .
Emailed Geissele themselves today to ask and they said 8 weeks. I'm hoping that's just to be safe and they drop sooner.
Grant, when do you anticipate selling the Aimpoint mounts by themselves?
Just saw an e-mail that some are coming in (1/3).
C4
Just a heads up, the H1/H2/T1/T2 and MRO mounts are for sale on Geissele's website.
Any data on ring-cap torque, yet?
I just received a T1 lower 1/3rd mount this week from Midway. Very nice mount, robust and simple. I did have to make an elevation adjustment when zeroing. The G mount appears to be shorter than the Bobro it is replacing. It honestly feels more like an absolute co-witness. Not sure how I feel about that yet. I'll run it for a while and see if I like the height or not.
I just received a T1 lower 1/3rd mount this week from Midway. Very nice mount, robust and simple. I did have to make an elevation adjustment when zeroing. The G mount appears to be shorter than the Bobro it is replacing. It honestly feels more like an absolute co-witness. Not sure how I feel about that yet. I'll run it for a while and see if I like the height or not.
I've become a fan of a 1.5-1.6 sight height over top of rail. Bobro's T1 mounts are a bit "low", IMO, so if Geissele is shorter than Bobro's, wow.
I've become a fan of a 1.5-1.6 sight height over top of rail. Bobro's T1 mounts are a bit "low", IMO, so if Geissele is shorter than Bobro's, wow.
Definitely shorter, maybe by 0.09—0.10“. Makes me wonder if I received an absolute co-witness. Does anyone know the part number for the lower 1/3rd mount?
I think geissele is higher than bobros lower 1/3 (which is low), but lower than the bobro high.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Geissele T1 mount lower 1/3: PN: 05-472. The co-witness is 05-401. I bought both 1/3 and cw and returned the cw.
The lower 1/3 ( PN: 05-472 ) is about 0.09 lower than Bobro lower 1/3 ( PN: B13-111-003 ).
I posted something about this last week ( link (https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?182554-Geissele-Super-Precision-Aimpoint-T1-Lower-1-3-with-Wilcox-EOTech-Flip-Mount) ).
REF photo below ( Geissele T1 lower 1/3 vs Bobro lower 1/3 )
http://i1294.photobucket.com/albums/b602/ihcnehc/2016-APR-05%20Geissele%20Micro%20Mount/Geissele_Bobro_Wilcox_Line_Up_01_2016_04_zpspdmked8k.jpg
Definitely shorter, maybe by 0.09—0.10“. Makes me wonder if I received an absolute co-witness. Does anyone know the part number for the lower 1/3rd mount?
I think geissele is higher than bobros lower 1/3 (which is low), but lower than the bobro high.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Negative. The Geissele lower 1/3rd is lower than the Bobro lower 1/3rd.
Geissele T1 mount lower 1/3: PN: 05-472. The co-witness is 05-401. I bought both 1/3 and cw and returned the cw.
The lower 1/3 ( PN: 05-472 ) is about 0.09 lower than Bobro lower 1/3 ( PN: B13-111-003 ).
I posted something about this last week ( link (https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?182554-Geissele-Super-Precision-Aimpoint-T1-Lower-1-3-with-Wilcox-EOTech-Flip-Mount) ).
Thanks. I didn't see the earlier post. Haven't had much time to keep up with the discussion lately.
I've become a fan of a 1.5-1.6 sight height over top of rail. Bobro's T1 mounts are a bit "low", IMO, so if Geissele is shorter than Bobro's, wow.
Just eyeballing center of the optic, it looks pretty darn close to 1.5 with my calipers and a quick measurement. That would put the Bobro around 1.6. Not sure why it would seem "low" for you since both are right in the wheelhouse of where you want to be.
Here are some Pics of my lower third mount, etc.. Also a Pic of the absolute witness mount at 1.410"( the same as the AR's iron sights). I measured from top of the receiver to the center of the T1 objective at approximately 1.530".
The part numbers on the packaging on both of mine are different than what is printed on the mount body. The height works a little better * for me* than the Bobro lower third aimpoint micro mount .
http://www.lightfighter.net/topic/lt-mount-heights-aimpoint-trijicon-and-more
http://www.weaponevolution.com/forum/showthread.php?2497-UNDERSTANDING-CO-WITNESS
http://www.primaryarms.com/b13-111-003/p/b13-111-003/ The Bobro lower third mount is 1.650" receiver top to optic centerline. Approximately .120" inch higher than the Geissele lower third mount.
http://www.tacticallink.com/Red-Dot-Sight-Mounts.html
http://i563.photobucket.com/albums/ss72/Biggy8/IMG_3118.jpg (http://s563.photobucket.com/user/Biggy8/media/IMG_3118.jpg.html)
http://i563.photobucket.com/albums/ss72/Biggy8/IMG_3117.jpg (http://s563.photobucket.com/user/Biggy8/media/IMG_3117.jpg.html)
http://i563.photobucket.com/albums/ss72/Biggy8/IMG_3108.jpg (http://s563.photobucket.com/user/Biggy8/media/IMG_3108.jpg.html)
05-472 is what I've got also. Didn't look at the package markings though.
TexasAggie2005
04-16-16, 10:43
Just got my 30mm in and mounted a Trijicon 1-4 Accupower.
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160416/6efac47e5097b64c7574c83cc7add849.jpg
Just eyeballing center of the optic, it looks pretty darn close to 1.5 with my calipers and a quick measurement. That would put the Bobro around 1.6. Not sure why it would seem "low" for you since both are right in the wheelhouse of where you want to be.The measurements are imprecise and everyone has a different idea of lower 1/3 hence the confusion.
Bobro 1/3 (#003) is lower than an ADM or Larue lower 1/3, which is what WS6 was referring to.
Bobro High (#004) is ~0.2" higher than their lower 1/3 ?? The Geissele being shorter than Bobro #003 would make it one of the shortest 1/3 mounts. I don't know where the Scalarworks fits in.
Just got my 30mm in and mounted a Trijicon 1-4 Accupower.
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160416/6efac47e5097b64c7574c83cc7add849.jpg
Do the nuts the mount dig into your chest or back when the rifle is slung?
TexasAggie2005
04-16-16, 19:10
Do the nuts the mount dig into your chest or back when the rifle is slung?
They don't at all. I was concerned about that when I bought it, but in wearing it around the house today, it was a non-issue. In reality, they don't protrude past the barrel nut sling QD of my Mk8 rail or the illumination knob of the scope.
I'll try and get another profile pic if you like.
Good to know. I've transitioned to mostly mk2 leupolds just because it makes the left side slick for slung front or back carry when on bikes or atvs.
Scope knobs never seem to bother me. Just scope levers and pointy charging handles.
Metric Matt
04-17-16, 00:56
38982
The MRO mount looks great, as expected the machine work and finish are excellent. It's a few tenths of an ounce heavier than the stock mount, but looks far more robust. It has three lugs as opposed to the stock mount's one, with the cross bolt acting as the center lug. The nut is captured on the cross bolt.
Metric Matt
04-17-16, 01:07
http://i961.photobucket.com/albums/ae99/Matthew_Stoner/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpssiwzxbjn.jpeg (http://s961.photobucket.com/user/Matthew_Stoner/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpssiwzxbjn.jpeg.html)
http://i961.photobucket.com/albums/ae99/Matthew_Stoner/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpso6cen7xs.jpeg (http://s961.photobucket.com/user/Matthew_Stoner/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpso6cen7xs.jpeg.html)
Metric Matt
04-17-16, 01:18
http://i961.photobucket.com/albums/ae99/Matthew_Stoner/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsdbk9m6mt.jpeg (http://s961.photobucket.com/user/Matthew_Stoner/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsdbk9m6mt.jpeg.html)
http://i961.photobucket.com/albums/ae99/Matthew_Stoner/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsmh1dmw7a.jpeg (http://s961.photobucket.com/user/Matthew_Stoner/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsmh1dmw7a.jpeg.html)
http://i961.photobucket.com/albums/ae99/Matthew_Stoner/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsno4ljdgn.jpeg (http://s961.photobucket.com/user/Matthew_Stoner/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsno4ljdgn.jpeg.html)
http://i961.photobucket.com/albums/ae99/Matthew_Stoner/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zps296pcdn8.jpeg (http://s961.photobucket.com/user/Matthew_Stoner/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zps296pcdn8.jpeg.html)
http://i961.photobucket.com/albums/ae99/Matthew_Stoner/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsbmsdrzht.jpeg (http://s961.photobucket.com/user/Matthew_Stoner/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsbmsdrzht.jpeg.html)
Scalarworks
04-17-16, 16:57
The measurements are imprecise and everyone has a different idea of lower 1/3 hence the confusion.
Bobro 1/3 (#003) is lower than an ADM or Larue lower 1/3, which is what WS6 was referring to.
Bobro High (#004) is ~0.2" higher than their lower 1/3 ?? The Geissele being shorter than Bobro #003 would make it one of the shortest 1/3 mounts. I don't know where the Scalarworks fits in.
Our Lower-third is 40mm (1.57").
TexasAggie2005
04-26-16, 16:21
https://youtu.be/W3o2QKoOpjk
hyper extended is available on G's website. I ordered mine Tuesday. should have it sat night.
From the Geissele scope mount instructions.
http://i563.photobucket.com/albums/ss72/Biggy8/IMG_3185.jpg (http://s563.photobucket.com/user/Biggy8/media/IMG_3185.jpg.html)
http://i563.photobucket.com/albums/ss72/Biggy8/IMG_3186.jpg (http://s563.photobucket.com/user/Biggy8/media/IMG_3186.jpg.html)
556BlackRifle
05-23-16, 00:55
From the Geissele scope mount instructions.
I received mine a few weeks ago. No instructions in the box. Looks like I mounted it correctly.
I haven't been able to try it yet due to serious illness and now that I'm better, playing catch up at work.
Jwknutson17
05-23-16, 10:09
Mine did not come with any mounting instructions either and I used blue loctite. Dont see that being an issue. As I do on all my scope mounts on all my rifles. I ordered one of the SOPMOD SR-25 Schmidt & Bender mounts if that even matters for instructions..
Mine did not come with any mounting instructions either and I used blue loctite. Dont see that being an issue. As I do on all my scope mounts on all my rifles. I ordered one of the SOPMOD SR-25 Schmidt & Bender mounts if that even matters for instructions..
Loctite of any sort increases compression on the scope tube by roughly 15%.
I didn't get instructions, and I didn't use locktite. I asked a rep and he gave the the torque specs. Honestly with as precise as this mount was supposed to be I was slightly disappointed by how the caps fit. I was expecting a much different fit, but it's not a huge deal.
I didn't get instructions, and I didn't use locktite. I asked a rep and he gave the the torque specs. Honestly with as precise as this mount was supposed to be I was slightly disappointed by how the caps fit. I was expecting a much different fit, but it's not a huge deal.
Can you explain? What optic was used?
Jwknutson17
05-25-16, 07:49
Loctite of any sort increases compression on the scope tube by roughly 15%.
Well that's great. At least it isn't going anywhere ;). Not sure I'm understanding how a torqued bolt to specific spec and now adding lock tite increases force by 15%. Can you elaborate?
TexasAggie2005
05-25-16, 08:04
I didn't get instructions, and I didn't use locktite. I asked a rep and he gave the the torque specs. Honestly with as precise as this mount was supposed to be I was slightly disappointed by how the caps fit. I was expecting a much different fit, but it's not a huge deal.
My Accupower fit in my 30mm mount perfectly.
Well that's great. At least it isn't going anywhere ;). Not sure I'm understanding how a torqued bolt to specific spec and now adding lock tite increases force by 15%. Can you elaborate?
Loctite lowers the k factor and allows the screw to be turned further using the same torque value, thus applying more clamping to the tube of the optic that the ring caps are bearing down on.
Jwknutson17
05-25-16, 09:01
Loctite lowers the k factor and allows the screw to be turned further using the same torque value, thus applying more clamping to the tube of the optic that the ring caps are bearing down on.
Thanks. I would have assumed that the TQ values would be with locktite and not dry. When I wrenched for Toyota when assembling motors/heads, all the TQ values are assuming use of proper assembly lube. I do understand the reasoning and assumed that was the only difference. Just thought I would ask if there was some special sauce for locktite.
I continue to still use locktite and will TQ to a specific value on anything going on my rifles. When talking about such low TQ values anyway, I have never seen it an issue in all the rifles and optics and mounts I have assembled. Thanks for the clarification / info WS6.
Jwknutson17
05-25-16, 09:27
My Accupower fit in my 30mm mount perfectly.
The 2 examples I have fit very well also. On Bushnell elite and Steiner military optics.
elephantrider
05-25-16, 16:16
Loctite lowers the k factor and allows the screw to be turned further using the same torque value, thus applying more clamping to the tube of the optic that the ring caps are bearing down on.
Sounds like it is analogous to using anti-seize or grease on a threaded assembly and getting a little more rotation at a given torque value.
Sounds like it is analogous to using anti-seize or grease on a threaded assembly and getting a little more rotation at a given torque value.
Correct. The factor for loctite is 0.15, or the same as "light machining oil".
Sounds like it is analogous to using anti-seize or grease on a threaded assembly and getting a little more rotation at a given torque value.
Correct. The factor for loctite is 0.15, or the same as "light machining oil".
Can you explain? What optic was used?
They fit snugly, but everybody is posting photos of the mounts sticking to their scopes like a magnet, and I had wiggle room in mine. With the caps centered I have a .011" gap between the caps and base.
I think I had just gotten my hopes up seeing what everyone else was posting and saying.
Leupold mk4.
They fit snugly, but everybody is posting photos of the mounts sticking to their scopes like a magnet, and I had wiggle room in mine. With the caps centered I have a .011" gap between the caps and base.
I think I had just gotten my hopes up seeing what everyone else was posting and saying.
Leupold mk4.
There is supposed to be a gap. How would you bend / compress the scope tube if there was not ?
Sadly I can't find them in stock... I'd like a black 20moa SR25 extended and a black 20moa for my AR. Need to measure it to see if standard or extended would be best for my 1-4x...
Sadly I can't find them in stock... I'd like a black 20moa SR25 extended and a black 20moa for my AR. Need to measure it to see if standard or extended would be best for my 1-4x...
Same here but I don't care about 20 moa vs 0.
They don't really seem to be in stock anywhere. I've got this black M4 30mm hyper extended that doesn't work for me and I'd love to trade it for a black M4 30mm extended.
So...if Geissele recommends 15-18 inch-pounds, but the scope company recommends 25 inch-pounds...whose to use?
elephantrider
07-14-16, 03:11
So...if Geissele recommends 15-18 inch-pounds, but the scope company recommends 25 inch-pounds...whose to use?
What scope/company?
What scope/company?
Nightforce. NXS 1-4, specifically.
Thoughts: Mounts compress tubes, tubes spring against mounts = friction = how it works.
Facts: NF tubes thicker than regular tubes
Questions...will 18 in-lb hold it in place?
15 inch lbs. The mount design determines how much clamping force is generated per the specific torque on the screws.
15 inch lbs will be fine. I have a couple NF scopes in Badger mounts at that torque and they have never moved or changed zero even on 308 gas guns.
15 inch lbs. The mount design determines how much clamping force is generated per the specific torque on the screws.
15 inch lbs will be fine. I have a couple NF scopes in Badger mounts at that torque and they have never moved or changed zero even on 308 gas guns.
Thanks!
Question...how does mount design determine amount of clamping force transmitted in different amount, if thread pitch is the same between two mounts?
Thanks!
Question...how does mount design determine amount of clamping force transmitted in different amount, if thread pitch is the same between two mounts?
Width of rings, surface area in contact with the scope, and number of screws per ring.
For instance, ARC rings have one screw and the recommended torque is 50 inch lbs. Yes, 50 on the rings, as well as the Picatinny clamp.
Width of rings, surface area in contact with the scope, and number of screws per ring.
For instance, ARC rings have one screw and the recommended torque is 50 inch lbs. Yes, 50 on the rings, as well as the Picatinny clamp.
I read a review where an ARC mount mushed a scope like a toy, too...yes, it was a cheaper scope, but still.
The NF Unimount and Geissele mounts have identical number of screws. However, the Geissele has larger (wider) rings. Does this mean less pressure, or more? I would think less pressure, because if it's like an offroad vehicle, wider tires = better for sand/snow (unless you are trying to sink through to the road).
No real expert here, but is suggest (for ALL MOUNTS AND SCOPES) to go with the lowest torque possible that works. Scopes aren't cheap and once you bind them up there is a chance you FUBARE'd them up. Torque to the lowest setting that is mentioned. Put witness lines on the scope/rings and shoot the crap out of it. Rinse and repeat till you find the combo that works and doesn't bugger up your scope.
No real expert here, but is suggest (for ALL MOUNTS AND SCOPES) to go with the lowest torque possible that works. Scopes aren't cheap and once you bind them up there is a chance you FUBARE'd them up. Torque to the lowest setting that is mentioned. Put witness lines on the scope/rings and shoot the crap out of it. Rinse and repeat till you find the combo that works and doesn't bugger up your scope.
My last NIghtforce took 25 inch-pounds just fine, with thinner rings than the Geissele.
That said, Nightforce got back with me and complimented the Geissele product, while telling me that their torque specs should work just fine. You could not ask for classier product support than that, considering Nightforce sells what could only be termed a competing product. They did not ask why I did not buy a NF unimount, they did not recommend that I buy one. They were in-depth and very polite in their response (I just hit the highlites here). This is one of the reasons I buy Nightforce when I can.
Defaultmp3
07-14-16, 09:56
The NF Unimount and Geissele mounts have identical number of screws. However, the Geissele has larger (wider) rings. Does this mean less pressure, or more? I would think less pressure, because if it's like an offroad vehicle, wider tires = better for sand/snow (unless you are trying to sink through to the road).Pressure * area = force.
With less pressure, but more surface area, the amount of force keeping the optic in place can be kept equal.
Has anyone else noticed that the Geissele mounts are just kindof "shoddy" in the machining department? I expected mine to be similar in finish to my Nightforce, but it just looks...rough. Like a knock-off or something. Lots of toolmarks, ID of the rings is not smooth, etc. etc.
Has anyone else noticed that the Geissele mounts are just kindof "shoddy" in the machining department? I expected mine to be similar in finish to my Nightforce, but it just looks...rough. Like a knock-off or something. Lots of toolmarks, ID of the rings is not smooth, etc. etc.
Please send me an email with some sample images of your mount and a description of what is the issue and I'll get it to the right folks. j.dang@geissele.com
Please send me an email with some sample images of your mount and a description of what is the issue and I'll get it to the right folks. j.dang@geissele.com
Will do as soon as I get home (1.5hrs). I already sent same to "sales", although the chipped anodizing reflected the flash and just shows up as "glare". I'll resnap that pic and send it again to the add. you just provided.
Will do as soon as I get home (1.5hrs). I already sent same to "sales", although the chipped anodizing reflected the flash and just shows up as "glare". I'll resnap that pic and send it again to the add. you just provided.
Please also include where it was purchased. I will make sure it gets the proper attention.
Please also include where it was purchased. I will make sure it gets the proper attention.
The dealer is great. I can either go through them, or you. Let me know what's easiest. Both work for me.
The dealer is great. I can either go through them, or you. Let me know what's easiest. Both work for me.
Just shoot me an email and we will take care of it.
Just shoot me an email and we will take care of it.
E-mail sent. Thanks!
Someone will be in touch tomorrow.
Someone will be in touch tomorrow.
Thanks!
Someone will be in touch tomorrow.
So, about availability of the sr-25/ar-10 mounts....
Just an update, Geissele CS has asked me to get the dealer to give me a full refund. A swag bag was offered, if I would like, and they apologized for the hassel.
Since this issue is now handled, my reason for displeasure in the mount is as follows:
Anodizing was chipped when I took it out of the wrapper:
http://i66.tinypic.com/30t5hdj.jpg
The ID of the rings showed machine-marks/scratches:
http://i67.tinypic.com/2a919g2.jpg
http://i64.tinypic.com/2ni1sll.jpg
Normally, these things may not concern me. However, I have had excellent experiences with similar products from other companies, whereupon the ID of the rings were perfectly smooth, and the anodizing was not chipped,etc. For $300+, I expected better finish, mainly on the ID of the rings, is what bothered me.
If these "issues" are "non-issues", to anyone, I would save my dealer, Weapon Outfitters, the expense and trouble, and sell it to you.
Just an update, Geissele CS has asked me to get the dealer to give me a full refund. A swag bag was offered, if I would like, and they apologized for the hassel.
Since this issue is now handled, my reason for displeasure in the mount is as follows:
Anodizing was chipped when I took it out of the wrapper:
http://i66.tinypic.com/30t5hdj.jpg
The ID of the rings showed machine-marks/scratches:
http://i67.tinypic.com/2a919g2.jpg
http://i64.tinypic.com/2ni1sll.jpg
Normally, these things may not concern me. However, I have had excellent experiences with similar products from other companies, whereupon the ID of the rings were perfectly smooth, and the anodizing was not chipped,etc. For $300+, I expected better finish, mainly on the ID of the rings, is what bothered me.
If these "issues" are "non-issues", to anyone, I would save my dealer, Weapon Outfitters, the expense and trouble, and sell it to you.
You do realize that the ID of rings on several high end mounts is left slightly rough like that to help grab the scope?
You do realize that the ID of rings on several high end mounts is left slightly rough like that to help grab the scope?
This was not explained as such when I contacted Geissele CS, nor was my other Geissele mount like this. I would be curious which mounts you are referring to, though, and were I can source that information, as I have heard same from others. I also wouldn't think it would have grooves in the direction of the potential "scope slip", as well (those just didn't show up because of how the photo was taken).
You do realize that the ID of rings on several high end mounts is left slightly rough like that to help grab the scope?
Mechanically speaking, any mount that needs to be "rough" to grab a scope (compared to a "smooth" version of the same mount) has tolerance issues.
Torquetard
08-02-16, 17:33
See that there are a ton of options for this mount. Then there's the one that's designed with the Vortex 1-6x in mind. So wouldn't it be perfect for any LPV?
Is it just me, or does the Lower 1/3rd cowitness T1 mount seem really low? When I sight over the irons, the dot is very high in the FOV. And it required a pretty significant elevation adjustment when switching from a Bobro Mount.
Is it just me, or does the Lower 1/3rd cowitness T1 mount seem really low? When I sight over the irons, the dot is very high in the FOV. And it required a pretty significant elevation adjustment when switching from a Bobro Mount.
Definitely feels more like an absolute mount to me.
Hasn't bothered me in use with DD irons, and I didn't notice it switching from an LT660 (I zeroed a ton of shit the day I zeroed this, so I didn't pay attention to the elevation change), but I did notice the visual difference after I tried it next to a friend's DD mount.
Might bother me more if it wasn't built as well as it is.
See that there are a ton of options for this mount. Then there's the one that's designed with the Vortex 1-6x in mind. So wouldn't it be perfect for any LPV?
The Vortex just places it more forward than the "standard". Since I have a NF 1-4, I am using the *standard*. I replaced my Geissele with another Geissele, and it shows the same rough machining. This is likely why Geissele just had me get a refund vs. offering another solution. They are all like this. Apparently it doesn't hurt, and I'm tired of messing with it, so I'll use this one. Maybe the grooves in the rings will hold the scope better, who knows.
As to T1 mounts, "absolute' CW means something different to each manufacture of a T1 mount. Look around.
As to T1 mounts, "absolute' CW means something different to each manufacture of a T1 mount. Look around.
Except this was sold as lower-1/3rd, and lower-1/3rd it ain't.
I don't care much either way about lower-1/3rd or absolute, I've used both with fixed irons and they're pretty interchangeable to me, but having used a handful of each mounts now, and actually paying attention to how low the Geissele itself sits, this is not a lower-1/3rd mount. Shows you how much I pay attention if I had to use it next to another gun to notice it in live fire.
I've got the bag it came in and I'll see if the part numbers match up, but I'd be surprised if this is what Geissele calls a lower-1/3rd.
ETA - part number on the lower-1/3rd bag is PN: 05-469 BLACK. Part number on the mount I've got is PN: 05-472.
Someone slipped up somewhere.
Except this was sold as lower-1/3rd, and lower-1/3rd it ain't.
I don't care much either way about lower-1/3rd or absolute, I've used both with fixed irons and they're pretty interchangeable to me, but having used a handful of each mounts now, and actually paying attention to how low the Geissele itself sits, this is not a lower-1/3rd mount. Shows you how much I pay attention if I had to use it next to another gun to notice it in live fire.
I've got the bag it came in and I'll see if the part numbers match up, but I'd be surprised if this is what Geissele calls a lower-1/3rd.
ETA - part number on the lower-1/3rd bag is PN: 05-469 BLACK. Part number on the mount I've got is PN: 05-472.
Someone slipped up somewhere.
Ah. Every manufacturer varies the height, but if it's lower 1/3, it should be somewhere below the 50%. It happens, talk to your dealer and get it exchanged.
Ah. Every manufacturer varies the height, but if it's lower 1/3, it should be somewhere below the 50%. It happens, talk to your dealer and get it exchanged.
I'll probably email Geissele and just see if it was them or the dealer and make them or both parties aware.
I'm really not*even sure I care enough to go through an exchange process, especially considering the scarcity of the lower-1/3rd mounts on Geissele's site. I haven't had a complaint in ~700 rounds with it, most of which after noticing how short it is anyway.
I'll probably email Geissele and just see if it was them or the dealer and make them or both parties aware.
I'm really not*even sure I care enough to go through an exchange process, especially considering the scarcity of the lower-1/3rd mounts on Geissele's site. I haven't had a complaint in ~700 rounds with it, most of which after noticing how short it is anyway.
Took me a minute to find a 7075 30mm 0 MOA Standard to replace mine, but the Geissele mounts are out there.
Got mine back during PA'S memorial day sale. It was a great price or I wouldn't have gotten it. The finish on mine (7075) matches well with the billet upper, so I guess I'm lucky, but I'm happy with it.
Took me a minute to find a 7075 30mm 0 MOA Standard to replace mine, but the Geissele mounts are out there.
Shot them an email last night, and they got back with me this morning. It is indeed a lower-1/3rd, just with a different part number from the package.
I still maintain it's closer to an absolute than a lower-1/3rd just going off all the others I've used, but as I said, I haven't noticed any issue in use. As long as I got what I bought, I'm happy. They still offered an exchange for one with a matching part number, though.
EzGoingKev
09-04-16, 09:23
Did Geissele just do one run of these? It seems like A LOT of them have been sold out for a LONG time.
Digital_Damage
09-04-16, 10:53
Did Geissele just do one run of these? It seems like A LOT of them have been sold out for a LONG time.
my guess is material issues, the supplier has been hard pressed to meet demands for other industries. I would think Geissele is close to the bottom on their contractual supply obligation.
I need an sr25 mount. Hopefully they're available soon.
Canonshooter
09-04-16, 11:30
I'd love to see a mount for the 30mm Aimpoints (such as the PRO).
my guess is material issues, the supplier has been hard pressed to meet demands for other industries. I would think Geissele is close to the bottom on their contractual supply obligation.
Alcoa does not move at the pace tiny companies request. The firearm industry is less than a grain of sand in their bucket.
Canonshooter
09-07-16, 06:28
I'd love to see a mount for the 30mm Aimpoints (such as the PRO).
FYI - I contacted Geissele and they responded that they have no plans at this time to make a 30mm RDS mount.
FYI - I contacted Geissele and they responded that they have no plans at this time to make a 30mm RDS mount.
Scalarworks does.
Canonshooter
09-07-16, 19:47
Scalarworks does.
Yes, already have the page bookmarked (https://scalarworks.com/shop/optic-mounts/ldm-pro/)! I plan on getting one as soon as they are available.
MountainRaven
01-11-17, 01:47
Semi-necro... anyone hear anything recent about the tool-free mount designs? Maybe a rough ETA?
BUOPtimus Prime
02-09-17, 14:09
20 MOA canted models are significantly discounted. Would I be at a detriment for any reason, if I chose the 20MOA model over the zero cant model?
EzGoingKev
02-09-17, 14:29
IDK if they are still on sale but Primary Arms was blowing all their Geissele mounts out at about 50% off the other day.
StevethePirate
02-09-17, 14:32
There are still "some" for sale. I picked up a 34mm Hyper extended 20moa yesterday. For the price, I couldn't pass it up. If they had a 0moa 30mm hyper, I'd have gotten one of those, too. No brainer at $175.
Torquetard
05-26-17, 21:03
These are on sale right now at Geissele's site.... btw, what's best for a accupower 1-4x. Standard, extended, or just get the SOPMOD?
EzGoingKev
05-26-17, 21:21
Primary Arms has all Geissele's stuff on sale too.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.