I know this isn't the optics forum, but I'd like some functional feedback

[Skyyr]

As the title states, I know this isn't the optics forum, but I'd like to post this here in the general discussion as it's a somewhat broad(er) question... plus another post there only got two replies in a week.

Short story: I want a QD mount that will not put ring marks on my scope (provided they are installed properly). If you want a rundown of my experience and where I'm at currently, read on...

Detailed story:

I've purchased a new Nightforce 2.5-10x24. The scope will be going on a Noveske Recon. I'd like QD capability for cleaning and for using iron sights if wanted/needed without a tools requirement.

I want to avoid any and all ring marks on the scope, if possible. I'm not afraid to "use" my gun, but I want to avoid unnecessary wear. I treat all of my firearms as an investment (I do have over $4,000 in this rifle alone), so things like this are important to me.

I've owned both Larue and Bobro mounts. The Bobro mounts are amazing - the "snap" of the lock and way it locks to the rail is perfection. However, the rings left visible impressions on the finish of my KDot from the mounting alone (I didn't even fire it before they appeared). It was not from over-tightening it either. This is apparently typical of horizontally (traditional) split rings. I still have a Bobro 201 (I was one of the few lucky enough to get a 201 model) and I can use it if decided on, or sell it to fund another mount.

I've used Larue ACOG mounts before, but not their 30mm scope mounts. Based on virtually every review I've read, the mount will not leave ring marks whatsoever (if your experience differs, feel free to share it). My only reservation is the design of the locking mechanism, which is very unrefined and not the most robust option out there. It relies on friction and will wear away the finish over time, requiring it to be adjusted tighter, exacerbating the issue. Again, it just seems very crude overall, regardless of how nice the machining is.

My dislikes of the mentioned aspects of the Bobro and Larue led me to check out ADM. It has both a much more refined locking mechanism and vertically split rings. However, based on my limited knowledge, the ADM rings utilize a crossbar that runs through the base of the rings, securing one side of them to the base. This, coupled with the three bolts at the top of each ring, keep it from centering around the scope like the Larue rings do (which only use two bolts at the top and bottom). This negates the advantage of the vertically split rings, as they can't center around the scope being attached to the base and therefore can mar the scope like any other mount.

This led my last of all of the Nightforce Unimount, which NF touts as not marring the scope whatsoever, in addition to having a base that's more secure than QD mounts. This is great, but I don't like the need for a torque wrench to take the mount on and off the rails. I actually enjoy using irons and I don't like the need for a tool to remove the scope to use them.



So, what would you do in my case? A different mount? Something else? I'm asking this question here because I'd like an objective, educated answer. I posted this question on TOS and the majority were Larue kool-aid drinkers, while the rest didn't seem to understand the thought process of considering an AR an investment... followed by the typical armchair-commando replies of "just throw it down the driveway and stop caring how it looks."

Again, please don't respond with "just throw it on there and shoot it." If I wanted to simply toss my gun around, I wouldn't have invested as much as I have into it. I don't mind normal wear and tear, but I do try to avoid unneeded wear as well. This is my "precision" build and I'm treating it as an investment. I'm building a good old FSB sighted, plastic-handguard carbine as my "beater" gun and I won't care what goes on it.

If you made it this far through my post, thanks for your time and I look forward to reading your insights.

Regards...

[dcs12345]

How often do you plan on taking the scope mount on and off of your rifle?

[militarymoron]

any mechanical interface will exhibit wear. scope rings depend on friction and compression to keep the scope from moving, and over time, the recoil can (and will) result in the interface between the two being 'worn'. i think it's unavoidable.
the only way to keep a scope in NIB condition is to leave it in the box.

[Skyyr]

How often do you plan on taking the scope mount on and off of your rifle?

Potentially once every other range trip and when cleaning the rifle, and when running carbine courses (if any).

[Skyyr]

any mechanical interface will exhibit wear. scope rings depend on friction and compression to keep the scope from moving, and over time, the recoil can (and will) result in the interface between the two being 'worn'. i think it's unavoidable.
the only way to keep a scope in NIB condition is to leave it in the box.

Thanks for your reply. I'm not worried about the normal wear from recoil and friction. However, the Bobro clearly left "impressions" on my KDot from just being mounted, no firing or recoil whatsoever.

Look closely at the following picture. It isn't my rifle, but the ring marks (to the left of each ring) are identical to what was left on my KDot. This is what I want to avoid. Normal wear is one thing, but a mount deforming/marring/whatever a scope just from mounting it should be avoidable, IMO.

http://i764.photobucket.com/albums/xx282/jaston87/Guns/IMG_4579-1.jpg

[dcs12345]

The marks on the scope above looks to be caused by having the rings to tight while pushing the scope back and forth adjusting the eye relief.

Did you ever try lapping the rings? This can help with the scratches.

Also why would you remove the scope mount to clean your rifle? Since you are using a 2.5x10 scope are you going to be taking off during the carbine comps and using a BUIS?

[Skyyr]

The marks on the scope above looks to be caused by having the rings to tight while pushing the scope back and forth adjusting the eye relief.

Did you ever try lapping the rings? This can help with the scratches.

Also why would you remove the scope mount to clean your rifle? Since you are using a 2.5x10 scope are you going to be taking off during the carbine comps and using a BUIS?

My marks looked the same, although they were perfectly fitted to the mount in that they weren't from "adjusting" it while mounted, nor were the rings tightened too tight. Someone else suggested that those were common with horizontally split rings stressing the scope tube where the rings came together. The fact that Larue's rings do not leave marks seems to reinforce that it's the design of the rings that is leaving the marks and not installation error. If someone with more knowledge has some insight, feel free to chime in.

I haven't tried lapping the rings. I haven't been convinced that lapping a QD mount would remove the chance of ring marks completely. If they will, it's an option. Otherwise, it's simply an added expense that detracts from the value of the mount.

Removing it while cleaning isn't a must, but it avoids getting cleaning solution/carbon removers on the scope body or near the lenses. It also makes it easier to move/handle the upper.

[siucowboy]

Get a mount that is one piece, not separate rings (you're relying on your rings to mount in perfect alignment separately on the rail of the upper) and get a ring lapping bar and kit.

All my scopes had marks on them until I starting lapping all my rings...it will work on a 2 piece system, but only if you don't remove them after you lap them.

I don't have any scientific proof, but I've also stopping having issues with scope's jumping around in their adjustment range or moving zero's in between range sessions since I started lapping rings.

I have not however ever lapped a single ring, like what may go on a aimpoint since there's only one ring.

EDIT: Just noticed that you said that picture wasn't of your rifle, in that case I'm thinking the bobro you're mentioning is a one piece mount - if you don't get anything else to work, I'd find someone that can lap the rings for you and try it before investing in a lapping bar.

[glockshooter]

I understand that you have a lot of money in your rifle but you do realize it is a tool. If in the process of mounting the scope you have mounting marks does if really matter. I hate to sound like a dick but come on really your worried about marks from rings. I can assure you there are plenty of us that have just as much tied up in our weapons to include myself. Guns are not investments they are tools. Could you imagine a carpenter that was scared to put his hammer in a tool box because he might scratch it. There is probably a reason you did not get a bunch of replies to your post in the optics forum. Generally people here are more concerned about how well there weapons works as opposed to how good it looks

Matt

[Outlander Systems]

Guns are not investments they are tools.

Matt

And that, my good man, is why they made signature lines.

[Skyyr]

I understand that you have a lot of money in your rifle but you do realize it is a tool. If in the process of mounting the scope you have mounting marks does if really matter. I hate to sound like a dick but come on really your worried about marks from rings. I can assure you there are plenty of us that have just as much tied up in our weapons to include myself. Guns are not investments they are tools. Could you imagine a carpenter that was scared to put his hammer in a tool box because he might scratch it. There is probably a reason you did not get a bunch of replies to your post in the optics forum. Generally people here are more concerned about how well there weapons works as opposed to how good it looks

Matt

A Lamborghini is a tool, is it not? Yet you won't find one owner who has a "nice" one that doesn't buff and polish it at every occasion, or one who doesn't drive out of his way to get ultra-high octane fuel at $4.00+ a gallon.

I understand your sentiments, but that doesn't make them correct; they're simply different. It is a widespread fact that weapons appreciate in value when taken care of. That is the very definition of a good investment, regardless of the ramifications. Aesthetics and function aside, there is no difference between my rifle and an ultra-rare imported WA2000 valued at $70,000+ - mine simply hasn't attained that value yet. Ironically, no one in their right mind would offer the above advice to the owner of a WA2000, especially one sporting the correct era glass.

Like I said, I have several rifles and I'm not worried about using them. I don't have objections to slinging around a fighting carbine whatsoever. However, this isn't my fighting carbine. This is my safe-queened precision rifle and I'd like to treat it as such.

I don't expect everyone to understand me, but I rest assured that the few who do also happen to feel the same way. It's one of those "If I have to explain, you wouldn't understand" sort of things.

[Outlander Systems]

Dude, you want an investment? Buy silver. Your scope isn't going to appreciate in value.

[Bimmer]

... the rings left visible impressions on the finish of my KDot from the mounting alone (I didn't even fire it before they appeared). It was not from over-tightening it either. This is apparently typical of horizontally (traditional) split rings.

Two thoughts...

1. Wrap a layer of electrical tape around the inside of the rings, so that the rings don't directly contact the scope tube. It'll be invisible once everything's together, but it will prevent any scratching/impressing, and it'll grip better than metal-on-metal.

2. Make sure you're not over-tightening. Scope rings don't need much torque at all. If you're not absolutely sure that you're NOT over-tightening, then get a little torque wrench.

Bimmer

[ColdDeadHands]

Buy a good mount like the Larue, give the scope a light coat of oil, leave the rings loose enough while you adjust the eye relief and finally use a torque wrench and torque the rings down with proper torque.
That's all you can do trying do avoid ring marks...if you still get them live with it.

[tray]

Dude, you want an investment? Buy silver. Your scope isn't going to appreciate in value.

Agreed.

Park the Lamborghini in the garage (oh, ...and it's not a tool) and mount the scope and rifle above your mantle. They'll look real pretty collecting dust!

[GhostB14]

Agreed.

Park the Lamborghini in the garage (oh, ...and it's not a tool)

Right, only the driver is.

To the OP, Lapping is probably your best best for two reasons.
1: No mount is perfect, imperfect rings lead to strange stresses on your high dollar optics. Lapping gets them pretty damn close to perfect.
2: a side benefit of #1 is reduced ring marks.

[Toonces]

Those marks are not normal. The scope in the picture looks like it moved under recoil.

1. Buy a lapping kit. They are not expensive. Don't go overboard, you don't need 100% contact, especially if you use tape as well.

2. Use tape. I use double sided carpet tape. Bimmer uses electrical tape. I've heard of using duct tape as well. I'm going to try electrical tape on my next mount, because the carpet tape is a pain to work with.

3. Buy a good torque screwdriver. Brownells or Snap-On off the top of my head. You just spent $4k+ on the rig, so another $200 for a tool you will have forever shouldn't be a problem. There have been a lot of scopes damaged by the torquemeister "go till yer scared and then a quarter turn past" mentality.