Geissele super precision....

[pointblank4445]

Good decision.

Did you consider a NF Unimount? I like them but their line up needs expanding a little.

Good mounts (lighter than most too), but you have to take the 20MOA cant...no 0-cant options. (For me) LPV scopes on 1x plus rails longer than 12" plus 20 MOA cant (also include any BUIS or 12 o'clock mounted accessories) means you are going to fill up your FOV on 1x quick, fast and and in a hurry!

[P2000]

Good mounts (lighter than most too), but you have to take the 20MOA cant...no 0-cant options. (For me) LPV scopes on 1x plus rails longer than 12" plus 20 MOA cant (also include any BUIS or 12 o'clock mounted accessories) means you are going to fill up your FOV on 1x quick, fast and and in a hurry!

I worried about that before I bought one. I'm not bothered by the 20moa on 1x, but if NF made a 0moa that would have been my choice.

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk

[elephantrider]

I'm just selling the scope, getting a refund on the mount, and buying a MK8 CQBSS H27D. Because SR25, and f it.

I've been there. You get going down what you think is the road to 'Awesomeville,' and you wind up soured on the whole experience. Aside from your issue, how was the Kahles 1-6 otherwise? On paper at least, that is one of my, 'if I had the $$' optics. I also wanted one of the tall 1.93" G-mounts but they are $150 more than a tall Midwest Industries, and I couldn't justify it.

[WS6]

I've been there. You get going down what you think is the road to 'Awesomeville,' and you wind up soured on the whole experience. Aside from your issue, how was the Kahles 1-6 otherwise? On paper at least, that is one of my, 'if I had the $$' optics. I also wanted one of the tall 1.93" G-mounts but they are $150 more than a tall Midwest Industries, and I couldn't justify it.

Form/function is tits.
Glass clarity is equal to my MK6, but it gathered a TINY TINY TINY bit more light, mainly discernable on 6x at sunset, and arguable. Eyebox similar to the mk6, Image distortion and flatness on 1x is excellent. Zoom ring is perfectly tensioned. Illumination is very good, but not as bright as the aimpoint that is the MK6.

The main "wow" of the K16i is the FOV. It's absolutely massive.

I'm honestly re-thinking the MK8. I have been told that 1x is NOT 1x, and there is NOTABLE distortion of the image edges as well as discernible magnification on "1x" even at 25 yards.

[Biggy]

IMHO, I believe the Geissele scope mounted ring gap tolerance on their mounts is on the tight side, when compared to Badger, Nightforce, Leupold,etc., rings and one piece mounts. Scope manufactures have a O.D. spec tolerance they try to hold the tube to. To big and the tube O.D. will not fit in the rings without distorting the rings and messing things up. To much undersize on the tube O.D. is not ideal either.
IMHO, a .003" undersized scope tube should not be enough to matter. The ring and mount manufacturers *must also hold their bore diameters*. Also, when they split the rings, as in Geissele's case with a jewelers saw, there are *different thickness of blades* that also have a bearing on the ring gap. Some ring manufactuers also put a slight relief on each side of the ring where they come together. Unless I am not seeing something, I would like to see Geissele open up their ring gap tolerance by .004" , as the above ring and mount manufactures have.

[EzGoingKev]

Some ring manufactuers also put a slight relief on each side of the ring where they come together.

That is because when you tighten the cap they will pinch in there slightly.

[WS6]

That is because when you tighten the cap they will pinch in there slightly.

The tube compresses into an ellipse. The reliefs allow this without marring or plastic deformation.

[elephantrider]

I'm honestly re-thinking the MK8. I have been told that 1x is NOT 1x, and there is NOTABLE distortion of the image edges as well as discernible magnification on "1x" even at 25 yards.

This is my understanding of the mk8 as well. It's more like a 1.1 (Leupold even lists it as 1.1-8) than a 1x. Even most "1x" have some slight magnification, so if a mfg. calls thier scope 1.1 I'd expect significant low end magnification. I don't think there is a 1-8, or 1-8.5 on the market that works really well at "1x" due to a variety of factors baked into each model (first focal plane reticles/reticle size/design, not true 1x, etc). IMO the 1-8 concept is more of a mini precision rifle scope that does nothing really well. You have a lot of downsides to get the extra 2, or 2.5 magnification. Extra weight, FFP reticles, exposed turrets, etc.

[Biggy]

Hmm, must be an individual mount defect, because I have seen numerous pictures of people rocking geissele mounts and the Kahles 1-6. Steve fisher is rocking one on his FN/Hodge carbine with a Geissele 1.93 mount right now as a student/demo gun. I have my Kahles 1-6 coming from DSG right now and plan to put it on my geissele 1.93 mount. Ill let you know if I have a similar problem.

I got the Geissele 1.930" high mount for my K16i when they first became available around three months ago. The tube on my K16i mics right at 1.180"-1.181" in diameter. With the rings torqued to 18 inch lbs, there is a very little gap between the ring halves, but there is a gap. The extra high mount is working very well for me while using the Magpul MOE SL-S stock. A 1-6x LPVS is the sweet spot in magnification for my needs ( 300-400yds max distance , target size, my corrected vision eyesight). If shooting 400yds and farther *most* of the time, I would step up to a larger caliber. Of coarse the larger caliber rifle has its place, but at the expense of the amount of ammo carried, more recoil and more weight. Although it is just one scenario, watch the movie "Lone Survivor" and ask yourself the question, would they have been more effective while using a 7.62 Nato chambered AR's ? The same question could be asked about caliber size in the battles of Fallujah or Mogadishu

[WS6]

This is my understanding of the mk8 as well. It's more like a 1.1 (Leupold even lists it as 1.1-8) than a 1x. Even most "1x" have some slight magnification, so if a mfg. calls thier scope 1.1 I'd expect significant low end magnification. I don't think there is a 1-8, or 1-8.5 on the market that works really well at "1x" due to a variety of factors baked into each model (first focal plane reticles/reticle size/design, not true 1x, etc). IMO the 1-8 concept is more of a mini precision rifle scope that does nothing really well. You have a lot of downsides to get the extra 2, or 2.5 magnification. Extra weight, FFP reticles, exposed turrets, etc.

Th3 trijicon 1-8 is actually as 1 power as any other I've seen, including the k16i. Not quite as flat as the mk6 or k16i, but I'd say it's similar on 1x.