Are lightweight mounts strong enough to do the job?

[Digital_Damage]

LOL - yeah right. I have no brand loyalty and own so much different gear it would make your head spin.

All I have is my own experience (extremely good) and the many happy LaRue mount users out in the wild. I also have 3 ADM Mounts, one BoBro mount and have had 4 different GG&G mounts (none currently.) Show me. Show me. Show me.

When I hear of things differing from my own experience on multiple 308 AR rifles using LaRue mounts - I get interested real quick. Especially because a lot of folks love to bash Mark because he's been less than friendly at times. I like to challenge "popular trends" of sheeple product bashing and blind product love/following, whoever/whatever the manufacturer is. Maybe I need to start throwing some of my own gear on the pavement.

EDIT: Specifically with the LaRue LT104s, yes that mag article shows RTZ (.076) within Mark's stated specs of "It's somewheres in the range of .060"-.085" ... at a 100 yds." -- I personally am perfectly fine with this.

I'm talking about the other bashing that has been mentioned.

Your claim of "perfect" return to zero as you have readily admitted is incorrect. It performs poorly compared to competitors. That is a fact from public studies, private studies and the manufacture themselves.

Claims from TOS, snipers hide and private funded studies have proven that Larue's mechanism of security the scope holds up poorly compared to other manufactures. If it performs good enough for you (like your return to zero requirement) than that is subjective to your needs and not in line with your demand of scientific facts that Larue's method is as good as the other manufactures.

Their method provides less clamping force and surface contact area of the competitors.

Will it cause an issue for you? Possibly not given your requirements, but that is not what is being discussed here. The best QDC is not Larue with the metrics provided, that is a fact proven by studies.

[MegademiC]

^^^^^

I think your decimal points are off...

1 MOA is roughly 1" @100 yards

0.135 MOA.... 0.135" at 100 yards

Well, I said 100yds where I meant 1k. Edited to fix.

I didn't read the article and can't comment to the validity of the test, just the results. As said, for most people, I think 1.35" @1kyds is not noticable.

[Brahmzy]

Your claim of "perfect" return to zero as you have readily admitted is incorrect. It performs poorly compared to competitors. That is a fact from public studies, private studies and the manufacture themselves.

Claims from TOS, snipers hide and private funded studies have proven that Larue's mechanism of security the scope holds up poorly compared to other manufactures. If it performs good enough for you (like your return to zero requirement) than that is subjective to your needs and not in line with your demand of scientific facts that Larue's method is as good as the other manufactures.

Their method provides less clamping force and surface contact area of the competitors.

Will it cause an issue for you? Possibly not given your requirements, but that is not what is being discussed here. The best QDC is not Larue with the metrics provided, that is a fact proven by studies.

Some valid points. Technically there is no such thing as perfect RTZ. Requirements differ user to user.

[RHINOWSO]

Well, I said 100yds where I meant 1k. Edited to fix.

I didn't read the article and can't comment to the validity of the test, just the results. As said, for most people, I think 1.35" @1kyds is not noticable.

Most people can't shoot 10" at 1000yards, so yeah an inch shift is NBD.

Not to mention those who shoot long distance don't typically have QDs on their rigs...

[WS6]

It's not the POI shift that's such a turn-off on the LaRue, but the lack of durability of zero with rough handling, 308, etc.

[TomMcC]

Well at my 2/27 3gun match I gave my rifle a quick drop test on the concrete slab (this of course made me very sad). I have an Aero lightweight mount. The rifle fell from about 3ft up when the zipper on my range bag failed and I didn't notice it. The rifle first struck the muzzle break then sort of flopped over onto the left side of the scope buggering up the illumination knob. Not a severe test, but a real world hit. Before leaving the pad I fired a round at a steel target roughly 12" wide by 18" tall at about 250 yds and hit it. I will be going to the range to bench it for a zero test (I must have some peace of mind). I'll let you know how it went in a couple weeks.

[Primus Pilum]

Most people can't shoot 10" at 1000yards, so yeah an inch shift is NBD.

Not to mention those who shoot long distance don't typically have QDs on their rigs...

Disagree. That is a huge deviation at distance and when shooting 1-2 MOA targets, matters. I stretch my SCAR & SR25 out past 1K regularly on steel. Both Have a Bobro on them because I will switch out a LPV or RD for close work as well. I enjoy the flexibility. IPSC target at 1175 yards, 1 MOA matters very much.

At 100 yards in, on a carbine, yea it doesn't really matter.

[Primus Pilum]

Well at my 2/27 3gun match I gave my rifle a quick drop test on the concrete slab (this of course made me very sad). I have an Aero lightweight mount. The rifle fell from about 3ft up when the zipper on my range bag failed and I didn't notice it. The rifle first struck the muzzle break then sort of flopped over onto the left side of the scope buggering up the illumination knob. Not a severe test, but a real world hit. Before leaving the pad I fired a round at a steel target roughly 12" wide by 18" tall at about 250 yds and hit it. I will be going to the range to bench it for a zero test (I must have some peace of mind). I'll let you know how it went in a couple weeks.

That really means nothing. It's a non repeatable test and you can't base confidence on it. What if it fell 10* in the other direction or from 3" higher? Not to mention hitting a 5 MOA target is not enough to even tell you if your mount held zero on that ONE impact. This is why verifiable, repeatable testing with a good sample size matters.

IMO the benefit of saving a few Ounces here and there on a lightweight mount (which will be the weakest link in your system) is foolish. I prefer that interface to be stout and have the confidence that it will not be the failure point. The optic should always be the weakest link, even if it is the most expensive part of the system IMO.

[TomMcC]

That really means nothing. It's a non repeatable test and you can't base confidence on it. What if it fell 10* in the other direction or from 3" higher? Not to mention hitting a 5 MOA target is not enough to even tell you if your mount held zero on that ONE impact. This is why verifiable, repeatable testing with a good sample size matters.

IMO the benefit of saving a few Ounces here and there on a lightweight mount (which will be the weakest link in your system) is foolish. I prefer that interface to be stout and have the confidence that it will not be the failure point. The optic should always be the weakest link, even if it is the most expensive part of the system IMO.

Wow dude, ease up. I'M NOT CLAIMING ANYTHING OTHER THAN I DROPPED MY GUN ON THE SCOPE AND I'll SEE IF IT HELD ZERO. I'm not claiming some rigorous super duper scientific anything. You see, we're having a casual conversation here. My recommendation for you is to take your super stout mount and drop it repeatedly from 10 ft high on concrete over a 6 month period under rigorous controls and then tell us how your scope mount did.

By the way.....just because something is light doesn't necessarily mean it's weak, if it's engineered properly. It seems to be your contention that Aero mounts are somehow weak because they are light, how do you know this?

[Digital_Damage]

Wow dude, ease up. I'M NOT CLAIMING ANYTHING OTHER THAN I DROPPED MY GUN ON THE SCOPE AND I'll SEE IF IT HELD ZERO. I'm not claiming some rigorous super duper scientific anything. You see, we're having a casual conversation here. My recommendation for you is to take your super stout mount and drop it repeatedly from 10 ft high on concrete over a 6 month period under rigorous controls and then tell us how your scope mount did.

By the way.....just because something is light doesn't necessarily mean it's weak, if it's engineered properly. It seems to be your contention that Aero mounts are somehow weak because they are light, how do you know this?

I for one am interested in seeing what happens, keep us posted.