What scope mounts would you like tested?

[ColtSeavers]

Get better and look forward to the testing. Thank you again.

[ColtSeavers]

Any update/testing completed or even started by any chance?

[Digital_Damage]

I return to the lab on Monday, when I get my punch list in the morning I will have a better idea of how much time I can devote to this. I hope to have some test done this week if things are not busy in the lab.

[Digital_Damage]

Got the non destructive return to zero done. Have a lot of other test to do and I'll type it up before release.

Just a teaser... you will want to torque the Geissele mounts down.

[ColtSeavers]

Thank you again for this testing. Looking forward to the results when you have the time to put it all together and post them up.

[ColtSeavers]

Any more updates or teasers by any chance?

[sevenhelmet]

Anybody else use the LaRue LT104 or similar? That would be cool to see tested, if it's in common enough use to be a reasonable comparison.

[WS6]

Got the non destructive return to zero done. Have a lot of other test to do and I'll type it up before release.

Just a teaser... you will want to torque the Geissele mounts down.

I already did a test on nightforce unimount. About a 2moa shift from finger tight to 65inches. Live fire test. How was the geissele in comparison?

[ColtSeavers]

Any updates to this?

[Digital_Damage]

I have the results... I also have some letters from some lawyers.

To be honest I have been weighing the risk of releasing it. The process and science behind the testing is accurate, but as everyone knows just being sued to prove that is a very expensive process.

To keep it short, while some manufactures have been a true pleasure to work with during this process and were truly excited to see the results themselves so they can make improvements (two already have made updates and are sending prototypes to run again). Others have taken to litigation without even asking about the results, so that has led me to believe they already know some of their claims are not entirely what they make them out to be.

I have been thinking about trying to engage publications that would be willing to defend the results if it becomes messy and I reached out to one but was quickly turned away. I suspect it might have something to do with the full page ad the manufacture is currently running in their issues or this process has just made me cynical.

I'm actually pretty heartbroken because I considered one of the manufactures to be a "good guy" and it turns out they are one of the more aggressive ones.

In any case without going into details.

There is no detriment going light weight.
"Finger tight" RTZ on non-QD mounts is a farce, always torque the nut.
A good RTZ with a tool less design is achievable.
Beefier cross bolts are important.

If anyone can provide a contact to a publication willing to stand up to the industry let me know...