Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

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

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Squirrel!
    Posts
    2,156
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)

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

    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...
    Last edited by Skyyr; 03-08-10 at 16:23.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Nederland TX
    Posts
    119
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    How often do you plan on taking the scope mount on and off of your rifle?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    CONUS
    Posts
    4,020
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    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.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Squirrel!
    Posts
    2,156
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by dcs12345 View Post
    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).

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Squirrel!
    Posts
    2,156
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by militarymoron View Post
    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.

    Last edited by Skyyr; 03-08-10 at 15:54.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Nederland TX
    Posts
    119
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    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?
    Last edited by dcs12345; 03-08-10 at 16:12.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Squirrel!
    Posts
    2,156
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by dcs12345 View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Skyyr; 03-08-10 at 16:38.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    73
    Feedback Score
    0
    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.
    Last edited by siucowboy; 03-08-10 at 20:47.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    hampton roads VA
    Posts
    397
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    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

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Posts
    9,209
    Feedback Score
    47 (100%)

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by glockshooter View Post
    Guns are not investments they are tools.

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

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •