I am purchasing my first LPV scope for the AR-15 (upgrading from an Aimpoint PRO), and I need a mount. My criteria are simple:
1. As lightweight as possible - This is going on a light 16" BCM
2. Quick-detach - This rifle does have irons, so I'd like to easily switch to those if needed (but I'm no "operator"). It's also just convenient.
3. Tried and true - This rifle is build using a "tried and true" formula and I'd like to stick with that concept.
4. Perhaps a "high" mount - I know a lot of the AR-15 scope mounts are around 1.5" height above the rail, but after using my Aimpoint PRO which is a little above co-witness, but not quick lower 1/3 height, I feel like I need a decently high mount. I'm 6'2" tall and feel like my head is scrunched down to see thru the Aimpoint.
So what do you recommend? The new Scalarworks LEAP scope mount looks wonderful with it's built-in leveling feature, but the price tag is pretty steep. I know ADM RECON mounts are well-regarded and they do come in a high version.
Thanks for the help!
I happen to prefer the bobro ones fwiw.
“So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong, and strike at what is weak.”
LaRue or ADM.
I have owned both. Still own the ADM. Odd quirk of how it happened but I wish I still had the LaRue. Not enough difference to prompt me to switch.
I never utilize the QD feature.....
I have LaRue and GG&G in a true QD, and Nightforce in a sort-of fast D.
I feel the GG&G holds zero a little better upon detach/remount than the LaRue -- but the difference won't be noticeable to the vast majority of shooters.
IMO the Nightforce mount is the most solid and the most precise, but it requires a wrench to detach/remount.
I don't recall ever detaching the scope on my long-ish distance precision ARs. I have detached my primary mid-power variable scopes on my carbines to switch to a low-power variable optic -- primarily for training classes that really emphasize the use of a LPV scope.
I no longer have iron sights on any of my ARs, even SBR uppers. I don't feel they're necessary with good optics.
LaRue. The new LT204 CAN model is less expensive but the same as my favorite, LT104.
|Drill Here, Drill Now|
I dislike the QD set-up on my ADM. In hindsight, I wish I would've saved money and just bought the Vortex fixed rail scope like I did on it's fraternal twin (1 in 5.56 and other in 6.5G). I have 45 degree offset sights so if the Vortex scope goes down I can go directly to irons without having to remove a scope.
Ego is the anesthesia that deadens the pain of stupidity
DISCLAIMER: These are the author's own personal views and do not represent the views of the author's employer.
|Go ahead punk, make my day|
The LEAP looks great but it's way expensive and I'm not sold on the ring mounting setup.
I have used a lot of American Defense mounts but they are locked on very tight, some I have to use a dowel rod to unlock (had a SCAR 17 rock two QD locks off twice).
Geissele has some great optic mounts in addition to what has already been mentioned. And the more I shoot the less I see the need for QD mounts - I have no issue with my Addmount that take a quick turn of a wrench to remove it.
It is one of those things that sounds good in theory, but doesn't pan out that way in practice.
Speaking as a guy who has a QD mount on the rifle I shoot the most, and two non QD mounts on the next two highest volume rifles.... QD is of limited utility UNLESS you are actually swapping optics for different scenarios on the same rifle.
I trust my mount to return to zero but I still don't do it.
I have had success with the ADM mounts. Like RHINOWSO said, they can take some effort to remove.
|Middle children |
I really like my ADM Recon mounts, the have all worked very well, but at ~8.5oz they aren't very light.
My Scalarworks red-dot mounts have been excellent so I thought their new scope mount looked interesting. I was surprised to see that there are no machined/squared recoil lugs on the bottom surface that interface with the Pic rail, it's only relying on the round thru-bolts with minimal contact points. That may be ok for a lightweight red-dot, and Scalarworks knows their stuff so it's probably fine, but IMO a mount for a significantly heavier scope needs some machined in/squared recoil lugs to minimize shifting on the rail during recoil. Picture of the underside here:
I still use QD mounts for my red dots, but for a quality scope with an etched reticle I'm also not seeing the need for QD as much anymore.
I am using the Aero Ultralight scope mount for my Trijicon Accupower 1-4 on my SCAR 16S. It has been an excellent one-piece mount. Very solid, low profile, 3 machined recoil lugs, only 3.3oz, and also about half the price of the typical QD options. I'm also tall and I find the 1.5" height to be just right for a LPV optic.
Only downside, the clamshell rings take a bit more patience to get the scope exactly level, as they tend to rotate the scope slightly more than typical split rings when you torque it down.
I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle - victorious.
Bobro mounts are expensive, but they are rock solid and return to zero very reliably.
Oh, by the way, which one's "Pink?"
|We gonna get some |
oojima in this house!
Yep. I prefer the tool less C.A.N. System on the 204 to the system to the LT 104.
I think they go a tad over 7oz. Mine hold zero pretty good from rifle to rifle. The vertical ring halves really help level the scope. I installed using the seam of the rings as TDC and I put a level on it it was perfect. I have the adjustments written down so I have a zero for each rifle. It’s about $100 cheaper than the 104 also.
TCB all the time...
|Amat victoria curam|
Bobro for the win!
I have tried quite a few QD mounts and I have found Bobro to be the best.
Also, if you like to move optics around, the Bobro design auto-adjusts for tolerance differences in various mounting rails. No need to tweak a little nut like the ADM mounts or remember to pack a wrench like the LaRue mounts.
|Go ahead punk, make my day|
I have to agree with you on that one re: no recoil lugs. Geissele goes with 3, as does my ADDMOUNT.
I'm all about saving weight but it's gotta be able to stand up. And at $399.99 per, I think they may be priced out of the market if it's not 100% wired tight.
Bobro mounts have been shown to exhibit fore and aft movement as well, their lever is insufficient to overcome the lack of a machined recoil lug. Some of that is dependent upon the weight of the optic. I don't think I would go that route. People I trust have had issues.
Thanks for all the recommendations, guys. I appreciate it. I think I'm going to go with one of the Larue mounts. What are the pros and cons of each model? Also, I don't see any weights on their website. Any idea on that? Thanks.
I'm uncertain if weights are listed side-by-side for the various LaRue models. If you stick with a basic type of mount -- 1 piece vs. 2 piece, QD vs. non-QD -- there probably won't be much weight difference between comparable models. Besides, part of an ounce or even an ounce here and there won't make a tangible difference in how the rifle performs.
If you're going QD, go with a 1 piece. IMO 2-piece mounts are for fixed optics, and essentially are rings.
If you like your scope mounted fairly forward, and your rifle's mounting area doesn't extend all that far forward, consider a mount with a forward cantilever.
For a LPV optic you can get by with a flat (i.e. non-canted) mount. You're not going to shoot a LPV rifle at great distances, where the canted base makes sense. That said, a canted base won't hurt the optic's performance, either.
For most rifles a 1.5" (-ish) height is about right. This results in roughly a 2.5" center of optic over bore height. For me the LT104 works well. The LT135 is a little higher at 1.9". The LT139 has extra forward extension -- at least for my ARs, it's not necessary. LT158 works, and has some canting.
Be careful when tightening rings on your LPV. Follow Larue's instructions on tightening screws. Da webz purports instances where vertically split rings resulted in inconsistent performance in returning to zero. I suspect much of this is from (1) cheap mounts and (2) improper tightening of the screws. Consider a torque device, if you don't have one already.
Larue mounts have worked for me for LPV optics.
If you haven’t pulled the trigger on the Larue yet, are you interested in the Weaver MSR? I picked a scope and mount on the forum and will likely be going in a different direction. I’d be willing to sell it for a good bit less than retail.
"A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week." George S. Patton
Thanks again, fritz. Since this install is semi-permanent, it sounds like the new VFZ mount is the way to go. Any pros/cons on that vs the legacy QD mount?
Not quick detach but by far the nicest scope rings and lightest I have ever had.
I will be swift in my attack. My venom is packed with enough pride and gun powder to take down
any adversary that attempts to tread on my freedom. You've been warned, but if you
still want to test me, take a step forward.
|Powered by Social Strata||Page 1 2|