Monolithic Scope and Mount System ?

[BFuller]

Given that most of the high end scope manufacturers are machining the body of the scope from a solid billet, and given that many of us are willing to pay out $250 - $400 dollars for a mount, why aren't any of them offering scopes with integrated mount? Like Spuhr meets ZC420? Most such scope are all being mounted on pic rails, so it's not like that would need to produce a bunch of different versions, one would catch most users.

It would have 3 main advantages I can think of:

• Avoiding any chance of applying too much pressure on the scope tube, while trying to ensure nothing moves during recoil. I.E. We are trying to develop a frictional shear force between the rings and the scope tube without applying very much force. The problem goes away with a monolithic part, zero chance of damage
• Accuracy - There would be one less interface between scope and action, always a good thing, and that ring pressure on the tube wouldn't have any chance of adversely effecting the function of the scope.
• Weight - The material around the rings is the size it is because friction is how the shear force is developed, and with minimal squeeze on the tube. If it was all one piece, the mount part could be significantly skeletonized and still provide adequate strength

One disadvantage I can think of:

• All the fore and aft adjustment for the position of the scope would have to be provided in the base alone (no rings to slide in)

 

[rydah]

Something like the VCOG would be all positives.

The mount is removable and is what adjusts the height of the scope and what clamps to the rail.
But getting companies to adopt something that kills an entire segment of the industry wouldn’t be easy. I think companies like making money more than adopting a newer, better system that’s better for the end user.

 

[theLBC]

because you can't spin it on a lathe?

 

[RTH1800]

Companies are not worried about hurting the scope mount industry at all. The concern is more about losing options and market share. Scope mount height, desired rings, exact ring placement etc.

The older German scopes were often built with a rail on the bottom of the steel tube mostly soldered not milled. . It was basically a nuscence to Americans who had little knowledge of or access to the proper bases. S&B made these type scopes up to recent times and likley still does. The sell for much lower prices than a round tube scope on the secondary market. At one time post WW11 there was quite an industry built around removing the rails and refinishing the steel tubes.

Rail scopes are not often seen today due to being a logistic nightmare, not due to worries about the scope ring makers.

 

[BFuller]

because you can't spin it on a lathe?

Yeah, you would have to do it all with boring tools vs lathe (I think). But it seems doable.

 

[theLBC]

Yeah, you would have to do it all with boring tools vs lathe (I think). But it seems doable.

i'm not sure, but i think it would be expensive.
the tolerances are so tight, and tools wear. so you would have to replace tooling a lot.

lots of people don't realize that was the big difference in japanese cars in the 70s.
they realized that tool wear made it impossible or too expensive to hold tolerances.
instead they added people that measured each cylinder and piston, and matched up small pistons with small cylinders...
here, they just spent more hours trying to make everything the same and that is why you could get a car that was really reliable, or you could get one that wasn't, depending on pure luck. this is sort of simplified...

 

[J-Ham]

Yeah, you would have to do it all with boring tools vs lathe (I think). But it seems doable.

You'd still do the ID on a lathe, OD would be on a mill... Cool idea though.

 

[loveha]

At one time post WW11 there was quite an industry built around removing the rails and refinishing the steel tubes.

WW11? Are you from the future? What shape are we in? I have so many questions.