419 Mid Cantilever Question

Running an Area 419 30 moa rail on both my CZ's, no issues. What platform are you running, nice as they fit I don't pick either off a barricade by the scope bell, they're only clamping to an 11mm dovetail...can't expect miracles.

That's crazy, but I will say I feel like I've been noticing that more and more scope mounts are getting really thin in some areas, especially.

It's interesting that the mid-cant does not have a center stiffening "beam", I guess they thought you didn't need it, but I have to admit if I could see/feel flex in the mount, that would concern me. Lots of guys are running them and I don't think I've seen this come up before. Might be worth asking the Area 419 folks, I suppose it's possible a batch was not heat treated properly.

It does seem like the connection to the main flat from the leading ring is pretty thin, and just overall on the mid-cant the flat that the rings connect to is very thin compared to the longer cant option or the option that has no cant at all.

Top to bottom: no cant, long cant, mid cant. You can see how much thinner the mid-cant is than either of the others and lacks the stiffening spine. It's hard to imagine that the mid-cant would not have the most flex of the 3.







Especially when you start comparing that to the thickness in that area from competitors.

NF Unimount


Badger Unimount


Mbrace (probably similar thickness underneath the clamping/picatinny area, but it has massive stiffening beams down both sides the entire length.



Geissel

I've really noticed that mount design across the firearms industry just isn't uniform, and honestly, it's making a lot of people unhappy. It's this almost never-ending cycle of "innovation" where people are never quite satisfied. The only thing everyone actually agrees on is that a scope needs to attach to a gun, using two clamps on the top of the scope rings. Beyond that? It's pure chaos. I've used a range of them myself, from ADM mounts and LaRue to Trijicon-designed options, but Warne has been my most consistent to date.

Back in the early 2000s, my duty rifles and their mounts were absolute tanks. Dovetails were still common, and putting a Picatinny rail on a bolt gun was almost unheard of. But then competition shooting blew up, YouTube got huge, and the whole "tacti-cool" thing went mainstream. Suddenly, guns needed to be lighter, but optics were still heavy, so mounts started adapting to Picatinny rails, often becoming pretty beefy. Of course, then those beefy mounts were too heavy, and everyone wanted lightweight.

Fast forward to today, and honestly, we're seeing the exact same "innovation" repeating itself. The market is super fragmented, with different groups wanting completely opposite things but expecting the platform and mounts they use to just work. To make things even worse, some manufacturers are designing mounts based purely on what looks good on paper, and they totally fail when it comes to real-world field testing over time.
Examples:
PRS guys typically want heavy guns to soak up recoil.
Hunters, on the other hand, are often willing to take a beating, using super light rifles (like 7-8 lbs all-in) even in big calibers.
Then you've got the internet experts who just care about how cool something looks, with function often being an afterthought.

I run a Warne QD 30mm skeletonized mount on my bolt-action Steyr THB SX. I prefer Warne because it lets me shift the scope and mount weight toward the rear, perfectly balancing the 16-inch heavy barrel. I also run it backward as It gets the QD levers away from the bolt and I can keep my dominate hand on the rifle at all times. Plus, since it's also my thermal hog gun, a quick-detach (QD) mount is an absolute must.

I noticed this thread just before I recieved this mount and thought hum. But when my mount arrived I tried flexing it in various ways and could not get anything without applying an amout of force that I feared would damage it. I assume I must be misunderstanding what the op is describing but if anyone else has a concern the mount is rock solid for me. Yes its thin in the middle but stiff enough that I haven't given it a second thought.