Thank you! I had a brain fart for a second and forgot that the S3 is the more problematic of the LRPs. I tend to really like one piece mounts and am thinking real hard about an S5 or an S3 for an upcoming build. There are some killer deals to be had on S5 scopes especially right now. It’s nice to know that if I go that route, I won’t have a problem because I really want to try am Area 419 mount on my next scope. Thanks again!
Area 419 Tactical One-Piece Scope Mount
- Thread starter Caba
- Start date
-
- Tags
- area 419 scope mount
Recently received my first set of area 419 hunt rings and they definitely will not be my last. The fit and finish of the rings and hardware is absolutely stunning. The pins on the rings are a very nice touch. There is a really good chance that these will be the best selling mounts and rings available once more of them get out in the wild.
Agreed. I will look at Area 419 for pretty much all mounting options moving forward. And their hellfire brake system is incredible as well. Truly some of the best products on the market currently.
Has anyone switched from a scope mounted level to the level that mounts to the 419 mount?
No, I tried it and sold the 419 level. The location on the mount is non-ideal vs something like a Halo X mounted by the erector.
Thank you guys, it's really appreciated. We are going to keep pushing, we want to be able to keep providing as many great solutions as possible.
These things look awesome. These and the rings are tops of my options to try next time im buying mounts.
A little wider ring spacing on 34mm would be cool though. Seems they are the narrowest of all tube diameters and I tend to avoid the supershort scope sillyness.
A little wider ring spacing on 34mm would be cool though. Seems they are the narrowest of all tube diameters and I tend to avoid the supershort scope sillyness.
Which is why we have them available in one-piece, both standard style and cantilevered. Fully understanding there may be corner cases where a person is not using a full pic rail on a receiver and then a thermal, we will likely do the rings in that height at some point as well.
But in the mean time, we have to make products in the order we see fit, and then try to keep them on the shelves before we make more.
Ahh very good.
Just ordered a mount
Will the low rmr mount clear a 50mm scope bell ? 36mm tube. Zco 420 ?
So we made the 34s a little further spaced at one point, mostly after the MK4HD Leupolds dropped. Before, they fit everything, then Leupold with the elongated erector housing came out, so we spread them a bit. 34mm is the hardest to make (anyone) everyone happy on with the huge variety of scopes and layouts.
If you've run into an optic that doesn't work, let us know. We want to know about this stuff.
Yes, high vs low tends to be more about the elevation turret than the objective. You may lose part of the sight picture of the dot behind that elevation turret on a low dot mount.
I use the side pic rail attachment to attach my Send It (old style). Works fine for me.
Totally understand not wanting to have a ton of configs/SKUs. Its just about the only thing about the mount that I dont love - an ideal mount would have rings spaced wider rather than having most of the tube extending way past them. Enough so that I might lean towards your rings instead.
One last thing. I had to order from your Amazon store because your website was showing OOS
We keep two separate inventories internally because of the way Amazon works, so one having a product and the other being "out" is probably technically accurate. 90% of the time, the normal dotcom will have stock over Amazon, but once in a while Amazon will have something left when the dotcom runs out. We have invested millions over the last year in trying to keep product, mostly rings and mounts, in stock. Good problem to have, but still one we are working through.
No. With diving board my 36mm 1.54” 20 MOA regular style is 11.1oz.
This is a shipping weight, including packaging, tool, etc.
Here is a disgustingly granular weight breakdown of all parts.
I'm clueless on the math of how this stuff works. Would the Match rings resist tube slippage more or less than the Hunt rings? They seem to have a wider contact surface but the same torque spec on the same number of screws, just not sure if that's better or worse.
In general, more contact = more friction, and friction is what keeps things in place.
On lightweight items, the only advantage is the weight, in a significant majority of scenarios, across the firearm (and most product-centric) world.
Bro these things do NOT move. You can loosen up the rings and you still can barely get the scope to move. You take the ring caps off and it doesn't move without yanking it out. Its almost like torquing the rings down is just for redundancy.
These things Grip a scope tube like nothing I have ever seen. The combination of bare AL and exact dimensional machining seem to be a perfect fit with every scope I have tried so far (bunch of zcos, a tangent, MK4hds and T6Xis.)
Going forward, I don't know why you would buy anything else. Even their Hunt rings are just as well done. Yes it will leave some marks from the bare AL ( Bare AL will oxidize slightly, leaving a residue that easily wipes off. )
