will I have a problem running a scope with a 40 moa base behind a clip on on a Badger 20moa IMUNS?
Night Vision 40 moa rail with 20 IMUNS mount?
- Thread starter deersniper
- Start date
U.S. military does not recommend sloped mounts, all standard mil units run zero cant mounts, to reduce the potential point of impact shifts.
Several of us have gotten away with 20moa rails and flat imuns with the highest dollar night vision and thermals.
There are recommended "fixes" 20moa rail synced to a 20moa imuns, but I've never tried that personally.
I have seen 20 moa rails and flat imuns give horrendous point of impact shifts of 10+ moa past 300 yards with low dollar clip ons, which I've avoided owning .
The least amount of shift was with a pvs27 the last time I tried the 20moa/flat imuns. Have stayed flat/flat since.
Best of luck with whatever you go with.
Several of us have gotten away with 20moa rails and flat imuns with the highest dollar night vision and thermals.
There are recommended "fixes" 20moa rail synced to a 20moa imuns, but I've never tried that personally.
I have seen 20 moa rails and flat imuns give horrendous point of impact shifts of 10+ moa past 300 yards with low dollar clip ons, which I've avoided owning .
The least amount of shift was with a pvs27 the last time I tried the 20moa/flat imuns. Have stayed flat/flat since.
Best of luck with whatever you go with.
Thanks for the info. I will find a 0 moa mount so I only have to end up with a 20 moa base to deal with.
Are you saying there are problems with a 20moa base and a 20 moa IMUNS?
Are you saying there are problems with a 20moa base and a 20 moa IMUNS?
Imuns are 0. Some people put a straight edge on the 20 moa rail, and across the imuns and seat it basically flat line, thus 20/20 does not equal 40 in this case, but both are on 20 degrees cant on the same plane.
I've personally never done this modification but understand it works fine. Takes a little more experienced installer to do this. Hope some more voices speak up here.
I've personally never done this modification but understand it works fine. Takes a little more experienced installer to do this. Hope some more voices speak up here.
Flat/20 is doable. You won’t really notice any difference. It’s not as good as equal cant but it’s fine. Flat/40 is pushing it hard. It’s not only the poi shift that’s the problem, it’s also clarity.
if you have a pvs-14 hold it up to your eye straight. Then angle it a little to simulate a 0/40 cant difference. It looks horrible with just a little movement. Obviously a pvs-14 is different than all clip ons but you get the idea. Image intensifiers are meant to be looked straight into not at an angle.
Jay
if you have a pvs-14 hold it up to your eye straight. Then angle it a little to simulate a 0/40 cant difference. It looks horrible with just a little movement. Obviously a pvs-14 is different than all clip ons but you get the idea. Image intensifiers are meant to be looked straight into not at an angle.
Jay
there are 20 moa IMUNS now. I have this one
https://www.milehighshooting.com/ba...l-night-sight-imuns-20-moa-forward-cant-itar/
https://www.milehighshooting.com/ba...l-night-sight-imuns-20-moa-forward-cant-itar/
the us military as in who? the USMC ran 30moa bias mounts with the pgw imbedded rail forever without issue. they certainly didn't line up. I run 20moa and 0 with my pvs-30, 22 and 27 and have not seen a decernable shift in any of them. cannot say about 40. don't know why the hell you want a 40moa rail to begin with.
Bump
Re above: us army m24 used a flat rail when it was fielded and spec called for a flat rail. The pvs22 and 27 manufacturers called for a flat rail when they first came out.
Real field use gave different results as your experience showed.
Re above: us army m24 used a flat rail when it was fielded and spec called for a flat rail. The pvs22 and 27 manufacturers called for a flat rail when they first came out.
Real field use gave different results as your experience showed.
Last edited:
Thanks for the info.
I have a GAP 700 clone in a AICS that I am bringing into the modern era. It has a 20 moa base that I don't want to change. And my Spuhr, Badger, and NF 34mm unimounts all have 20 moa in them. So I am going to buy a new 0moa 34mm NF magmount or rings.
I have a GAP 700 clone in a AICS that I am bringing into the modern era. It has a 20 moa base that I don't want to change. And my Spuhr, Badger, and NF 34mm unimounts all have 20 moa in them. So I am going to buy a new 0moa 34mm NF magmount or rings.
Not sure if I should go with 1.5" high rings to go with an LWTS or stick with 1.3" with the LWTS because I plan on getting. A UTC which has a 1.3" centerline when I can find one.
1.4 center rings work for UTC ... I bet they work for LWTS but can't say for sure.
Since I am switching to badger and spuhr ( to support top mounting raptars and radiae ) I happen to have some spare L&S 34mm steel SH (1.4 center ) rings if you need any
I can say 1.515 and 1.57 (a Larue and an ADM unimounts I have) to NOT work with the UTC ... so somewhere between 1.4 and 1.51 is too far from 1.31 for the UTC.
I have heard from a reliable source that 1.3 works for a PVS-30 ... So that means between 1.3 and 1.4 is known to work for both PVS-30 and UTC.
Since I am switching to badger and spuhr ( to support top mounting raptars and radiae ) I happen to have some spare L&S 34mm steel SH (1.4 center ) rings if you need any
I can say 1.515 and 1.57 (a Larue and an ADM unimounts I have) to NOT work with the UTC ... so somewhere between 1.4 and 1.51 is too far from 1.31 for the UTC.
I have heard from a reliable source that 1.3 works for a PVS-30 ... So that means between 1.3 and 1.4 is known to work for both PVS-30 and UTC.
I started with larue 1.4's behind a pvs22. It worked fine. then I got the lwts, and for 18 months it worked fine. then two of the lwts got out of sync. Both spent a month in repair. l3 gave us grief for not running 1.5's. I changed a bunch over to 1.5's and still have several 1.4's. three lwts run fine either way, the t70 runs best on 1.5. The pvs22, 26, and 27 work fine on either height.
Your mileage may vary, this is offered for your information gathering only. I will probably never see a utc so I'm staying 1.4 and 1.5. if your lwts glitches, it really won't matter what height ring you run, or it didn't with us.
Best of luck.
Your mileage may vary, this is offered for your information gathering only. I will probably never see a utc so I'm staying 1.4 and 1.5. if your lwts glitches, it really won't matter what height ring you run, or it didn't with us.
Best of luck.
Thanks. What problems did they give you ?
Zero shifted, as in lost collimation. Scopes were dead on. Added lwts 1. Dead on. lwts 2. 4 moa low. lwts 3. 6 moa low, 3 right.
L3 states the unit is acceptable with 2 moa shift... they checked collimation and said there was no shift for them. said they rechecked it, no shift.
They returned the units, and the shift was gone.
One technician explained the simplicity of collimation checking and how to correct it. Obviously they recollimated the units when they checked the factory settings. Took a month, but they sent them back correct as both were under warranty. We are happy customers. Neither unit has shifted again.
And SO FAR, it doesn't matter if it's a 1.25, 1.4, 1.5, or a 1.75 high mount. Yes, we checked. checking the 1.75 was accidental in that I put a wrong base on, said wtf, and decided to shoot it anyway just to see (the scope was fully 1/2 diameter above the thermal lense). nobody had done it b4 according to l3. It worked on 3 units just fine. Damnifiknow.
L3 states the unit is acceptable with 2 moa shift... they checked collimation and said there was no shift for them. said they rechecked it, no shift.
They returned the units, and the shift was gone.
One technician explained the simplicity of collimation checking and how to correct it. Obviously they recollimated the units when they checked the factory settings. Took a month, but they sent them back correct as both were under warranty. We are happy customers. Neither unit has shifted again.
And SO FAR, it doesn't matter if it's a 1.25, 1.4, 1.5, or a 1.75 high mount. Yes, we checked. checking the 1.75 was accidental in that I put a wrong base on, said wtf, and decided to shoot it anyway just to see (the scope was fully 1/2 diameter above the thermal lense). nobody had done it b4 according to l3. It worked on 3 units just fine. Damnifiknow.
Last edited:
Thanks a lot for the info. How was the image with the 1.25 rings? I will be using the LWTS very little and a lower scope would be nicer in this application.
Brian D. In a forward from Roger who did the testing. I tried to call but, y'all closed...
How's was the LWTS image with the 1.25 rings?
Image looked the same with all rings "to me".. it's the potential point of impact shift of different ring heights. The lwts when "right" didn't matter on the three units we have in our group.
Image is dependent on the glass behind it.
Image is dependent on the glass behind it.
