I've often wondered that lol. How much 'drift' or 'creep' there was overall in metrology devices used by the NIST. Is theirs right? Checked by whos? lol
Last edited:
Toughest scope mounts?
- Thread starter Mj30wilson900
- Start date
There are still some rings out there that must be lapped unfortunately. For ex the old issue A.R.M.S rings that were issued in the Army a while back. I was buying some a few years back, even after reading that thread on here that was trying to warn people off from that company. Yep, they were right. Those rings were ALLLL KINDS of fucked up on multiple planes or axis. Lapping only help one axis, but still had to do it. I still find rings from time to time that arent perfectly round, and would squeeze the scope tube from top to bottom if they arent lapped.
If a mount can’t take a small difference in a torque wrench variance then it’s a piece of shit to begin with. Definitely not tough.
Remember years back no one used torque wrenches but we seemed to not have our mounts break. lol Now we worry about double and triple calibrations. Lol
Remember years back no one used torque wrenches but we seemed to not have our mounts break. lol Now we worry about double and triple calibrations. Lol
Toughest? Seems like 419 is a pretty clear winner here. They've done plenty of stunts to prove their point.
Runner ups in my opinion:
Hawkins (my personal favorite)
Gray ops (holy balls are they proud of it)
Badger
Seekins
I'm probably forgetting a few.
ARC has been pretty weak in my experience. Mine and a buddy's MBrace mounts cracked and broke right at the hinge with no major impacts. My going theory is cold temps caused it. The LRF bridge is tough as hell but the rings, not so much.
Runner ups in my opinion:
Hawkins (my personal favorite)
Gray ops (holy balls are they proud of it)
Badger
Seekins
I'm probably forgetting a few.
ARC has been pretty weak in my experience. Mine and a buddy's MBrace mounts cracked and broke right at the hinge with no major impacts. My going theory is cold temps caused it. The LRF bridge is tough as hell but the rings, not so much.
I've heard a couple reports of this, but haven't seen any pictures-- and I'd love to see some if you have them. It's fairly obvious the expected failure point of the ARC design would occur in hinge pins themselves or in the "fingers" for the hinge pins in the base or rings caps. I have yet to have any failures in my sample size (10 mounts and 1 set of rings.) Not saying the ARC design can't fail, but they appear to be failing at a far lower rate than say scalarworks where you can easily find lots of pictures of broken ring hinges. If I had one of my ARCs fail I'd switch brands again, just like I did with Spuhr, only this time I'm not waiting until I have a 45% failure rate to change brands, lol
How cold was it when you had the failures? Several of my M-brace mounts have seen lots of use and bouncing around on quads and side by sides with heavy razor gen 3s and S&B 5-25s down in the 15-30f range for a couple years now with no issues, but that's not as cold as is it gets elsewhere...
I suppose if I really wanted to torture test them I could stick them in a thermal chamber here at work... they'll go down to -321F, but that's a bit excessive, lol.
Last edited:
Post #64
I've only seen 2 break like this personally, but I've read plenty of reports of this happening to others. Really a shame. Cool company and a good price point for an otherwise good product. Temps were in the 0°F to -10°F range. Mine went first, then a couple weeks later my buddy's did the same shit.
Last edited:
Nist goes to some insane precision. Im a person that regularly goes to +-0.0001" and have made offsets of 0.00003" on diameters. Their stuff is crazy.
Veritasium went further (in previous videos) into how the change went from masses to the newer definition.
The crazy part of that is a unit of measure can technically change over time because the standard we use to define it can change super slightly over time.
Thanks for that, exactly as I expected a failure to look and where to occur. Wonder if they got some bad material combined with a design that leaves minimal margin in that area especially if there's some material or process variability.
I may have to turn one of my ARC mounts into a test piece, come up with a test fixture, and subject it to some impacts between say 70 to -50F...
I'll continue to run mine up until I have a failure; at this point they have proved far more reliable than Spuhr for me.
Except that the true standard for all units traces back to a physical constant that doesn't change. The kilogram was the last based on a physical object. Dig into Veritasium's videos. Search "Veritasium kilogram" on YouTube and watch from oldest to newest. "Veritasium nist" is another good one.
Last edited:
Well I went Area 419. After reading the comments and scanning numerous mounts I found that I wanted 7075 aluminum with hard anodized coating and stainless hardware. These are line bored together and serialized all of which is time consuming but is done above and beyond I feel. I saw some of the you tube videos about these that impressed me so hopefully they work well for me. Thank you for all the suggestions.
Hawkins was my second choice as I hear a lot of pros using their stuff as of late.
Hawkins was my second choice as I hear a lot of pros using their stuff as of late.
Last edited:
You don't buy a new one every time? Peasant.
