• The Shot You’ll Never Forget Giveaway - Enter To Win A Barrel From Rifle Barrel Blanks!

    Tell us about the best or most memorable shot you’ve ever taken. Contest ends June 13th and remember: subscribe for a better chance of winning!

    Join contest Subscribe

Toughest scope mounts?

Spuhr looks the coolest (to me), but beyond the worrying cracking issues and now-stupid pricing, I see two further issues:
  1. I have heard on good authority that for a WMLRF the Spuhr bridge attachment is not ideal. In my opinion, ARC’s bridge attachment method is the best and A419’s is very, very good.
  2. The countersunk screw problem: somewhere @koshkin mentions that as one tightens the ring cap screws, the centering force the countersink imparts on the ring cap can impart stress upon the scope tube.
In my very limited experience (two Spuhr mounts) I haven’t had issues with the countersunk “centering” ring caps binding parallax, etc. But it does seem like a needless design complication.

I own two Spuhr and two ARC Mbrace and a bunch of M10 rings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Baron23 and BurtG
As I mentioned on page 1, I had 5 out of 11 Spuhr clamp bars fail over about 12 years of use-- that’s a 45% failure rate just in my own safe. Granted, they were all the thinner Gen 1 design which were more prone to failure than the thicker screw pad Gen 2 design, but a 45% failure rate is a giant red flag for a design or material issue (or a combination of both.) Plenty of pics here on SH of the thicker Gen 2 clamp bars cracking as well, and now Gen 3 are made from steel.

Regarding installation methods since that always gets mentioned by the Spuhr cheerleaders to try to deflect blame to the end user, especially when someone like me experiences a 45% failure rate… keep in mind installing a scope mount is not a complex assembly procedure and the two biggest points of deviation for the end user to really mess things up are using dry torque specs on fasteners that the end user added lubrication to, or using a torque driver that’s way out of calibration that overtorques the fasteners.

In my situation I used the same torque driver on every Spuhr I owned to torque all of them to Spuhr’s spec, and the screws were always degreased and dry with no added lubricant or thread locker added, so it’s not like I slathered them in anti-seize and put excess load on the clamp bars and screws because of using the dry spec torque spec on screws that are now lubricated with a wildly different K factor.

Regarding my torque drivers, my 2x Mountz drivers only get used for scope and action screws (so low volume / low cycle use, nowhere near enough use to wear the tools out rapidly) get checked 2 to 3 times a year in the NIST-traceable calibration lab at my work, and I have full paper trail history on them back to the initial as-received condition showing them always in spec every time they get checked. I can also pull the full paper trail and calibration history for the actual torque testing machines from our calibration database to show the torque tester is in spec. I purposely keep these 2 drivers on the low side of spec and favor setting them to -5% to no more than +3% of the indicated setting over the full span during calibration so they don’t overtorque small fasteners.

When clamp bar #4 cracked and I replaced it, I purposely undertorqued the replacement clamp bar to 35 in-lb as a test hoping it wouldn’t crack again. About 2 years later, the replacement cracked while sitting in the safe at the lower torque value, just like all the others failed. They went into the safe intact, they came out at a later date with 1 or 2 ends cracked. When clamp bar #5 failed at a lower torque than Spuhr’s spec that’s when I got rid of all of the Spuhrs and changed brands-- I decided I couldn’t rely on them anymore.

Another data point—I’ve used the exact same Mountz torque drivers that I used to install my 11 Spuhrs to install Badger, ARC, Geissele, Seekins, Nightforce, Burris, and Hawkins rings and mounts… and have experienced *zero* mount failures with any of those other brands using the same tools and installation methods. Screws are always installed with no lubrication or just a bit of threadlocker, with the exception of ARC who specifically states their torque specs are for lubricated fasteners (lube will change the K factor and result in higher stress/stretch in the bolt compared to dry non-lubricated threads / underhead at the same torque value, but ARC designed and spec’d for lubricated fasteners.)

Frank has commented in other threads (that were screenshotted above) that he keeps an inventory of Spuhr clamp bars on hand for his classes because he’s seen so many of them broken, and also says several LE departments will not use them because of the issue. Running his classes probably exposes him to a larger sample size than your average user, and he seems to only keep spare parts on hand for one specific brand… but make your own decisions.

Seems the latest Gen 3 Spuhrs are now using steel clamp bars, and my hunch is that will finally solve their clamp bar failure issue—but I won’t use any more of them. Having wandering zero / impact issues at the range sucks… the first time it happened I spent a while trying to figure out the problem at the range but only noticed the cracked clamp bar once I got home. After that first you learn to look over the mounts closely before heading to the range and wasting ammo.

Before the Gen 3 steel clamp bars were a thing I always wondered if the $30-100 Spuhr fakes on AliExpress had stronger clamp bars than the genuine ones, lol. (FYI, they also sell fake Scalarworks, Badger, Geissele, etc... they can look pretty convincing at a quick glance!)
 
Don't know why people are in such denial about the Spuhrs being such a shit product. They ALL crack in the same spot. I really don't think proper torquing is going to help with this issue. It's a design/material issue. I get it, you spent good money on a product thinking it's the best on the market. But it's not, so you have to defend it.

Personally I'm in the position where none of my Spuhr mounts have broken, so they don't ALL crack, and it isn't a shit product.

For me, it's the best I've ever tried and used. I think I got my first mount something like 15 years ago, and it's still in use.
 
Personally I'm in the position where none of my Spuhr mounts have broken, so they don't ALL crack, and it isn't a shit product.

For me, it's the best I've ever tried and used. I think I got my first mount something like 15 years ago, and it's still in use.
I got one way back in 2010/2011 when they first came out on my TRG. I noticed that the fasteners holding the mount together was stripping really easy. I emailed them about this and Spuhr wanted something crazy for a couple of fasteners. Come to find out, they are still stripping really easily, and they are including extras when you buy a mount. They know about this issue and don't even address this problem as well. I refuse to buy another one because of the cost and lack of support and trying to overcharge me when I needed some simple fasteners. There are just better products out there for less.
 
I have been the one replacing side clamps over the years. I can answer any questions anyone may have. If anyone got new clamps or screws it came from me. There have of course been too many clamp issues, but given the sheer number of mounts they sell all over the world it was not a large percentage.

Kent
 
Last edited:
I have been the one replacing side clamps over the years. I can answer any questions anyone may have. If anyone got new clamps or screws it came from me. There have of course been too many clamp issues, but given the sheer number of mounts they sell all over the world it was not a large percentage.

Kent
Kent I am wondering then if it is a design flaw or thinning of an area that needs to be beefed up or is it heat treated or material problem.
I see a lot of rings made from 7075 and then hard coat anodize do you think this is optimal?
7075 aluminum is known to be susceptible to cracking, particularly due to stress corrosion. This is due to a combination of factors, including its high strength, tendency for stress concentration, and susceptibility to environmental factors like water and salt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: carbonbased
Hey,

I am certainly not a materials expert, but I have seen broken clamps and the ones that cracked looked more brittle to the naked eye. I do know they finally just went to steel. I am currently replacing aluminum ones with steel as people reach out to me. In all the cracks I have seen I have seen only two instances where the mount itself cracked.

In both cases there had to be a pretty severe impact.
 
In re to steel

IMG_4155.png
 
Hey,

I am certainly not a materials expert, but I have seen broken clamps and the ones that cracked looked more brittle to the naked eye. I do know they finally just went to steel. I am currently replacing aluminum ones with steel as people reach out to me. In all the cracks I have seen I have seen only two instances where the mount itself cracked.

In both cases there had to be a pretty severe impact.
Funny story, I own around 8-10 Spuhr mounts and ancillary pieces and never had an issue as described. Then I had a failure of the clamping piece that was on my Vuudo 22lr build. Not the 338lm, not the 458 socom. On the 22lr recent build. Mile High, Kent, took care of it. Thanks.
 
Ive been the unlucky one to recieve actions with feed ramps not machined, rifles with action screws not even finger tight, and stocks with the complete wrong action screws but over the years ive had upwards of 15-20 Spuhr mounts. All from 30-36mm of various heights, and I’ve never had an issue.

Guess it’s coming eventually. We will see. I guess maybe I’m a whore for how the look. I don’t know. That’s pretty much the only reason I began to buy them, and why I still do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alfmoonspace