A Small Rant about AR mounts ahead of April Fools Day

BobinNC

Petty Officer
Full Member
Minuteman
Supporter
  • Jan 31, 2009
    4,808
    181
    74
    Goldsboro, NC
    So I just bought a nice Trijicon Credo 1-6x24 FFP Mil Red, all of 19 oz of it. And I got it for a steal of a deal. That aside, I knew I need some new 1 piece mounts that didn't weigh a ton, so I let my fingers do the walking in the digital marketplace.

    And while shopping my angst was aroused by many a well known purveyor's of said mounts. Why?? Because many simply do not list the weight of their creations. I mean like come on. Weight or lack thereof is immensely important in cobbling together a good scope and mount combination. The prices are easy enough to find, but weight seems mysteriously absent in many cases.

    I first went to Trijicon since mating a scope with the makers own mounts seemed like a good idea at first. Well not so good. Trijicon's 1.59" High Cantilevered Mount caught my eye. They gave spec's on everything, except the weight.

    Moving on to Nightforce, they had a nice X-Treme Duty 30mm 1.54" 0 MOA Ultramount #A699. But the weight of the dang thing is apparently a military secret as it is nowhere listed.

    Badger Ordnance Badger Ordnance 30mm One-Piece 1.54" Condition One Modular 0 MOA I finally found (6.5 oz) only by going to Badger's own website. And they are priced north of $300 green backs, which is a bit spendy for a sub-1K$ lpvo like the Credo.

    Rather than bore you with further travails down my personnel rabbit hole, I think you get my point. Scope base makers, especially those that charge well north of $200. semoleon's should put their weight of their product front and center everywhere they are sold. I shouldn't have to go to multiple places just to find out.

    Anyway, in the end, I went with an old standby Primary Arms PLx 30mm Cantilever Mount - 1.5". About $212. bucks for a 5.9 oz mount, before tax & shipping, with my GI discount.

    Primary Arms 30mm PLx Cantilever Mount - 1.5"
     
    Completely different product, not even weight related but Eberlestock's website will have ten pictures of people using a pack who *might* be in the military but no internal/pocket measurements or close ups of the layout.
    edit-9F5CE61C-F151-48B8-B75AAE25EC843446.jpg

    I have three of their packs but that always gives me a laugh.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: BobinNC
    Yeah, weight not being a listed spec deove me crazy too. What I've found is that QD mounts, like ADM are in the 10 oz range, with some being heavier.

    About the lightest I've found, while still being pretty robust, is the Nightforce Unimount and the Leupold Mark AR (a heck of a mount for under $100), each at about 6 oz.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: BobinNC
    For my AR I like to keep things light weight and most mounts seem overly heavy. I've been using Aero Precision ultralight mounts that are only about 3.5 oz and have worked well for me. Back when I used to do 3 gun I never lost zero even some pretty hard tosses into dump barrels.

    Maybee I'm cheap and prioritize weight more than others but I don't understand the desire or need to use an 8 + oz scope mount that cost over $200-300 when mounting a 20 oz LPVO.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Islander
    How much cantilever you want? I have a ZCO 420 in a Badger Max on a small frame and it works fine

    Enough to mount the scope?

    ZCO 4-20x50 is 90mm of eye relief plus (79+62.5+53) mm of scope from the ocular to the front of the saddle, so 90+194.5mm of scope from your eyeball to the minimum placement position of the rear of the forward ring. (chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.zcompoptic.com/images/products/zc420/ZC420%2001MIL%20Datasheet_ENG_web.pdf)

    The Kahles is 92mm of eye relief plus (106+71+53) mm of scope from the ocular to the front of the saddle, so 92+230mm of scope from your eyeball to the minimum placement position of the rear of the forward ring. (https://www.kahles.at/us/sport/riflescopes/k328i-3_5-28x50i-dlr)

    In other words, the rear most position for the rear of the forward ring on the Kahles is 37.5mm further forward than on the ZCO, or 1.5".

    The Area 419 cantilever mount would need to be about 2 pic rail notches longer of cantilever.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: roostercogburn98
    This is the Area 419 cantilever, and it would need 2 pic rail slots worth of cantilever more than this:




    Have you consider one of these to solve your problem? Couple this with a nice pair of 36MM Rings 1.08" high with a PRI .45" riser and you have a 1.53" scope height at mid point. Not a one piece solution, but it might give you a workable solution. The 6.3" PRI rail gives you more options on ring placement.

    Zeiss - Scope Rings - Ultralight with Level

    PRi AR15 / M16 Flattop Riser 3 Hole

    This one has a 3" over hang

    PRi AR15 / M16 Top Rail Riser 2 Hole With 20 MOA
     
    Last edited:
    Have you consider one of these to solve your problem? Couple this with a nice pair of 36MM Rings 1.08" high with a PRI .45" riser and you have a 1.53" scope height at mid point. Not a one piece solution, but it might give you a workable solution. The 6.3" PRI rail gives you more options on ring placement.

    Zeiss - Scope Rings - Ultralight with Level

    PRi AR15 / M16 Flattop Riser 3 Hole

    This one has a 3" over hang

    PRi AR15 / M16 Top Rail Riser 2 Hole With 20 MOA

    Something like that could work, would need 7 or 8 rail slots forward of the forward bolt though.



    EDIT: that 2nd one is money! Thank you!
     
    • Like
    Reactions: BobinNC