Rifle Scopes Badger rings vs NF unimount

[m1ajunkie]

I am thinking of taking my 3.5-15x 50mm nf out of the larue mount it is currently in and replacing it with something thats not qd. I don't need the qd feature on my dedicated long range rifle. This scope is on an lmt mws with a full length top rail if it makes any difference.

What would be the advantages of going with a set of badger ring? What height would be correct for my nf scope on a flat top ar?

What about the NF unimount? I am leaning this way due to the built in 20 moa cant. Are there any other advantages of the unimount I am not thinking of? Again, what height would be recommended for the unimount?

The rings are cheaper by a good bit, but I feel like the one pieve mount would be a more solid way to mount my scope. Is this correct?

Thanks

 

[Jon A]

Re: Badger rings vs NF unimount

You could save some money doing the rings, as the NF likely has enough travel that you don't really need 20 MOA. However, a 20 MOA mount is nice to put the scope toward the middle of its travel at long range and maximize travel for extreme ranges.

The NF Unimount is very nice and would serve you well. It's lower than your Larue mount (assuming LT-104) which you may or may not like.

Another choice is the mounts I make (see link in sig). It's a tad higher than the Larue which you may or may not like better. Solid as a rock and a bit cheaper than the NF.

 

[One-Eyed Jack]

Re: Badger rings vs NF unimount

I have and use two Unimounts on a couple ARs. The high ones are 1.375" from the top of the rail to the optical centerline, and these are the ones you should use for an M4 type flattop. They are exceptionally well made and light weight, and the 20MOA cant is useful for most optics. If you don't need a QD mount, there is nothing better, IMO. Cost is the only downside, I think NF prohibits substantial discounts.

 

[dumbbell]

Re: Badger rings vs NF unimount

I have two of the nightforce uni-mounts, the 1.125 high ones, on two different ar's, and for me, the height is the main reason i went with them. That height is just right for me to get a perfect check weld on my ar's. Obviously, everyone is different. Also, I think you said you have a one piece top rail all the way down your gun, so badger rings would work, but if it is not a monolithic upper, just a upper and free float, you obviously would have to but a riser rail and put the rings on it. Just a thought. I have not found many scopes that would mount far enough forward for rings alone to work without a riser on an ar.

 

[m1ajunkie]

Re: Badger rings vs NF unimount

I will be using this on a monolithic upper so I will not need a riser.

On midways website I am not following the sizing. It says the extra high unimount measures .81" from "base of ring to bottom of scope tube." I believe this is the correct height, but I'm not entirely sure.

When I worked out the math that the extra high puts the centerline at 1.4".

The high model only measures .535". That seems like it will be a little low for what I need.

The centerline on the high model looks like it will be at 1.125"

 

[Lawdog734]

Re: Badger rings vs NF unimount

A 50mm tube will just barely touch the rail if you go with the High Uni-Mount. You'll want the Extra-High.

 

[Opticsspecialist]

Re: Badger rings vs NF unimount

i've used the 1.375 uni mount on more ar style rifles than i can remember. thats the way i try to go every time

 

[gstaylorg]

Re: Badger rings vs NF unimount

I would like to reiterate one of m1ajunkie's questions from above. I'm considering a mount for a custom .308 build that is in the works. I'll most likely go with a NF 3.5-15x50 F1 and I'm trying to figure out the best mount to use. I have several other NFs that are mounted on LaRue (LT-104 or LT-158) QD mounts for different rifles like the OP stated above, so I have some feel for single piece (QD) mounts. However, I want the new rifle to have a dedicated mount (no need for QD on this one). Similar to m1ajunkie, at this point in the build, I can go with either a flat rail or a 20 MOA canted rail on top, along with something along the lines of either a NF Unimount with a 20 MOA cant (with a flat rail), or a flat unimount-style or set of rings (with a 20 MOA canted rail).

My question is regarding the difference (if any) between a unimount-style mount and set of rings. On the surface, it seems to me that from a mechanical standpoint, the inherent stability of a single piece dedicated mount would be equal to, or even superior to that of a pair of rings, and the mounting process is fairly simple with a single piece mount.

Am I missing something? Is there some advantage to using a pair of rings instead of a single piece mount that I am unaware of? Are rings as stable (solid) as a single piece mount? Thanks in advance for any feedback/advice.

 

[BiggerStick47]

Re: Badger rings vs NF unimount

The NF Unimount is awesome. Fit and finish are excellence and the 20moa is nice to have. On my Noveske:

 

[m1ajunkie]

Re: Badger rings vs NF unimount

gstaylorg,

About the only reason I am considering the rings is price. A set of badger rings is roughly $100 less than the unimount.

 

[gstaylorg]

Re: Badger rings vs NF unimount

I hear ya on the $$$. I'm still wondering though, whether there is any real (functional) difference between a one piece mount and rings as you asked in your post. If there is a distinct advantage to one or the other, it might change the way I decide to go, regardless of the cost.

 

[BiggerStick47]

Re: Badger rings vs NF unimount

On an AR the extended/cantilever mounts like the NF above, Larue/ADM/Bobro allow you to mount the scope further out in the proper position and still be mounted on the reciever. If you look above, if I used regular rings, the front ring would be mounted on the handguard.

 

[lovdasnow]

Re: Badger rings vs NF unimount

the unimount would probably save you some weight if you're concerned about that, but either way you go you're set. both make a great product.

 

[CSTactical]

Re: Badger rings vs NF unimount

The Nigthforce Uni-Mount is a one of the best mount of its kind. I tend to recommend the 1.375" for AR15 platform.

Mike @ CST

 

[Oakland Tactical]

Re: Badger rings vs NF unimount

The reason I like the NF Unimount is that I look at the two rings and the scope like, I'm going to make this very simplistic, two domino's set up on end with a domino setting on top creating a bridge. When the rifle recoils the two standing blocks rock back and forth. This is like the slow motion video of the Barrett 50 which shows this action on the scope and rings.

Now with extra tall rings you have even more leverage than on low rings like on a bolt gun. Add to that the heavy weight of the NF with a constant rocking back and forth under recoil and it stresses the picatinny rail. The NF unimount structure puts more surface area and distributes recoil along more of the top rail and its unification resists that rocking motion.

Rings will probably hold up just fine but my thought is <span style="font-weight: bold">if</span> I screw up the top rail of my monolithic it is trash. I think it justify s the cost, your not going to be able to send it in for repair.

The NF unimount isn't your only option though, Badger makes a nice unimount also. Hope all that makes sense