Cracked Sphur Mount

A Neanderthal, make sense, especially the low IQ.
If you're going to talk shit about people, you should probably possess the 'IQ' to do so.

You clearly made a direct comment about my reply regarding the metallurgy of my particular rifle, starting your response with 'Not really,' You then went on to discuss different metals, which had nothing to do with anything I had said.

It was simply an attempt to interject yourself with some 'knowledge'.

But now you're upset that I didn't bow in awe of your obvious point that didn't need to be said that some guns use different materials in the receiver or in spots where you'd mount a scope.

You do you, I'm sure you're a popular guy in real life and your funeral will be a tearful event.

It's not hard to be a jackass, and you prove it true.
 
If anything on a $375-500 mount is going to fail, wouldn't you want it to be the cheapest part? The clamping bar or a fastner should be the weakest link in the system.
Lets not pretend clamp bars have been the only casualties over the years....

1723424362416.png

1723424400342.png

1723424417005.png

1723424458407.png
 
Lets not pretend clamp bars have been the only casualties over the years....

View attachment 8477983
View attachment 8477984
View attachment 8477985
View attachment 8477986
The fact you guys are still entertaining him is the problem. This sphur cracking issue is a known issue and has been for a while. Maybe the ones cracking are the same bad batch and guys are buying them second hand and having the issue?

Here’s a thread I made a while back when I cracked a bar. Mile High wasn’t at all surprised, they didn’t need the batch number off the bottom. Sounded common enough

I still have 2 sphurs. I won’t buy another with the available options currently

 
Eugh, yeah, I know - sometimes I dont realize its the windowlicker that Im replying to.
Every thread he comments in is the same. He’s the greatest prs shooter and smartest engineer on the hide. You won’t talk him out of it. Just entertain him and he’ll eventually he’ll get banned or move along
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hennig
The fact you guys are still entertaining him is the problem. This sphur cracking issue is a known issue and has been for a while. Maybe the ones cracking are the same bad batch and guys are buying them second hand and having the issue?

Here’s a thread I made a while back when I cracked a bar. Mile High wasn’t at all surprised, they didn’t need the batch number off the bottom. Sounded common enough

I still have 2 sphurs. I won’t buy another with the available options currently

Spuhr said they're going to take care of it.
 
Spuhr said they're going to take care of it.
They will. I went through mile high for mine. They had extra rails in hand and took very good care of me. I’ve mounted this scope/mount probably 8-10 times between guns for testing and what not. Always using the recommended 45 inch lbs and blue loctite. Haven’t had an issue since cracking the one bar

It’ll probably work forever. It just kills your confidence in the reliability of it. Then to see threads still popping up or the amount that chimed in on my thread alone doesn’t boost confidence

People can say what they want. I have many torque wrenches. Sphur is the only one I’ve ever cracked

I’ve used tons of Burris XTR/PEPR mounts and rings, NF, Badger, Leupold MK4 and a few others. Same torque wrenches at manufacturer recommended settings. Only fail is the sphur so far
 
  • Like
Reactions: st1650 and BurtG
  • Like
Reactions: oldrifleman
Every thread he comments in is the same. He’s the greatest prs shooter and smartest engineer on the hide. You won’t talk him out of it. Just entertain him and he’ll eventually he’ll get banned or move along
You make up more bullshit than just about anyone else here I don't already have ignored. Congrats, you made the cut.
 
We
Things I learned from this thread.

Ikea is not a consumer store selling consumer items. Auto Zone, O'Reilly, Napa, and the parts department of dealers are not consumer stores.
i made a new thread.

please keep the spuhr thread on topic
 
Anything that requires specialized knowledge in order to be used is not a consumer item. Anything that requires the end user to pay attention to the sequence and torque values of fasteners is not a consumer item.

By this definition, it would appear we could say that the 300 million cars registered in the US are not "consumer items".

We've come a long ways in the 50 or so years since owner's manuals contained instructions on valve adjustments, and this movement hasn't been in a good direction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lash
Gota be smarter than the engineers. 45lb lbs is a fuck load...especially considering action screws which are way bigger and holding much more weight/mass are like 55lbs. You don't need anywhere near that.

15 on the caps 25 on the rail fastners.

Can you convert "45lb lbs" to ugga-duggas? That's the only torque spec that I understand.

Doing my own engineering over here, I would like to note that the 45 in-lb spec (which converts over to 5 N-m) is about 30% lower than the spec for a M5 bolt of Grade 8.8 and a full 50% lower than that of a Grade 10.9. This sort of under-specifying of fastener torque possibly indicates that the mechanical design of the mount is already inadequate to handle the potential clamp load of the fastener, or at the very least suggests that broad margin has been provided to minimized the likelihood of broken fasteners during installation at the expense of performance. Either way, the shit shouldn't be breaking even with a torque wrench of poor quality, and if it's user error from incorrect units as you suggest then we should be seeing the fastener yield which does not appear to be the case.

I've got one Spuhr because it was the only option that provided the desired angle to optimize scope travel on that particular rifle. It's worked fine and I'll continue to use it, but future purchases will Badger or Nightforce Unimounts because they have no apparent issues accepting reasonable torque values for the provided fasteners.
 
Riddle me this. You have a hardened steel fastener (not grade 5 or even 8) that holds an AL bar against a steel rail and threads into a AL mount.

All these numbers being thrown out seem to assume all like material. They don't take into account an AL Clamp and Mount.

In every system there is a weak line. Sometime by design and sometimes not. In this system. You 100% want the weak link to be the AL clamp bar. If the Mount fails, you are stuck with a $400 piece of scrap metal. The AL is the cheap, easy to replace part of the system. Does it suck when they break? Yea. But it also protects the rest of the system.

I reiterate, based on the number and cycles of torquing I have put on these mounts over the years, I will bet I have more cycles than the vast majority of people complaining about failures. I have ALWAYS used 25in/lbs on the mount clamp. If you use 45, it feels like too much, and you don't need anywhere near that much force. That is why I said you need to be smarter than the enginereds. Common sense and experience have a say in the conversation.

And not to whip out the dick, but I spent almost 2 years doing a "fastener" study with a large agency trying to reduce their costs, increase quality and decrease lead time. I learned ALOT about fasteners , how they work, how they are made, where they are made and how they are sourced.

Experienced mechanics and mechanically inclined people can tighten a fastner by feel. Its not some magic repeatable torque value, but you can properly tighten them taking into account material, size, type of driver and feel. Most of the people posting here aren't that, they can barely mount a scope themselves, much less understand the mechanics behind it. Its no wonder they are breaking shit, blindly following instructions like the good little communist followers they were trained to be in public school.
 
Riddle me this. You have a hardened steel fastener (not grade 5 or even 8) that holds an AL bar against a steel rail and threads into a AL mount.

All these numbers being thrown out seem to assume all like material. They don't take into account an AL Clamp and Mount.

In every system there is a weak line. Sometime by design and sometimes not. In this system. You 100% want the weak link to be the AL clamp bar. If the Mount fails, you are stuck with a $400 piece of scrap metal. The AL is the cheap, easy to replace part of the system. Does it suck when they break? Yea. But it also protects the rest of the system.

I reiterate, based on the number and cycles of torquing I have put on these mounts over the years, I will bet I have more cycles than the vast majority of people complaining about failures. I have ALWAYS used 25in/lbs on the mount clamp. If you use 45, it feels like too much, and you don't need anywhere near that much force. That is why I said you need to be smarter than the enginereds. Common sense and experience have a say in the conversation.

And not to whip out the dick, but I spent almost 2 years doing a "fastener" study with a large agency trying to reduce their costs, increase quality and decrease lead time. I learned ALOT about fasteners , how they work, how they are made, where they are made and how they are sourced.

Experienced mechanics and mechanically inclined people can tighten a fastner by feel. Its not some magic repeatable torque value, but you can properly tighten them taking into account material, size, type of driver and feel. Most of the people posting here aren't that, they can barely mount a scope themselves, much less understand the mechanics behind it. Its no wonder they are breaking shit, blindly following instructions like the good little communist followers they were trained to be in public school.
I believe we have found the mechanical genius of our time fellas.
 
Most of the people posting here aren't that, they can barely mount a scope themselves, much less understand the mechanics behind it. Its no wonder they are breaking shit, blindly following instructions like the good little communist followers they were trained to be in public school.
😂🤣😄😂🤣😄😂🤣

He just can’t help himself. He is, after all superior in every way to all on the Hide and has to remind himself fifteen times a day that is the case. Such superior intellect gracing our site is a blessing.

Fucking hilarious! 😆 😆
 
😂🤣😄😂🤣😄😂🤣

He just can’t help himself. He is, after all superior in every way to all on the Hide and has to remind himself fifteen times a day that is the case. Such superior intellect gracing our site is a blessing.

Fucking hilarious! 😆 😆
To fucking retards breaking the same shit over and over and not figuring it out......it's not hard to be superior.

Those are your words by the way. If you feel inferior then that's a you problem.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: lash
This ^^ is an incredible...albeit, hilarious...statement. I'm glad he's not in charge of the pre-flight checklist on any aircraft I'd ever get on. Wow.

View attachment 8481034
I know your like 150 years old so the mind is probably going a bit and I dont want to be mean to my elders.....

But words matter and the responses here show how some can not read.

Blindly....... BLINDLY following instructions. I.E., not using experience and common sense to come to a conclusion.

But its Ok. People trained to not think for themselves probably would understand anyway. Add in some room temp IQ and the result is predictable.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Baron23
Riddle me this. You have a hardened steel fastener (not grade 5 or even 8) that holds an AL bar against a steel rail and threads into a AL mount.

All these numbers being thrown out seem to assume all like material. They don't take into account an AL Clamp and Mount.

In every system there is a weak line. Sometime by design and sometimes not. In this system. You 100% want the weak link to be the AL clamp bar. If the Mount fails, you are stuck with a $400 piece of scrap metal. The AL is the cheap, easy to replace part of the system. Does it suck when they break? Yea. But it also protects the rest of the system.

I reiterate, based on the number and cycles of torquing I have put on these mounts over the years, I will bet I have more cycles than the vast majority of people complaining about failures. I have ALWAYS used 25in/lbs on the mount clamp. If you use 45, it feels like too much, and you don't need anywhere near that much force. That is why I said you need to be smarter than the enginereds. Common sense and experience have a say in the conversation.

And not to whip out the dick, but I spent almost 2 years doing a "fastener" study with a large agency trying to reduce their costs, increase quality and decrease lead time. I learned ALOT about fasteners , how they work, how they are made, where they are made and how they are sourced.

Experienced mechanics and mechanically inclined people can tighten a fastner by feel. Its not some magic repeatable torque value, but you can properly tighten them taking into account material, size, type of driver and feel. Most of the people posting here aren't that, they can barely mount a scope themselves, much less understand the mechanics behind it. Its no wonder they are breaking shit, blindly following instructions like the good little communist followers they were trained to be in public school.

Oh - so now the clamp bar is supposed to break. It's a feature, not a bug. Cool. That's way better than these other shitty mounts and rings that I have on a couple dozen other guns that simply don't break when torqued to 65 in-lbs.

I'm going to spend the rest of the afternoon redesigning a bunch of things so that some proprietary component that's only available through one vendor breaks before the $0.25 fastener (which also happens to be one of the most consistent and reliably-produced commodity component in the world) reaches its maximum preload like we've known how to do for about a century.
 
I know your like 150 years old so the mind is probably going a bit and I dont want to be mean to my elders.....

But words matter and the responses here show how some can not read.

Blindly....... BLINDLY following instructions. I.E., not using experience and common sense to come to a conclusion.

But its Ok. People trained to not think for themselves probably would understand anyway. Add in some room temp IQ and the result is predictable.

Let me get this straight:

By following the instructions, I'm at fault.

By not following the instructions, I'm also at fault.

I've seen some remarkably dumb attempts at blaming users for design and manufacturing flaws before, but this one reaches new depths.
 
Oh - so now the clamp bar is supposed to break. It's a feature, not a bug. Cool. That's way better than these other shitty mounts and rings that I have on a couple dozen other guns that simply don't break when torqued to 65 in-lbs.

I'm going to spend the rest of the afternoon redesigning a bunch of things so that some proprietary component that's only available through one vendor breaks before the $0.25 fastener (which also happens to be one of the most consistent and reliably-produced commodity component in the world) reaches its maximum preload like we've known how to do for about a century.
They are completely different designs. I'm not making excuses just trying to show some of the logic behind it. Are there better clamping methods out there? Absolutely. Can you run a spuhr successfully without breaking parts by using a little common sense? Absolutely. If they fail and it seems like they do due to a combination of retarded specs from the manufacture and people who blindly follow directions; its not the end of the world. A cheap fix and you are good to go (assuming you learned the lesson the first time). I can list bunch of other mounts, which I have seen fail over the year range from completely destroyed mount/rings to actually destroying the firearm they are mounted to. Considering this, a broken clamp bar is much preferable, if something is going to break. Ive seen multiple Mbrace mounts literally break in fucking half yet the same people shitting on spuhr will suck teds ballsack because THEY haven't experienced it yet,.

I get it, autists and people who lack said common sense or any modicum of mechanical inclination, find this unfathomable. Blame God not me.
 
When I installed my Spuhr, I did so by torquing it to the specs, not to "feel" or whatever number you've made up to make yourself happy. And yet it didn't break. So is my sample actually the defective one because it doesn't demonstrate this genuine benefit where one part breaks to protect some other parts? Now I'm concerned.

I can't wait to apply this "feel" concept to other fasteners. The last time I built an engine, the head bolts sure felt too tight despite the use of a Snap-On digital wrench and ARP's specs. I'll back those off a bit next time. 160 ft-lbs on the lug nuts "feels" like too much (especially when applied 32 times); I think I'll back that down to something more like 90 ft-lbs to give the studs a chance. 120 ft-lbs on Dana 60 ring gear bolts is too much for those little things. The list just goes on.
 
Let me get this straight:

By following the instructions, I'm at fault.

By not following the instructions, I'm also at fault.

I've seen some remarkably dumb attempts at blaming users for design and manufacturing flaws before, but this one reaches new depths.

Its not black or white like your attempt at an argument is. Like anything, its grey.

If the manufacture told you to lop you're dick off with brush shears before torquing to 45in lbs, would you blindly follow?

The first time you try to apply 45in lbs with that little T20 fastener on the clamp bar (which uses 4 or 5 by the way, not 1 or 2) If you have any mechanical experience you would feel its excessive and back off. I have never broken a spuhr mount but realized after trying to mount the first one like 10 or so years ago, that using 45in lbs was going to most likely strip the head on those soft ass screws, and apply WAY more clamping force than is needed. So i tried 25, 30 and 35 and found 25 to feel just right without risk of stripping the heads. And all of my screws look like new. Then you throw some witness marks on each one to make sure nothing is coming loose and over years of not seeing anything loosen on its own, you are gucci.

The Spuhr mount has a built in lug that is going to take almost all the positive and negative recoil from the gun. All the clamp is doing is holding it in place latterly. And if you know how to actually mount an optic, you would be pressing it forward on the lug so its seated properly when torqued, otherwise that gap is a failure point for the mount to slide under recoil. 25in lbs is MORE than enough with 4 or 5 fasteners to hold everything in place, even shooting big magnums like my LW 300 norma mag.

Again, if your going to be a dumb dumb or an autist and blindly follow instructions without taking into account what you actually experience and feel, then you are the type of person who will break shit. I am not saying the manufacture is not partially to blame, but you have to have some fucking common sense.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RRW