Larue LT-101 riser, any experience?

[bm11]

So,

Small bump in the road on my SPR build. My Larue SPR-104 didn't fit my new USO 1.8-10x37 TPAL, so now I'm going to mount it in rings.

The options are either the Badger 22moa riser, or the Larue LT-101 riser:

The badger is nice in that it is a 22moa and it will doubt lock up solid. On the other hand- I haven't read anything at all about a Larue product not returning to zero. It seems like the LT-101 would allow me to remain the most "true to my build" in that I could transition to irons faster.

Anyone have any experience with this product?

Thanks,

-Bob

 

[ORD]

Re: Larue LT-101 riser, any experience?

I have not used the LT-101 riser, but I have used countless other Larue products over the years and they are all built with extreme quality, reliability and return-to-zero ability in mind. Unless you NEED QD capability, I would run the 22MOA riser mount from Badger, along with a quality set of Badger (or similar) fixed rings that get you to the optimum heigth you need in conjunction with the riser. If you do require QD (for switching optics or running irons and you don't want to fool with retorquing everything to remove and reinstall), then I have no quams about recommending the LT-101 riser with a quality set of rings.

Out of curiosity, what about the LT-104 didn't work with your USO? (I'm guessing it was a ring spacing issue or the eyepiece area of the scope was making contact with the rear "foot" of the mount).

 

[gstaylorg]

Re: Larue LT-101 riser, any experience?

I have an LT-101 I used to mount an optic (indirectly) on a Sig 556 pistol. Basically, I needed to get the optic higher because it interfered in a major way with the charging handle and I wasn't satisfied with the other (higher) mount options I looked at. Like every one of my other (direct) LaRue QD optic mounts, it does a VERY good job of returning to zero when removed/replaced. Possibly not an issue, but if you go with this type mount, you will add slightly more weight because you will still need the rings.

IMO, nothing like this will ever be quite as stable a "permanent" mount, but LaRue QD mounts are about as good as it gets for a removable system. FWIW, my aim is far more likely to be off than my zero when replacing the optic on a LaRue mount.

 

[Postal0311]

Re: Larue LT-101 riser, any experience?

I own one and have used it for assorted setups.

It works and does what its suppose to do. However for optics I feel the dedicated mounts like the LT104 are more preferable.

 

[bm11]

Re: Larue LT-101 riser, any experience?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ORD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Out of curiosity, what about the LT-104 didn't work with your USO? (I'm guessing it was a ring spacing issue or the eyepiece area of the scope was making contact with the rear "foot" of the mount). </div></div>Not enough space between the rings for the TPAL erector housing.

I might just go with a Badger as your guys recommend. It's cheaper and it has cant.

 

[Moadster]

Re: Larue LT-101 riser, any experience?

You might check out my thread about the Larue LT-112. It has plenty of ring spacing for your USO, and has 20moa built in.

http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...947#Post2078947

Link to it's twin, LT-111.

http://stores.homestead.com/Laruetactical/Detail.bok?no=393

 

[bm11]

Re: Larue LT-101 riser, any experience?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Moadster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You might check out my thread about the Larue LT-112. It has plenty of ring spacing for your USO, and has 20moa built in.

http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...947#Post2078947

Link to it's twin, LT-111.

http://stores.homestead.com/Laruetactical/Detail.bok?no=393 </div></div>I'd be all over it, but it doesn't appear to have any cantilever. This is going on a Larue Stealth upper, and if you take a look at this pic, it will show you why a cantilever is required:

If you look, the front ring position is right over the retaining ring for the handguard. The OBR mount doesn't appear to have any cantilever, and I'm afraid that it would mount the scope too far to the rear, otherwise I would be all over it.

 

[ORD]

Re: Larue LT-101 riser, any experience?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bm11</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ORD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Out of curiosity, what about the LT-104 didn't work with your USO? (I'm guessing it was a ring spacing issue or the eyepiece area of the scope was making contact with the rear "foot" of the mount). </div></div>Not enough space between the rings for the TPAL erector housing.

I might just go with a Badger as your guys recommend. It's cheaper and it has cant. </div></div>

As a second thought...you could always use the Badger fixed 22MOA cant riser and then use Larue QD rings on top of it. That would give you QD capability so that you can switch to irons quickly (and still leave the 22MOA riser in place) since your sight plane with the irons would still be well above the riser.

Here you go:

LT-719 = 0.875” (0.285” Base to Bottom) - http://stores.homestead.com/Laruetactical/Detail.bok?no=365

LT-123 = 1.29” (0.70” Base to Bottom) - http://stores.homestead.com/Laruetactical/Detail.bok?no=35

That might give you the best of both worlds since you would prefer QD to a more "fixed" optics mount/ring setup.

 

[bm11]

Re: Larue LT-101 riser, any experience?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ORD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bm11</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ORD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Out of curiosity, what about the LT-104 didn't work with your USO? (I'm guessing it was a ring spacing issue or the eyepiece area of the scope was making contact with the rear "foot" of the mount). </div></div>Not enough space between the rings for the TPAL erector housing.

I might just go with a Badger as your guys recommend. It's cheaper and it has cant. </div></div>

As a second thought...you could always use the Badger fixed 22MOA cant riser and then use Larue QD rings on top of it. That would give you QD capability so that you can switch to irons quickly (and still leave the 22MOA riser in place) since your sight plane with the irons would still be well above the riser.

Here you go:

LT-719 = 0.875” (0.285” Base to Bottom) - http://stores.homestead.com/Laruetactical/Detail.bok?no=365

LT-123 = 1.29” (0.70” Base to Bottom) - http://stores.homestead.com/Laruetactical/Detail.bok?no=35

That might give you the best of both worlds since you would prefer QD to a more "fixed" optics mount/ring setup. </div></div>Cool. I didn't realize Larue offered a lower ring option- all I saw was the super highs.

In any case, I bought USO rings and a Badger base (both out of the for sale section) because they were available and the price was right. Since starting this thread, I have impulse purchased an AR-10 and I do believe this will be a better mounting solution for the time being (because of the 22moa cant, and the added security.)

 

[ORD]

Re: Larue LT-101 riser, any experience?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bm11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In any case, I bought USO rings and a Badger base (both out of the for sale section) because they were available and the price was right. Since starting this thread, I have impulse purchased an AR-10 and I do believe this will be a better mounting solution for the time being (because of the 22moa cant, and the added security.) </div></div>

I think you'll be pleased with both the USO rings and the Badger 22MOA rail! Very high quality on both items that should serve you well!

 

[bm11]

Re: Larue LT-101 riser, any experience?

I'm hoping!