Mount: Spuhr or ARC M-Brace
- Thread starter Cold_Bore_88
- Start date
Well shit, that sounds tedious. Lol. I am really liking the M-brace.
Have both, and no issue with either one. So can't go wrong! Believe it comes down to preference.
How about Italian Audere?
I like these alot.
Mkmachining Tyler is importer in US.
I like these alot.
Mkmachining Tyler is importer in US.
The ARC M-Brace by a large margin.
I looked at these but at the time they didn’t have a ton of attachment points for red dot mounts and stuff. I should look again.
I heard this mentioned at a class and not by a random student. Apparently spuhr hit a rough patch. Don't want to put words in people's mouths, buy yeah you aren't the only one hearing it
Sad to hear that. I have always had good luck with mine but all were made/purchase over a couple years ago.
Reading this thread just saved me a bunch of money. I need a mount for my Cronus BTR on my Origin; I’ll be going with the standard 1.26” ARC m brace. I was looking at the Spuhr 4001 and 4001C, but they are having quality issues, this is a no brainer for me.
What "quality issues" is Spuhr supposedly having? I hope is not the typical "a guy said so" and everyone else just spreads the rumor...
Both sides and top, and on front and rear section.
So there is enough places to add attachments
Guess who´s picture that is on the front page
AUDERE - WE DARE
www.audere.sm
ScopeLink™ Rail - AUDERE
Picatinny rail attachable via Adversus™, Levitas™ and PSR™ ScopeLink™ interfaces.
www.audere.sm
The M-Brace is just so easy to work with. They’ll spoil you fast.
At first this is what I thought too. Again, I am a big Spuhr fan and own more than a few. Supposedly, there were some design changes and heat treat issues causing the clamp and cross bars to crack. That coupled with their high price seems to push people towards other options.
Oh I like that! I’ve ran M-Braces and M-10 rings for a few years and love their design. The clamshell ring tops make mounting scopes super simple. My only complaint is the base is so wide on the M-Brace that my ejected rounds hit the mount.
Are these problems get bigger since the CZ bought Spuhr?
More stuff out, no intrest of the quality that much, just money money?
More stuff out, no intrest of the quality that much, just money money?
Yes our speculation was that there is substandard Aluminum causing breaks.
Maybe @Lowlight can comment on the spuhr issues, because I am parroting what I heard in class.
Iirc it was a recent issue, last year
Maybe @Lowlight can comment on the spuhr issues, because I am parroting what I heard in class.
Iirc it was a recent issue, last year
This is just my opinion, I have one of each. If either one has a quality issue then I would choose the other but M-Brace is about 3oz heavier, it is MUCH easier to mount your scope and adjust it. about the same mounting to the gun. Spuhr has more accessory mounting points. M brace is $110 less expensive. M brace is more bulky but I think it looks less bulky, sorta hard to explain. Spurh has that nifty leveling tool but I would not put 100% certainly on it so makes it sorta a mute point. Spurh has the bubble level much more snag proof and “built in” m brace allows you to move bubble level to either side, front to back. M brace has more cant options, less height options.
If you were buying one new I would get the m brace but if you already have a spurh mounted up and it works fine I would keep it unless you can sell for close to what it cost new. Also keep in mind the Seekins is coming out with a new one piece mount and could be a good option as well.
If you were buying one new I would get the m brace but if you already have a spurh mounted up and it works fine I would keep it unless you can sell for close to what it cost new. Also keep in mind the Seekins is coming out with a new one piece mount and could be a good option as well.
Spuhr looks cooler with its straight lines and tons of bolts, but Mbrace scope & accessory mounting is easier/better. IMHO.
I have a sphur and an M-brace. Both are high quality and have worked well. I would never spend the money on the sphur other than the fact it was a direct mount for my TRG. If I was going with pic mount it would not have been worth the extra money. I really like the clam shell style mount on the M brace. So easy to mount the scope and no issues with the scope moving as you torque.
My only real complaint with the Mbrace is how thick it is on the top. I have to lift my head quite a bit to see my turrets now. I just picked up a MDT 1 piece mount and really like how thin it is in the top, I can more easily see my turrets now. Still have the Mbrace and wouldn’t hesitate to buy another.
My only real complaint with the Mbrace is how thick it is on the top. I have to lift my head quite a bit to see my turrets now. I just picked up a MDT 1 piece mount and really like how thin it is in the top, I can more easily see my turrets now. Still have the Mbrace and wouldn’t hesitate to buy another.
It’s not just a recent issue, it’s been happening on and off for years now.
At one point I had 11 spuhrs in my safe, bought the first ones 8-9 years ago and the most recent one about 1.5-2 years ago… so all prior to the CZ buyout.
I have 5 cracked clamp bars sitting in my junk pile... that’s a pretty poor failure rate IMO. Only other scope ring failure I’ve had was a clamp block on a Nightforce ultralight ring splitting when torqueing it many years ago. Other than that one Nightforce issue, I've never had a single failure with any of the other Nightforce, Badger, Seekins, Murphy Precision, or even Burris Signature rings with the inserts that I’ve ran over the years.
Granted, all the Spuhr clamp bars that have cracked on me were the older thinner Gen 1 / 1.5 clamp bars and not the updated Gen 2 / 3 thicker clamp bars. In my case the story was the same on all 5 failures— they went into the safe in good shape, and at some point down the road when I took them out of the safe (sometimes a week since the last use, sometimes a year later) I noticed the clamp bars had cracked through the bolt holes. The first one cracked on me about 5 years ago, and just since the first of this year I’ve had to replace 2 more cracked ones. At least Mile High is easy to work with and quickly ships out replacements which are the updated thicker design, but I’ve seen several pics posted here now of the new thicker clamp bars that have also cracked so the updated design isn't immune to it either.
Normally with a 45% failure rate on something like this I’d first suspect a torque driver that’s out of calibration or lubricated threads being used with torque specs for non-lubricated hardware, both of which will overtighten the hardware and apply additional stress. I use a somewhat expensive Mountz torque driver and I calibrate it 3-4 times a year in the tool calibration lab at work, and I always make sure it’s on the numbers or slightly below the indicated setting during calibration (I’d rather have the driver slightly under torque than over torque especially with small hardware like scope mounting screws that can be susceptible to stripping.) Lubricating the threads can also have a significant impact on the final stress in the bolted joint if the torque specs were for dry threads, but I’ve never added any lubricant to the threads other than the wax Spuhr applies to the screws from the factory (I’ve noticed they don’t wax the hardware anymore on new production mounts.) For my failures I can confidently rule out an out of calibration torque driver or thread lubricant applied by the end user that the manufacturer didn’t specify. That leaves a design, material, or process issue.
I can’t nail down an exact cause for the failures, but IMO part of the issue is Hakan might have gone a little crazy with the fillet and chamfer tools in his solid modeling program in the name of cool looks and weight reduction and didn’t leave enough material in several areas which means there’s possibly minimal margin left in a few areas of the design to cope with tolerance stacking during machining, slightly substandard material, or an end user with a torque driver that’s slightly out of calibration and tightens the hardware a bit above spec. Look at the Gen 1 ring caps, the 4x corner ring cap screws have counterbores that leave only a knife edge of material remaining at the tangent point which can serve as a crack propagation point. I remember many years ago seeing quite a few pics of gen 1 ring caps split right through the bolt holes. For Gen 2 and 3, the design was changed and there’s now a lot more material remaining on the outside of the 4x corner ring cap screw counterbores. The Gen 2 and 3 mounts also have revised clamp bars with thicker pads under the screws, which is a design revision probably to deal with the known failure point. Material selection and processing could be playing a role too, 7075 aluminum is stronger, but also more notch and crack sensitive than say 6061. If your design already has minimal margins and you get a questionable batch of 7075, that would then be more prone to failure. Also, if something went wrong at the anodizers hydrogen embrittlement of the aluminum during anodizing is a possibility and it would make the parts extremely susceptible to cracking.
With my Spuhr mounts being purchased over the span of several years and having 5 clamp bars fail, it’s possibly a sporadic material/process issue combined with a design that doesn’t have much margin in a few critical areas. IMO if your design can’t tolerate a little bit of variation in the raw material or production process (neither are perfect) it’s not a very robust design.
Back to the title of the thread and the poll… After having the 2 latest clamp bars fail on me in just the last 9 weeks I’ve been replacing all my Spuhrs with M-Brace mounts. I previously had 1 M-Brace mount for over a year, really like it, and haven’t had an issue-- so that’s what I used to replace all my non-cantilever Spuhrs (the cantilever Spuhrs were replaced with Badger Condition 1 mounts since the M-brace mounts won't work for those applications.) Sure the M-brace mounts are a bit heavier, and the top of the ring being thicker means the turrets on the scope aren’t quite as easy to see as with the 45 degree thin Spuhr rings, but I’ll live with that if it means no more cracked clamp bars. The single bolt hinged rings are very nice as the scope doesn’t roll when tightening the rings, and with only 1 bolt you don't have to criss-cross torque multiple ring screws in multiple steps while trying maintain an even gap and keeping the scope level; that spoils you really fast. Plus the serrated accessory attachment method and hardware is much stouter compared to the spuhr "nipple" accessory attachment with screws into the ring caps that only engage a couple of threads.
Another thing I really like about the M-Brace is ARC specifies to lubricate the threads and under the bolt heads, so their specified torque numbers will produce the proper stretch and stress in the bolted joint with lubricated threads. That’s a good thing, because if someone leaves the threads dry as the mounts and hardware are shipped the result will be an undertorqued/understressed joint which won’t damage the hardware, mount, or scope. That’s far better than the opposite situation where the manufacturer’s specified torque is for dry threads but the end user lubricates the threads but still torques it to the dry thread specs, which can result in the threaded joint having 20-40+% more stress being applied at the same final torque value compared to dry threads, possibly leading to damaged threads or a damaged scope.
I still like the look of the Spuhr mounts and I like how they provide an excellent view of the turrets, but I’m tired of pulling rifles out of the safe and checking the clamp bars for cracks. Finding 2 cracked in just the last 9 weeks was the last straw, no more Spuhrs for me.
Last edited:
I didn’t think about the the thickness in front of the turret. Good consideration.
I will not buy an mbrace, after using ARC rings and m10 mounts since they came out.
I switched to spuhr which despite their shitty fastners that need frequent replacing, is a much better ecosystem for adding accessories.
Also, never seen a spuhr snap In half. Seen a lightly used mrabce crack right in half at a match used by an experienced shooter. ARC gave him his money back. It's a poor design.
I switched to spuhr which despite their shitty fastners that need frequent replacing, is a much better ecosystem for adding accessories.
Also, never seen a spuhr snap In half. Seen a lightly used mrabce crack right in half at a match used by an experienced shooter. ARC gave him his money back. It's a poor design.
Love my Spuhr. I really like the view of the turrets. No QC issues yet….
Last edited:
Just a thought. Things can go wrong on both mounts. But even with a crack developed. I believe the spuhr could still be used until the end of the mission. Say the single ring screw on the mbrace loosens some. The scope could turn or slide. Worse yet, the pivot pin could back out and you have no top half of the ring.
This is just me thinking about worst case scenarios
This is just me thinking about worst case scenarios
Don't count on a Spuhr finishing the day with minor hairline cracks. When my first clamp bar cracked I didn't immediately notice the crack but was wondering why I was having so much trouble hitting a 6" gong at 600Y; shots were falling all over the place rather than where I was aiming. The misses weren't too far off target, but far enough off that it was obvious something was wrong, especially when I grabbed another rifle and had no problems connecting. Figured the problem rifle had a scope issue, but found the clamp bar with a hairline crack through 2 bolt holes when I got home and looked things over closely. The cracked clamp bar didn't let the scope and mount fall off the rifle, but I sure couldn't hit what I was aiming at with any consistency.
Besides the clamp bar failures which seem to be the most common, you also aren't finishing your day and staying on target if this happens (not mine by the way, but happened to a member here.)
I have not seen an ARC ring fail, but if one were to fail my hunch for the failure path would be a broken hinge pin or the base or ring cap hinge segments fracturing through the hole for the dowel pin. A poor quality ring bolt could certainly fail too, but ARC's recommendation for 55 lb-in isn't even at the max recommended torque value with lubricated threads for that fastener diameter/pitch/grade... but there are counterfeit Chineseium bolts out there that sometimes sneak into the supply chain that will fail at much lower values than expected.
All I can say with certainty is that with my sample size of 11 Spuhrs they're running a 45% failure rate on the Gen 1/1.5 clamp bars. I thought about buying a couple of spare Gen 2 thicker clamp bars to keep in my shooting bag at all times just in case a failure happens in the field and then swapping the remaining Gen 1 clamp bars out under warranty if/when they fail, but when I saw a few pics here of cracked Gen 2 thicker clamp bars I decided to cut my losses and change mounts instead. We'll see if I end up regretting that decision.
I do certainly agree with the posters above that as of now there are lots more accessories available for the Spuhr mounts, and that is very important to some people. The engineer in me gets very nervous though looking at the interfaces on the Spuhr ring caps and seeing there's maybe 3 threads of thread engagement though... I would never feel comfortable mounting anything with decent mass to the ring cap interfaces like an LRF-- especially once you figure in recoil loads.
Finally, speaking of worst case scenarios and single points of failure-- if you don't want to go out shooting until you eliminate all possible single points of failure in your rifle, optic, or optic mount, you won't ever go out shooting as you can't eliminate them all.
Ended up ordering an M-Brace. Time to try something new. Reviews, durability, price reviews are good so why not?
I am normally a TT, ZCO, S&B guy but I got out of my comfort zone and ordered a Vortex Gen 3: 6-36x56. Figured I would stick with a new mount type too.
I am normally a TT, ZCO, S&B guy but I got out of my comfort zone and ordered a Vortex Gen 3: 6-36x56. Figured I would stick with a new mount type too.
That is exactly where the mbrace failed. The "fingers" on where the hinge pin meets. Not alot of material there and it's the weak point of the mount.Don't count on a Spuhr finishing the day with minor hairline cracks. When my first clamp bar cracked I didn't immediately notice the crack but was wondering why I was having so much trouble hitting a 6" gong at 600Y; shots were falling all over the place rather than where I was aiming. The misses weren't too far off target, but far enough off that it was obvious something was wrong, especially when I grabbed another rifle and had no problems connecting. Figured the problem rifle had a scope issue, but found the clamp bar with a hairline crack through 2 bolt holes when I got home and looked things over closely. The cracked clamp bar didn't let the scope and mount fall off the rifle, but I sure couldn't hit what I was aiming at with any consistency.
Besides the clamp bar failures which seem to be the most common, you also aren't finishing your day and staying on target if this happens (not mine by the way, but happened to a member here.)
I have not seen an ARC ring fail, but if one were to fail my hunch for the failure path would be a broken hinge pin or the base or ring cap hinge segments fracturing through the hole for the dowel pin. A poor quality ring bolt could certainly fail too, but ARC's recommendation for 55 lb-in isn't even at the max recommended torque value with lubricated threads for that fastener diameter/pitch/grade... but there are counterfeit Chineseium bolts out there that sometimes sneak into the supply chain that will fail at much lower values than expected.
All I can say with certainty is that with my sample size of 11 Spuhrs they're running a 45% failure rate on the Gen 1/1.5 clamp bars. I thought about buying a couple of spare Gen 2 thicker clamp bars to keep in my shooting bag at all times just in case a failure happens in the field and then swapping the remaining Gen 1 clamp bars out under warranty if/when they fail, but when I saw a few pics here of cracked Gen 2 thicker clamp bars I decided to cut my losses and change mounts instead. We'll see if I end up regretting that decision.
I do certainly agree with the posters above that as of now there are lots more accessories available for the Spuhr mounts, and that is very important to some people. The engineer in me gets very nervous though looking at the interfaces on the Spuhr ring caps and seeing there's maybe 3 threads of thread engagement though... I would never feel comfortable mounting anything with decent mass to the ring cap interfaces like an LRF-- especially once you figure in recoil loads.
Finally, speaking of worst case scenarios and single points of failure-- if you don't want to go out shooting until you eliminate all possible single points of failure in your rifle, optic, or optic mount, you won't ever go out shooting as you can't eliminate them all.
There’s been lots of pictures posted online of the hinged Scalarworks rings cracking through the hinge tabs, but the Scalarworks rings are much more svelte and have far less material around the hinge tabs and hinge pins compared to the latest design ARC rings.
I know some of the ARC gen 1 M10 rings had issues with cracking through the hinge tabs, but the hinge tabs were much thinner on those early rings and the ring bolt torque was called out at 65 lb-in. The updated/current design is much thicker around the hinge pins and the torque recommendation was lowered to 55 lb-in. I haven’t seen a picture of the latest design ARC rings cracked through the hinge pin tabs, but anything can fail—as you saw in person.
My first M-Brace mount has been fine for 16 months now and a good friend has been running a couple sets of the updated design M10 rings for about 3 years with no issues, so I’ll stick with the M-Brace until I have a failure—if and when that happens I’ll reevaluate things and possibly find yet another alternative. I stuck with Spuhr for 9 years despite cracking 5 clamp bars… not sure if I’m stupid and didn’t want to acknowledge there was an issue, or if I was being lazy and didn’t feel like changing all my mounts and having to rezero everything.
Last edited:
Similar threads
