Mounts - Gray Ops vs Area 419
- Thread starter avn2011
- Start date
I want to clarify my experience.
I had 2 mounts. One of them was holding a ZCO 527 and the other a S&B 6-36. When the mounts were removed, yes there was “aluminum transfer” but that was not the issue, I just wiped that off with some alcohol.
On both scopes all around the edges where the rings end there were marks that were not removable. Both mounts were torqued to 15in lbs using fix it sticks. Now, was there an issue with the 2 mounts I had or an issue with the finish on my scopes? Am not sure, maybe If I owned the mighty Arken I wouldn’t have had this problem.
I also would like to clarify that I think Area 419 makes great products and I will continue to be their customer because my experience with them has always been positive aside from this one experience. I have own a few pairs of their match rings in the past as well and never had any issues with them or any of the other items I own.
I had 2 mounts. One of them was holding a ZCO 527 and the other a S&B 6-36. When the mounts were removed, yes there was “aluminum transfer” but that was not the issue, I just wiped that off with some alcohol.
On both scopes all around the edges where the rings end there were marks that were not removable. Both mounts were torqued to 15in lbs using fix it sticks. Now, was there an issue with the 2 mounts I had or an issue with the finish on my scopes? Am not sure, maybe If I owned the mighty Arken I wouldn’t have had this problem.
I also would like to clarify that I think Area 419 makes great products and I will continue to be their customer because my experience with them has always been positive aside from this one experience. I have own a few pairs of their match rings in the past as well and never had any issues with them or any of the other items I own.
Aluminum oxide, while quite hard, does not build into a shell, rather stays in a very fine form without meaningful structure. Bare aluminum builds a surface oxide layer almost instantly when raw aluminum is exposed to oxygen.
Email me images of what you're talking about, if possible. I'm curious as to what you have going on here. Craig(at)Area419(dot)com
Unfortunately, I no longer own those scopes or mounts. But thank you for showing interest.
Just received my new area 419 scope mount along with the send it level the area 419 mount for it and there level. I'm very impressed with packaging and quality. That is a very good setup. I torque the the base screws down but never fully torqued the ring cap screws just doing mock mounting. The pins on the scope rings really help with pulling the rings straight down and the screws being snug the scope wouldn't move at all I had to have them very lose to move it where I wanted it. I'm coming from ARC scope mount which are super handy to mount scopes but I feel the area 419 is just as easy.
Rotating your scope in the Area419 mount is close to impossible due to the bare aluminum. Just keep that in mind when installing.
420 is awesome. I'll shoot it again at SAC Blue Ridge. Shot well in Idaho for the first
Oh nice you are shooting Sportsman at Blue Ridge?420 is awesome. I'll shoot it again at SAC Blue Ridge. Shot well in Idaho for the first
I have a 840 10 mil MPCT1x on order but it wont get here by the match unfortunately. I got one of those orange Grey ops mounts for it. Should POP.
I’m running their standard mount on my AR10. Big fan
After getting to play with the A419 mount, I think its one of the better options out there right now. Especially at its price.
The mounting system for accessories is superior to Spuhr and grey ops. The fit and finish is better IMO as well. Grey ops had a run of non de-burred mounts that screwed up some guys I know scope finishes. Kinda shouldn't happen on a $400 mount. I used a duburring tool on all the fasteners holes before installing mine just in case.
The only knock is the accessories are a different anodizing/finish than the mount. The mount is like a smooth glossy finish anodizing. The accessories are a more greyish matte finish. Almost like they used Type 3 anno on the accessories and type 2 on the mount. Not a big deal but just stood out as weird they would be different. Maybe @flyer1a knows why?
All in all , its a VERY well designed and executed product and It will probably be the mounts I go with in the future. At the price point, its an easy choice for value and overall quality.
The mounting system for accessories is superior to Spuhr and grey ops. The fit and finish is better IMO as well. Grey ops had a run of non de-burred mounts that screwed up some guys I know scope finishes. Kinda shouldn't happen on a $400 mount. I used a duburring tool on all the fasteners holes before installing mine just in case.
The only knock is the accessories are a different anodizing/finish than the mount. The mount is like a smooth glossy finish anodizing. The accessories are a more greyish matte finish. Almost like they used Type 3 anno on the accessories and type 2 on the mount. Not a big deal but just stood out as weird they would be different. Maybe @flyer1a knows why?
All in all , its a VERY well designed and executed product and It will probably be the mounts I go with in the future. At the price point, its an easy choice for value and overall quality.
I have two Area 419 mounts. There will be more in the future
Interesting. My ACRO mount isn’t even at the ring at the rear, but I see your RMR plate is. Odd choice and I’ve had preferred the ACRO mount be even with the ring at the rear - the overhand caused me some fitting grief.
Send me a photo of what you're talking about. Seems like there may be something going on with the ACRO mount (if it's one of ours, and I've not missed some context).
Can throw in the chat here, or PM me, or email, maybe even a carrier pigeon? Your call.
Curious if anyone else is having issues with the scope ring screws not holding torque?
Base is fine, greased the pic rail, installed and they have been good to go.
Myself along with a few other folks that all ordered 36mm mounts at the same time are all having a similar issue: the scope ring caps doesn’t stay torqued.
I running purple loctite now and have only put 50 or so rounds through it since. But every 200 to 300 rounds the screws were giving way.
Also curious why loctite is needed on these when most other manufacturers recommend dry torquing.
Never had any issue with any other 419 product, hoping it’s just a fluke.
Base is fine, greased the pic rail, installed and they have been good to go.
Myself along with a few other folks that all ordered 36mm mounts at the same time are all having a similar issue: the scope ring caps doesn’t stay torqued.
I running purple loctite now and have only put 50 or so rounds through it since. But every 200 to 300 rounds the screws were giving way.
Also curious why loctite is needed on these when most other manufacturers recommend dry torquing.
Never had any issue with any other 419 product, hoping it’s just a fluke.
My 36MM Area 419 mount caps are still tight, granted I only have a 125-150 rounds on it.
No mine are actually dry and undertorqued by atleast a few inch pounds. I didn't want to wet torque them until I was sure I had the reticle plum.
Send me a PM, or email Craig(at)Area419(dot)com - we have had a couple guys talk about an issue with 36, but have not been able to pin down what it is. If there's some issue with the scope cap screws holding, that's a great thing to be added here.
Regardless, happy to trade the mount out for a new one, in case there was something unknown going on it a lot.
I spoke with my father at length. He’s a mechanical engineer. Said that thread locker is needed given the dissimilar materials, steel vs aluminum and the amount of thread engagement the steel fastener has to preload the threads in the Aluminum base
Net net use thread locker and don’t skip this step and all should be fine was the consensus. He also recommended cleaning all the surfaces with at least alcohol before assembling too.
I’m guessing the issue is around thread locker being skipped.
Net net use thread locker and don’t skip this step and all should be fine was the consensus. He also recommended cleaning all the surfaces with at least alcohol before assembling too.
I’m guessing the issue is around thread locker being skipped.
I have issues. Recently changed scopes now it won't hold torque. I torqued at the start of tune up and it held to stage 7 day 1. By stage 6 day 2 was loose again. Lost torque twice over 300 rounds on a 6gt. After watching the video thought loctite is my best option moving forward.
These are through first round of production and are out at ano. We note this as "3 weeks" internally, so take that for what you will.
Nobody wants them in stock as much as we do, I promise.
FOR THOSE HAVING SCREW LOOSENING ISSUES - Our suggestions:
1) Be sure you're using the supplied thread locker. It's very helpful.
2) As is noted here: https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/torque-wrench-shootout-reviews-tests.7137138/
It's very plausible that torque tools can provide inconsistent results. Just part of it.
If you are seeing anything loosen, and push the torque value to 20-23-25 you're not going to create any problems. Many torque tools may struggle at this low end of torque. This isn't an Area 419 specific thing, but a tool that is off just a couple in/lb, or a screw that is being torqued dry vs wet can produce very different amounts of screw load (which is important to staying tight).
We use it in various applications here, I'm a fan. Continue to use full torque values with it.
These grey ops rings look great, but how difficult was it to true up the level when you evenly tightened the rings? Do they seat or is there no problem? I now have one pair of A419 rings with ZCO unimounts, which are fantastic, but I don't like how their level bolts on and protrudes for a hunting rifle. My interest in the GrayOps rings stems from the fact that their hunting rings are now available, but they need a level.
