Opinion time, Some Market Research

[Lowlight]

Let's talk mounts, lots of discussion on mounts. I have been preaching 1.375" to 1.54" as optimal for both LE and Competition, head up, works great.

So will all the new scopes, new main tube sizes, give me your opinion,

1. Your Top 3 One Piece scope mounts out there

2. What would you like to see, wish list me or tell me what is missing in your opinion

3. Sizes, where do you see the industry going and where would you put your focus if someone gave you a mount company. Choices include:

• Maintube: 36mm
  Cant / Bias: 0 MOA & 20 MOA
• Maintube: 35mm
  Cant / Bias: 0 MOA & 20 MOA
• Maintube: 34mm
  Cant / Bias: 0 MOA & 20 MOA
• Maintube: 30mm
  Cant / Bias: 0 MOA & 20 MOA

Tell me your top choice to 3, or top 2 even that would be best. Especially today looking at the scopes. A lot more working with 0 MOA than before, but 20MOA still rules the roost.

Thanks All

 

[RHutch]

my opinion only applies to the AR platform and for that, I like a taller than 1.5” mount for heads-up viewing. I also have a big melon. American defense is my go-to for price/value.
I can get by with the Recon-M for 30 and 34mm scopes. I use the Recon - H for my 30mm tubed thermal.

I still use bases and rings on a bolt gun.

 

[Herb Stoner]

I'm using Spuhr mounts on both my Kahles and Zco scopes. Both are 1.5" high with 20MOA.

Interested in some of the newer offering but am happy with the Spuhr mounts I have.

 

[Bacarrat]

Sphur would be close to the last because of issues they fail to resolve. Cheap Chinese hardware and cross bars cracking. SPeRM has to be last since it's a stupid ass name for a mount.

NF mounts have never done me wrong. Area 419 mounts is pretty nice with the cap guide pins. Giessele and Badger mounts are nice too but those are more application specific.

Cant would be application specific based on the action or rail it's going on.

 

[TheOE800]

I like the Gray Ops 1.5” mount, it’s only available with 0 cant in all popular maintubes. The rail clamp screws thread into steel threadserts for a steel-steel interface and use the same drive head as the ring cap screws. The accessory suite is somewhat limited it, but basically anything a modern competitor must have and a well engineered interface.

Badger C1 MAX 1.5” is also a favorite of mine - you can get it in any main tube size with or without incline. The rail clamp screws thread into the steel clamp, so you also have a steel to steel interface here. Badger has a really large accessory suite, though their supply chain sucks due to the sheer number of SKUs and they still don’t have everything a competitor must have (they will soon based on SHOT). Badger offers the accessory ring cap only as a separate accessory so if they don’t make it (36mm C1 ARC) or it’s out of stock, good luck.

I prefer 34mm and 20 MOA, but have a rifle with enough incline in the action rail so to speak that a 20 MOA mount disallowed me from getting a 100 yard zero. For competition rifles, 20 MOA is unnecessary likely even without a canted action rail at the distances and calibers we shoot. 36mm is picking up in popularity but I simply don’t have a lot of scopes in that diameter, therefore no extra mounts, therefore dislike them.

I want a combo of Grey Ops and Badger.

 

[MO Fugga]

Tagged

 

[OREGUN]

@Lowlight. As requested: I like 1.5” for bolt and taller for AR. 1.5 on an AR can be okay but it’s not awesome.

With all the rail mounted gadgetry, I’d like to see a one piece mount that left more rail space open underneath it.

I think starting with 34mm and 0/20 options gets a huge share of the market. Adding 35 adds more market and I would guess 36 is the smallest share. I only ever run 20 MOA and I don’t see any upside to a 0 bias unless you are doing some kind of thermal thing I guess. I also don’t have a need, nor do I think there’s a large market for more than 20.

SPUHR is my top choice even for ZCOs. I’ve never had any trouble and they are easily the easiest to mount the optic in. Likewise, their low profile and lack of wide hips makes them perfect for seeing around. Which I like.

Hawkins one piece probably get second place. They are a well built, well supported, local, etc. Their level built into the front ring is a downside in my opinion. But I appreciate that they have included it instead of making you buy one extra. I just don’t like it sticking out where my support hand goes when on a barricade. I’d rather have the level in the stock, behind the tang.

The Arc m brace is an interesting take on the form but I’m skeptical of any of Karagia’s super engineering whiz-bangery.

 

[oldrifleman]

As I am moving to ZCO, my ring size is 36mm, I was a Spuhr fan but am using the ZCO block mounts now and cant is governed by the rail it is being mounted on. I generally shoot for between 20 and 30 moa.

 

[Milf Dots]

What I lack in experience I make up for with enthusias-ity:

1) A) EraTac
B) Seekins
C) ADM/American Defense Manufacturing
(Honorable mention to ZCO, Badger, Geissele, GrayOps CNC, and F3 Machine)


2) A) Less milling, "melting of edges", sculpting, for weight reduction and style. I'd rather have the rugged durability of that extra material & weight to mitigate potential for cracking- see my top three above for rugged build design.
B ) Also, make any QR levers/mount bolts, and every accessory/attachment, ambidextrous or reversible so they can be hung off either side.
C) Offer at least three colors: FDE/Coyote, OD Green, Black.

3) I'd focus on 34, 35, 36mm tubes. 0, 20, 30 degrees of cant options.

 

[loveha]

I normally use ARC rings. My go to is ARC at 1.5" tall. However I recently added the ARC M Brace for an AR10 so I got their mount at 20 MOA and 34mm. I just love that you can use one bit and one toque for everything, and scope doesn't shift when you tighten the rings.
My previous go to for mounts was NF at 1.375". But I now feel that is to low after going to 1.5".
Do I need the 20 moa, nope, but it tickles my brain and I like it.

I like the the ARC M brace mount, but I want to see some sort of 45 degree offset mount for pistol sights with the option of either the RMR or DPP foot print. I do not want a 45 off set pic rail that I then need a plate to mount the optic to the offset. I want direct fit of the sight to the offset. NO ADAPTER PLATE. Hence the request for the RMR and DPP mount. It's cool that it has the option for putting a LRF on top with the bridge, but to me it seems to much height for adding a pistol sight on top.
Not sure if I am alone in this want?

A similiar design could be incorparated to any new scope mount if you are starting from scratch. A lot of unused empty space along the top of the mount under the scope. It's just smooth, empty and ready for accesories. Of course it would propbably only be compatible at 1.5"+ tall. Because it would stick up some and not be flush with the mount. I would not bother with anything shorter my self anyways. Could mill three shallow slots, two tapped holes each for a total of six. Then have the offset arm come from there. That way the end user could decide where they want it to come from. Left/right, back/middle/front.

I realize after proof reading this, is a lot of what I want and how I would design something to not copy what ARC has going. I just feel like that the options for 45 offset mounts on the market currently are compromises and suck.

I would start with 34mm at 20MOA and 1.5" tall, then I guess 30mm at 0MOA for an even bigger market. Could probably do 1.3 whatever for the 30mm assuming you are trying to compete in the larger market and not niche like us here on the hide. If you are not trying to compete with the vast majority of the mounts on the current market then skip 30mm. Then I would go 35 and 36.

 

[Faronth]

Favorite one piece mount is the MPA Bolt action mount.
Preferred size is 35mm and 34mm and at 0 MOA.
I leave the rise to the rail, plus some rifles come with a 20moa rail to begin with.

2nd favorite is the ADM/American Defense Manufacturing. While not technically one piece I own several of them and they perform well. Same preferred size of 35mm followed by 34mm and 0 MOA. I like that they are tall enough for 56mm scope on my LMT MWS.

HTH

 

[264win]

I like the ARC mbrace and Seekins mounts
Mostly 34mm 1.5” 0 moa.
Both have good modularity, are very solid and reasonably priced.

 

[Smokin7s]

Sphur would be close to the last because of issues they fail to resolve. Cheap Chinese hardware and cross bars cracking. SPeRM has to be last since it's a stupid ass name for a mount.

NF mounts have never done me wrong. Area 419 mounts is pretty nice with the cap guide pins. Giessele and Badger mounts are nice too but those are more application specific.

Cant would be application specific based on the action or rail it's going on.

They literally just got done fixing the crossbar issue

 

[CK1.0]

I dig a 1.5" for ARs and flat-top rifles like an AI or something... but a big scope in a 1.5" on top of a Manners/Foundation makes the gun feel tippy and a little top heavy to me on a bag, and for that type of setup, I still think a 1.25" height is relevant (and what I prefer at least).

1. Gray Ops (new kid, beefy AF)
MPA BA Mount (simple, proven)
Spuhr (ubiquitous)

2. I'd echo the comments about keeping it strong/solid versus any unnecessary/extra machining for an unremarkable return in weight savings. Also, I do not like the trend of integral levels and would think hard about it... most (all?) of the integral levels suck, and they're only as level/true as the top of the rail and the tolerance stacking of the stock/chassis+rail+mount can allow, and I still prefer and think it's valid to set the level last after everything else is as good as it can get, to gravity, with a plumb line.

3. 34mm in 0moa and 20moa should cover most (but with the surge of popularity in rimfire, more cant may be worth considering I guess).

 

[Beefmanne]

I love the Spuhr 44mm high mounts, I wish they had an option between 0 and 44 moa.

 

[Baron85]

I would build 34mm 1.5” O moa for bolt guns and would like taller for ARs maybe 1.8-1.9” 20moa

Second would be 35mm

I like thin top cap for easier viewing of my elevation turret ( my gripe with the m-brace mount I just sold is it obstructed my turret.

I would like an integrated level that’s adjustable like the flatline levels.

Also want more rail space available or a design that allows a dope card to be mounted to the bottom of the mount and hanging down next to the stock to keep the card out of my field of view.

Keep all the screws the same size, don’t mix nuts and Torx or different size Torx/allen.

Last complaint I have with mounts is having ejected brass hit the mounts and bounce back into the chamber. Have had this happen randomly on 2 rifles.

At this point I have sold a few of my mounts and went back to rings. I haven’t noticed any issues running rings personally.

 

[Im2bent]

From the op.
2. What would you like to see, wish list me or tell me what is missing in your opinion

 

[Sum Ting Wong]

Many more beefy. That was my goal when I machined this one, I should’ve made it taller though.

 

[SanPatHogger]

Most new big tube scopes have a ton of elevation adjustment. 20moa in a mount doesn't come close to making all the available travel usefull. But most people don't shoot past a few hundred to 1,000 yards. I had no idea where the long range shooting bug would take me and now have a 22LR and 243 with 50moa in the rails/mounts and have maxed them both out.

 

[papershredder]

I would like to see more offerings above 1.54" height. 1.5" is ok for my bolt gun, but for my AR's I need to go a little taller. 1.625" would be almost perfect, but I haven't found one at that height, I'm going to settle with a 1.7" for my next AR mount purchase.

Now if someone just handed me a company, I would try to make mounts in all the tube sizes listed due to all those sizes being used by popular brands. If one had to be sacrificed, it would be the 35mm and keep the 30,34,36 sizes. No need to get fancy with mount cant offerings. Simple 0,20,40 would be all I would ever offer with the 40's being short production runs since they're mainly for niche markets. Also, with weapon mounted LRF's, laser-illuminators, and piggyback rds becoming more popular, I would focus effort into making top ring mounts and/or bolt on rails.

Edit to add: Having both standard and cantilever mount options are a must. I will echo above statements and say I prefer beefier mounts and ditching integral levels as well. I would not ignore the market for two piece scope rings either. Many people still prefer those to one piece mounts and also make sure they have the option for top ring accessory mounts and bolt on rails as well.

 

[SanPatHogger]

At this point I have some a few of my mounts and went back to rings. I haven’t noticed any issues running rings personally.

My 22 has a 30moa rail and 20moa mount. The 243 has a 50moa rail and straight rings. I have a 50 rail for the 22, just need to get around to getting some straight rings for it.

 

[FUNCTIONAL]

As a guy who has high cheek bones id like a lower one piece option than the 1.5 and 1.4 options. So few to choose from.

 

[Baron85]

As a guy who has high cheek bones id like a lower one piece option than the 1.5 and 1.4 options. So few to choose from.

I have high cheek bones as well but have found that using my jaw as the reference instead of my cheek helps keep my head more vertical and makes it easier to stay level, and helps me transition and find the next targets faster. I also find it more comfortable on my neck.

 

[Earnhardt]

Many more beefy. That was my goal when I machined this one, I should’ve made it taller though.
View attachment 8384575

Height?
Thanks

 

[Milf Dots]

As a guy who has high cheek bones id like a lower one piece option than the 1.5 and 1.4 options. So few to choose from.

F3 Machine might have what you're looking for- they don't seem to have much of a selection above about 1.35.

 

[Smokin7s]

Many more beefy. That was my goal when I machined this one, I should’ve made it taller though.
View attachment 8384575

So do you bore it to size and then split it I’ve always wondered how it works

 

[R_A_W]

1) Industry standardization for attaching shit, like MLOK, just… smaller
2) no breaky (surprised many mfg haven’t thought of this tbh)

What I lack in experience I make up for with enthusias-ity:

1) A) EraTac
B) Seekins
C) ADM/American Defense Manufacturing
(Honorable mention to ZCO, Badger, Geissele, GrayOps CNC, and F3 Machine)


2) A) Less milling, "melting of edges", sculpting, for weight reduction and style. I'd rather have the rugged durability of that extra material & weight to mitigate potential for cracking- see my top three above for rugged build design.
B ) Also, make any QR levers/mount bolts, and every accessory/attachment, ambidextrous or reversible so they can be hung off either side.
C) Offer at least three colors: FDE/Coyote, OD Green, Black.

3) I'd focus on 34, 35, 36mm tubes. 0, 20, 30 degrees of cant options.

Lmao literally everyone and every thing

 

[papershredder]

So do you bore it to size and then split it I’ve always wondered how it works

Split then bore to size. Top rings are typically machined to size along with bottom for the external dimensions, then holes drilled & tapped for mounting the two halves together. Top ring "blanks" get bolted down to bottom then it's drilled & bored to size as an assembly with some final lapping to finish.

 

[J_D]

36mm 1.5” high, with 20 MOA is my preference. From rimfire to magnum center fire. ZCO across the board.

 

[BuildingConceptsllc]

Rings: 1.35 ish- 1.5"
MDT Elite for 34mm
Tier One for 36mm

Mounts:
ZCO block mount always 1.5" for any mount. Clip on is the real reason or I'd standardize it all to 1.35 but I like 1.5" just fine.

Main tube size for future 36mm and 34mm. 36mm becoming more and more common in the future and stopping there.

I've had all the big time mounts. I like the ARC stuff a lot but it's just too big and bulky. The ZCO is ideal and what I Ultimately settled with and i love em. I wont be changing anything and probably wont even get anything other than ZCO scopes going forward if they expand their USA line up.

I run 0moa and I run 20moa depends on which gun and what scope and what it's for.

 

[Pete B]

Sphur would be close to the last because of issues they fail to resolve. Cheap Chinese hardware and cross bars cracking. SPeRM has to be last since it's a stupid ass name for a mount.

NF mounts have never done me wrong. Area 419 mounts is pretty nice with the cap guide pins. Giessele and Badger mounts are nice too but those are more application specific.

Cant would be application specific based on the action or rail it's going on.

Hmmm...... pretty sure it wasn't a "what mount touched me" butt hurt thread, yup just read it again.
Goodjob getting that off your chest though

 

[AMGtuned]

Welp, this headed right where I thought it would. A mount that prices most shooters out of using it.

I don't feel like I'm alone here, but I might be, and don't care if so.

Some of the current mounts avaliable are already $300+, with nothing. I have yet to figure out the benefits that a $3-600 mount can do, that a $140 set of Badger/Seekins/NF can't do.

If such a robust mount is necessary for today's big fancy optics; is the problem the optic? Obviously, I would want my $3-5k optic safe and sound, but how much safety am I gaining vs brand whoring?

Now, mind you all, I'm a poor raising 3 kids. So this is coming from a guy with a XTR II in Seekins, and a RT-6 in a Leupold mount. I'd love to get a better/higher mount for the RT-6, and definitely a riser/flip system for my eotech setups to make them more comfortable.

But: a case of ammo, or bolt something on a different way .

Long way to say that I think I'm out of this one; but as an American capitalist, I appreciate you trying to bring new things to market. Unless it's a $400 red dot mount

 

[mrtoyz]

1.50”ish. Head upright and universal mounting to AR’s

1. Spuhr, Seekins, Tier 1

2. a. ability to have QD or not
b. ease of mounting scope
c. ability to attach red dots on top, don’t really care about on the sides.
d. return to zero
e. light weight
f. FDE and Black
g. tool-less would be great
h. ability to mount Send It vertically

3. 30,34,36mm both 0 and 20moa

 

[Jefe's Dope]

I have high cheek bones and a small face, so I prefer a lower mount otherwise the cheek riser is near its limit of adjustment. I also prefer to have my cant on the rail vs. the mount as I feel the rifle itself dictates how much cant in needed. 20 MOA for a 6GT PRS rifle, 40 MOA for a .22lr PRS rifle.

 

[Long Range 338]

I've moved to ARC M Brace mount in 1.5" as my go to. Almost exclusively in 34mm with 0 MOA in the mount - I prefer the MOA in my pic rail as I move scopes between rifles fairly often. Also like the MDT and Cadex mounts. I have several of the Spuhr but they are not my go to - speaking of precision rifles only.

 

[Huskydriver]

34 mm is fine... The 35mm and 36mm tubes don't have more travel then my current 34mm bodied scopes.

Always run between 30 and 50 moa of cant total in my rifles to get full travel from the scope.

1.5" all the way

 

[kthomas]

I really like the ARC series of mounts. What I mostly love about them is the one large bolt, rather then 4 or 6 small bolts, which makes mounting scopes a breeze. Right now I'm just using Mediums (1.1" height) rings in 34mm with no cant.

I want a scope mount/rings to be simple and robust. Simple to use for mounting a scope, and I don't need any additional gadgets hanging off of my mounts. Robust so that I don't have to worry about losing zero in any of my shooting.

 

[chevy_man]

Most of mine are 1.25 to 1.5".


I've found it depends on the scope design and individual facial structure. I run out of room to move the cheek piece up on a bravo to get to 1.5" rings.


I end up using lots of Leupold & Sig because it's what I can buy 6 blocks from my house.

I have avoided spur and some others because they're stupidly priced and I don't need anything that they do better.
$300 in ammo is going to make me better than $300 more in rings that do nothing.

 

[Milf Dots]

Welp, this headed right where I thought it would. A mount that prices most shooters out of using it.

I don't feel like I'm alone here, but I might be, and don't care if so.

Some of the current mounts avaliable are already $300+, with nothing. I have yet to figure out the benefits that a $3-600 mount can do, that a $140 set of Badger/Seekins/NF can't do.

If such a robust mount is necessary for today's big fancy optics; is the problem the optic? Obviously, I would want my $3-5k optic safe and sound, but how much safety am I gaining vs brand whoring?

Now, mind you all, I'm a poor raising 3 kids. So this is coming from a guy with a XTR II in Seekins, and a RT-6 in a Leupold mount. I'd love to get a better/higher mount for the RT-6, and definitely a riser/flip system for my eotech setups to make them more comfortable.

But: a case of ammo, or bolt something on a different way .

Long way to say that I think I'm out of this one; but as an American capitalist, I appreciate you trying to bring new things to market. Unless it's a $400 red dot mount

Sell your AMG and get a Toyota or Honda.

 

[Bigrederic]

I have been running the 1.5" Gray Ops setup on my work rifle for several months now, and I am amazed how easy the rifle is to get behind... it feels surprisingly easier to get behind then my normal 1.1" setups. That being said slowly I may start experimenting with more taller mounts on my other guns.

 

[AMGtuned]

Sell your AMG and get a Toyota or Honda.

Good poke. But I'm not a Merc guy (it WOULD be an AMG if I were), and I can't sell my name

 

[Lowlight]

When people ask,

This is why SH, the knowledge base here is second to none. People who know their shit and are willing to share their opinions

So many positive products came from here, this demonstrates why. Keep it coming.

 

[Long Range 338]

I have yet to figure out the benefits that a $3-600 mount can do, that a $140 set of Badger/Seekins/NF can't do.

There is nothing wrong with rings you mentioned. But they do not do the things a one piece mount allows you to do. I can remove my scope at any time without any consideration of rail spacing, torquing of the scope in the rings, having to re level the scope, etc. Not to mention many here are mounting red dots, NV or thermal, and weapon mounted rangefinders on their rigs. If none of these items are concerns of yours, you won't see the benefit.

 

[Long Range 338]

Welp, this headed right where I thought it would. A mount that prices most shooters out of using it.

If such a robust mount is necessary for today's big fancy optics; is the problem the optic? Obviously, I would want my $3-5k optic safe and sound, but how much safety am I gaining vs brand whoring?

You kind of entered this thread with a bit of a chip on your shoulder and it shows. Some of that is true, when you own a Ferrari you drive it and show it off. That certainly happens here but that isn't the tone of this thread, this thread is a discussion of which mounts, which heights, which cants, and which diameters are the most common or recommendable.

Not much if any insurance is gained by using the one piece mount over the rings you mentioned. In theory I suppose there could be an argument made but we are not shooting benchrest here. More than anything the one piece mount provides options, options for quickly moving the scope or using it in another manner, or options to mount more gear that you deem necessary.

 

[AMGtuned]

There is nothing wrong with rings you mentioned. But they do not do the things a one piece mount allows you to do. I can remove my scope at any time without any consideration of rail spacing, torquing of the scope in the rings, having to re level the scope, etc. Not to mention many here are mounting red dots, NV or thermal, and weapon mounted rangefinders on their rigs. If none of these items are concerns of yours, you won't see the benefit.

I totally agree. I have used some one piece mounts before (I had 2 different AD Recon), but some things change, and those went down the road. But to your point, the interchangeability it affords is great.

But if the mount doesn't come with all those extra doodads that some users are running, it shouldn't be priced as such. Couple hundred dollars to get into a mount system, ok, I can get with that. It has accessories available that I can add, if I choose its a good setup for me, the end user.

At the end of the day, it is a weapon "system". So it should be assembled, reliable, and complete. And so should the weapon, you need the one piece mount for, to be able to swap scopes around so easy.

Like I said before; probably alone in my thinking, but

 

[AMGtuned]

You kind of entered this thread with a bit of a chip on your shoulder and it shows. Some of that is true, when you own a Ferrari you drive it and show it off. That certainly happens here but that isn't the tone of this thread, this thread is a discussion of which mounts, which heights, which cants, and which diameters are the most common or recommendable.

Not much if any insurance is gained by using the one piece mount over the rings you mentioned. In theory I suppose there could be an argument made but we are not shooting benchrest here. More than anything the one piece mount provides options, options for quickly moving the scope or using it in another manner, or options to mount more gear that you deem necessary.

Certainly didn't have any "chip". But the discussion headed into extreme cants, and 35/36 mm tube optics. Maybe all the optics, in everyone's price range, are switching to those sizes. Here I was thinking that was just top dollar optics. I was also considering the AR type market. Lots of folks own that platform, amd shoot it often. I'd wager more than PRS/ELR owners (not the round count, ownership).

I'm just another voice. Don't like it, don't listen.

 

[SanPatHogger]

There is nothing wrong with rings you mentioned. But they do not do the things a one piece mount allows you to do. I can remove my scope at any time without any consideration of rail spacing, torquing of the scope in the rings, having to re level the scope, etc. Not to mention many here are mounting red dots, NV or thermal, and weapon mounted rangefinders on their rigs. If none of these items are concerns of yours, you won't see the benefit.

This might be cool. A 50moa mount on a zero rail. Then I could take the scope off and run a thermal. Then put the scope back on and it would probably be close to zero.

 

[Long Range 338]

This might be cool. A 50moa mount on a zero rail. Then I could take the scope off and run a thermal. Then put the scope back on and it would probably be close to zero.

Or you could run a clip on thermal?

 

[Slides]

Unless it's an eratac I can't see value inthe price of the vast majority of unimounts. I have used several of the Athlon 30 & 34mm by 20MOA (would like 30 as an option) on different rifles and they are perfect. They are between a third and half the price of many options. I'd suggest any of the level bubble stuff is rubbish anyway unless you can clearly see it fully engaged in the shooting position on the rifle, assuming they are even accurate.

I don't understand people wanting "chunky" mounts for strength, less machining or not casting smooth radii just result in stress raisers and opportunities to catch or drag on things.

 

[OREGUN]

People who know their shit and are willing to share their opinions

Too bad it’s so hard to tell if it’s the former you are talking to or just the latter.