Rifle Scopes What is this Forged carbon mount black magic??

[308pirate]

Using custom 17-4 stainless inserts (anchored in the base) and #8-36 alloy steel screws and mix that with almost no thermal expansion (6x less than aluminum) you can go from 0 degree environment to 100 degree or vice versa and know this mount will be exactly the same in any condition.

So what they're saying is that the thermal expansion coefficient of the rings is drastically different from the TEC of the metal components embedded in it.

I wonder what happens to the interface between the embedded steel inserts and the surrounding carbon fiber when it gets really cold.......

No actually I don't have to wonder. I know.

Just because you can doesn't mean you should. I think I'll pass.

 

[AirgunnerPCP]

So what they're saying is that the thermal expansion coefficient of the rings is drastically different from the TEC of the metal components embedded in it.

I wonder what happens to the interface between the embedded steel inserts and the surrounding carbon fiber when it gets really cold.......

No actually I don't have to wonder. I know.

Just because you can doesn't mean you should. I think I'll pass.

I dunno man I'm sure they've thought of differences in CTE when designing this. Assuming the inserts were co-laminated, I've seen parts that go through much larger temperature changes with inserts that showed no problems. If these inserts were bonded in post, then it's a matter of selecting the correct adhesive.

 

[308pirate]

I dunno man I'm sure they've thought of differences in CTE when designing this.

I sure hope so but you and I know there's been epic fails from people who should know better

 

[AirgunnerPCP]

I sure hope so but you and I know there's been epic fails from people who should know better

That's very true.

 

[koshkin]

I sure hope so but you and I know there's been epic fails from people who should know better

The part I am trying to understand is why you would want to have the mount with zero thermal expansion when it is clamped around an aluinum tube that does expand a little with heat. Making everything match would probably be a more interesting idea.

Either way, the temperature extremes that the scope and the mount go through are not that large, so I am not sure it matters, but I still wonder why they think zero thermal expansion is a good thing in this case. If it mattered, we'd see someone make a mount out of invar.

ILya

 

[Vodoun daVinci]

I think the less shit changing due to heat or whatever is ultimately better. I think the next 10 years are gonna fry our minds at how materials change. Then again I'm pretty sure digital is going to replace glass here soon so...

I'm a dumbass.

VooDoo

 

[308pirate]

The part I am trying to understand is why you would want to have the mount with zero thermal expansion when it is clamped around an aluinum tube that does expand a little with heat. Making everything match would probably be a more interesting idea.

Either way, the temperature extremes that the scope and the mount go through are not that large, so I am not sure it matters, but I still wonder why they think zero thermal expansion is a good thing in this case. If it mattered, we'd see someone make a mount out of invar.

ILya

The firearms world is chock full of potential customers who don't know shit from shinola about materials science (not even the most fundamental aspects) but are too afraid to ask because of their ego. They fail to spot these potential issues and instead of asking questions just buy the latest cool-guy shit they saw on instagram

How am I doing so far?

 

[308pirate]

I think the less shit changing due to heat or whatever is ultimately better.

Not when you have two mating parts with vastly dissimilar thermal expansion coefficients.

Yes, I agree.

 

[AirgunnerPCP]

I think the less shit changing due to heat or whatever is ultimately better. I think the next 10 years are gonna fry our minds at how materials change. Then again I'm pretty sure digital is going to replace glass here soon so...

I'm a dumbass.

VooDoo

I think the zero CTE thing is just a marketing pitch. With the temps most rifles are used at, such a small change in dimension is very likely in the noise. I would guess this mount is more useful for those who are trying to shave every last ounce of weight but as far as increasing precision I don't think this will move the needle. But hey this could become significant in the future who knows.

 

[koshkin]

The firearms world is chock full of potential customers who don't know shit from shinola about materials science (not even the most fundamental aspects) but are too afraid to ask because of their ego. They fail to spot these potential issues and instead of asking questions just buy the latest cool-guy shit they saw on instagram

How am I doing so far?

Pretty good, I think.
ILya

 

[koshkin]

I think the zero CTE thing is just a marketing pitch. With the temps most rifles are used at, such a small change in dimension is very likely in the noise. I would guess this mount is more useful for those who are trying to shave every last ounce of weight but as far as increasing precision I don't think this will move the needle. But hey this could become significant in the future who knows.

There are many potential advantages to composites both functional and esthetic, but structural stuff has to be resolved first.

ILya

 

[TheBoctor]

So I'm a little (lot) rusty on my corrosive properties, but isn't carbon fiber + aluminum a no-no? I know most scope tubes are anodized, but like i said, it's been a while for me. But I know I remember hearing that they don't play nice together.

 

[AirgunnerPCP]

So I'm a little (lot) rusty on my corrosive properties, but isn't carbon fiber + aluminum a no-no? I know most scope tubes are anodized, but like i said, it's been a while for me. But I know I remember hearing that they don't play nice together.

Yeah galvanic corrosion does result from carbon and aluminum being in contact. Proper anodizing typically is sufficient barrier so that it doesn't occur.

 

[seanh]

Wouldn't the resin remedy the galvanic issue

 

[Chief_Rick]

The firearms world is chock full of potential customers who don't know shit from shinola about materials science (not even the most fundamental aspects) but are too afraid to ask because of their ego. They fail to spot these potential issues and instead of asking questions just buy the latest cool-guy shit they saw on instagram

How am I doing so far?

I've seen a lot of responses, on this forum, where "experts" reply back with things like "use the correct terminology" or "have you even tried to search" or "that's a stupid question".

 

[AirgunnerPCP]

Wouldn't the resin remedy the galvanic issue

It can. Another solution is to have a "resin rich" layer between the aluminum and the carbon. Assuming they didn't do that here because that's added weight and possibly a weaker part. Pretty much all you need to do is ensure the carbon itself is sufficiently insulated from the aluminum.

 

[Guthwine]

Would be interesting how a cross section of this stuff looks like. Steel is not only used because it is stiff and rigid, it is used because of its toughness. Stiff and rigid alone just means brittle in my mind. But I am always ready to learn something new.

 

[308pirate]

Would be interesting how a cross section of this stuff looks like. Steel is not only used because it is stiff and rigid, it is used because of its toughness. Stiff and rigid alone just means brittle in my mind. But I am always ready to learn something new.

It would be nice to see a simple mechanical properties sheet with things like yield strength, ultimate tensile strength, elongation at break, fracture toughness, etc........

It would allow the educated consumer to make an intelligent choice.

 

[308pirate]

I've seen a lot of responses, on this forum, where "experts" reply back with things like "use the correct terminology" or "have you even tried to search" or "that's a stupid question".

Spoon feeding becomes tiresome at some point.

 

[Chief_Rick]

Spoon feeding becomes tiresome at some point.

Then why reply at all?

With the traffic on this site, a post that goes unanswered will fall off pretty quick.

 

[gnochi]

If you have a 416R stainless action, a 7075-T6511 aluminum scope tube, and a 4” ring spacing, over the interval from -40degF to 140degF:

• The action has a thermal expansion coefficient of ~10 microns per meter per degC
• The action between the rings will want ~0.007” expansion
• The scope tube has a thermal expansion coefficient of ~23 microns per meter per degC
• The scope tube between the rings will want ~0.017” expansion
• The relative expansion is ~0.010” within this range
• If you put the rifle together at room temperature, you’re going to see about half that relative expansion, worst case
• Since the scope rings do not clamp along the entire length of the action and the scope, they’ll have a tendency to rock by a fraction of a degree to allow the scope and action to remain substantially straight
• If the scope and action were clamped together along their entire length, you’d end up with a mild banana, and the scope and rail would both be pointing in substantially the same direction
• If the scope and action were clamped on either side of something with a thermal expansion coefficient of 0um/m/degC, the scope and action would both deflect away from the intermediary widget, and therefore not be pointing substantially the same direction

As such, I see zero benefit to using a mount that has ~0um/m/degC thermal expansion coefficient; if anything I would want something more in the 16um/m/degC range to take up the difference (and therefore the action and scope staying substantially straight). Maybe Monel 400?

 

[RTH1800]

Also keep in mind that the insert is a “captured system.”

Where is it going to go? Is the small material mass going to expand enough to cause problems? Even if it thermally delaminates it will likely still hold the scope. Not ideal but not a deal breaker.

This will work eventually, even if some bugs need worked out.

 

[Meety Peety]

Hi,

For those that have actually not read the finer details, lol...

Sincerely,
Theis


----------

Hand laid in CNC cut precision molds and forged to what you see here.

At 5.29oz(30mm model) you get all weight savings with no sacrifices.

Using custom 17-4 stainless inserts (anchored in the base) and #8-36 alloy steel screws and mix that with almost no thermal expansion (6x less than aluminum) you can go from 0 degree environment to 100 degree or vice versa and know this mount will be exactly the same in any condition.

Alloy steel #10-32 screws and Allen nuts and two recoil lugs keeps the base securely planted.

The one piece body mixed with the forged carbon fiber creates the most rigid mount on the market. Nobody even comes close.

Because this is a very rigid material follow the special torque instructions in the box to prevent any damage to your new mount.

Each mount is hand inspected and tested before it leaves. Quality and knowing that I provided you with the best possible product is my goal.

Mile high lists a Spuhr SCP-3001 at 5.2 ounces, I imagine Nitghforce's "Ultra lite" options might fit within the same weight range.. I don't have either one in front of me to weigh, but it sounds like this weighs about the same as some of the existing (and proven) options on the market already? If that's the case, is the appeal of carbon fiber supposed to be rigidity? I'd be curious if anyone has a a confirmed weight on any of them..

 

[fdkay]

What is Forged Carbon Fiber? The Ultimate Guide To Forged Composites

Welcome to the ultimate guide to Forged Carbon aka Forged Carbon Fiber aka Forged Composites. We’ll take a deep dive into everything from what it is, how it’s different from standard carbon fiber, how much it costs, how it’s made, and then some. RELATED: How to Make Carbon Fiber from Scratch At...

carbonfibergear.com

 

[gnochi]

Is the small material mass going to expand enough to cause problems?

Not the slightest chance. Threaded inserts really don’t care about thermal expansion.

This will work eventually, even if some bugs need worked out.

It’ll probably work fine right now. It’s a great low-weight one-piece scope mount using the latest and greatest composite technology, which has had several years to mature and is more complicated to simulate than it is to manufacture.

That said:

1. Your scope mount may be the same no matter the temperature, but everything else will be different. You want to go with the flow, not stand your ground.
2. Carbon fiber composites have the same elasticity as aluminum. For the same weight they’re substantially stiffer than both aluminum and steel, but for the same geometry steel is ~3x better and aluminum is identical. (Stiffness is a function of geometry and elasticity.)
3. Carbon fiber composites can range from brittle to springy depending on layup, fiber geometry, and resin. A compression molded design like this is probably going to be fine.
4. Carbon fiber composites see incredibly high stress risers from surface defects. Rifle scope mounts aren’t loaded that heavily to begin with, but if you drop it on a rock it’s going to fail a lot more readily. That said, compression molded chopped prepreg very effectively limits how readily cracks and splintering progress.

 

[i.mcvick]

Not the slightest chance. Threaded inserts really don’t care about thermal expansion.



It’ll probably work fine right now. It’s a great low-weight one-piece scope mount using the latest and greatest composite technology, which has had several years to mature and is more complicated to simulate than it is to manufacture.

That said:

1. Your scope mount may be the same no matter the temperature, but everything else will be different. You want to go with the flow, not stand your ground.
2. Carbon fiber composites have the same elasticity as aluminum. For the same weight they’re substantially stiffer than both aluminum and steel, but for the same geometry steel is ~3x better and aluminum is identical. (Stiffness is a function of geometry and elasticity.)
3. Carbon fiber composites can range from brittle to springy depending on layup, fiber geometry, and resin. A compression molded design like this is probably going to be fine.
4. Carbon fiber composites see incredibly high stress risers from surface defects. Rifle scope mounts aren’t loaded that heavily to begin with, but if you drop it on a rock it’s going to fail a lot more readily. That said, compression molded chopped prepreg very effectively limits how readily cracks and splintering progress.

First time posting here I actually saw an order come through and it came from here so I decided to check it out. Appreciate that btw if you’re reading this.
my name is Ian McVicker and I actually started this venture thinking I was going to do hollow carbon mounts but that turned expensive real quick and the labor involved was a lot. So I retrofitted my old molds and made a few Mk1 mounts and knew exactly what I needed to do after that. I know the main thing is what if they crack, well during drops against harder objects the material actually chunks away more than cracks. I have cracked them in testing(holes in carbon are a b**ch to get to work proper). The thing what made me go forward into manufacturing is even over torqued ring caps without the washers that failed(hairline fracture) still held zero, same for when chunks of material were missing. Also I know all of this info is useless without proof so don’t get the pitchforks out just yet. I wanna do a series of tests on video for the public that addresses everyone’s concerns.

that being said everything breaks(we all have that one friend), I’ve seen scope mounts that cost more than mine break before they reached proper torque. If after 100 or 1000 get out into the public and we see a common failure I’ll hit it head on and also make it right with previous customers.

Lots of smart people on here that have already answered a lot of the questions. please take that article knowing they’re just trying to pump info out. I didn’t write it. Love all the comments even the negative ones yeah I love you too! But seriously though I take every concern into consideration and I love seeing it because it makes me want to add whatever it is into testing.

pumped to get to know you guys.
Ian

 

[MLS2GO]

Interesting for sure. Thanks for coming on here and giving the Forum more info.

 

[brianf]

from your reply, you might just fit in around here lol

you received a good amount of criticism and your first post was not personal or a attack, but more information

PS this site likes pictures..more pictures...more business

good luck on your venture

brian

 

[i.mcvick]

Interesting for sure. Thanks for coming on here and giving the Forum more info.

from your reply, you might just fit in around here lol

you received a good amount of criticism and your first post was not personal or a attack, but more information

PS this site likes pictures..more pictures...more business

good luck on your venture

brian

No problem, thank you guys I’ll try to keep up with stuff on here as much as possible!

Don’t you say nothin bout my photo skills my mom says I’m really good.

 

[Strykervet]

I'd really, REALLY like to see other things done with this, not really rings.

Like a pistol frame. It could shine there. Or a revolver. Holy shit, would this defeat a metal detector? You could build the Glock 15!

I know, I know, barrel liners. Still, you get my drift. Light pistols, no flexing plastic. Could be a Glock killer.

I guess they figure they can do rings they can do anything. But yeah, it's the very definition of a solution to no problem.

 

[i.mcvick]

I'd really, REALLY like to see other things done with this, not really rings.

Like a pistol frame. It could shine there. Or a revolver. Holy shit, would this defeat a metal detector? You could build the Glock 15!

I know, I know, barrel liners. Still, you get my drift. Light pistols, no flexing plastic. Could be a Glock killer.

I guess they figure they can do rings they can do anything. But yeah, it's the very definition of a solution to no problem.

I hear ya. One of things that I’d like to put in a video is a test of ring bolts and what it takes to vibrate one loose. I noticed that quite a few people run marks on their rings to know.
hopefully one of the mathematician big brains can lend me a hand in the technical side of this, but doesn’t aluminum stay bent after a point? I know I’ve had caps on previous mounts/rings settle before. I know there’s one company and it’s lost to me at the moment but they run a spring steel style base clamp. So wouldn’t a carbon fiber ring cap that has the stiffness keep bolts from potentially coming loose?
That thought has been with me from the get go as far as problem solving. I know I know loctite.

 

[gnochi]

I hear ya. One of things that I’d like to put in a video is a test of ring bolts and what it takes to vibrate one loose. I noticed that quite a few people run marks on their rings to know.
hopefully one of the mathematician big brains can lend me a hand in the technical side of this, but doesn’t aluminum stay bent after a point? I know I’ve had caps on previous mounts/rings settle before. I know there’s one company and it’s lost to me at the moment but they run a spring steel style base clamp. So wouldn’t a carbon fiber ring cap that has the stiffness keep bolts from potentially coming loose?
That thought has been with me from the get go as far as problem solving. I know I know loctite.

First, great to see you joining the forum.

Second:

• Solid materials can generally be categorized as “ductile” or “brittle”. Ductile materials have an elastic region where they spring back, a plastic region where they stay bent, and then they fracture. Brittle materials have an elastic region with spring back, and then they fracture.
• Aluminum and steel are both ductile, but aluminum doesn’t have very good cycle life so isn’t great for most applications where it’s explicitly acting as a spring. A properly torqued joint with a properly designed system won’t have any problems with either material.
• Carbon fiber is brittle, and composites made from it also tend to be brittle.
• I’m very glad to hear about the chunking failure modes for this scope mount; that’s about the best result you can expect from CFC.
• There are a few things going on with joint relaxation. First, when you’re torquing a bolt, the bolt is twisting and going into the threads. As it untwists over time or with vibration, the clamp load goes down. Also, you can take materials past their allowable temperature ranges, or the joint differential thermal expansion too far, and lose clamping because the bolt anneals or yields. Finally, as things are vibrating around, sometimes the bolt starts to untwist a bit, which gets much worse very quickly. In general, a joint that’s tight but not too tight, mechanical aids, or thread compound, will help limit the extent of this loosening.
• The best options I’ve ever seen to prevent loosening are Nord-Lock washers, and cross drilled joints with wire retention. Belleville spring washers - or other spring mechanisms - can help in some cases but are limited to extremely low clamp loads that are only suitable for electrical joints (without a giant stack of such washers). Every other washer type increases the likelihood of something going wrong.
• Barring that, or if you’re clamping a material that can’t take surface defects, yeah, go with loctite.

 

[i.mcvick]

First, great to see you joining the forum.

Second:

• Solid materials can generally be categorized as “ductile” or “brittle”. Ductile materials have an elastic region where they spring back, a plastic region where they stay bent, and then they fracture. Brittle materials have an elastic region with spring back, and then they fracture.
• Aluminum and steel are both ductile, but aluminum doesn’t have very good cycle life so isn’t great for most applications where it’s explicitly acting as a spring. A properly torqued joint with a properly designed system won’t have any problems with either material.
• Carbon fiber is brittle, and composites made from it also tend to be brittle.
• I’m very glad to hear about the chunking failure modes for this scope mount; that’s about the best result you can expect from CFC.
• There are a few things going on with joint relaxation. First, when you’re torquing a bolt, the bolt is twisting and going into the threads. As it untwists over time or with vibration, the clamp load goes down. Also, you can take materials past their allowable temperature ranges, or the joint differential thermal expansion too far, and lose clamping because the bolt anneals or yields. Finally, as things are vibrating around, sometimes the bolt starts to untwist a bit, which gets much worse very quickly. In general, a joint that’s tight but not too tight, mechanical aids, or thread compound, will help limit the extent of this loosening.
• The best options I’ve ever seen to prevent loosening are Nord-Lock washers, and cross drilled joints with wire retention. Belleville spring washers - or other spring mechanisms - can help in some cases but are limited to extremely low clamp loads that are only suitable for electrical joints (without a giant stack of such washers). Every other washer type increases the likelihood of something going wrong.
• Barring that, or if you’re clamping a material that can’t take surface defects, yeah, go with loctite.

Thanks for the solid info!

The clamping was one of the things that took the longest. Didn’t matter what I did unless I just bulked material around the holes. Sounds simple, I just didn’t want to use washers if I didn’t have to.
I know loctite is the easy and cost effective way, but I always like exploring other options.

thanks again

 

[stemikel]

So what type of discount do hide members get?

 

[i.mcvick]

So what type of discount do hide members get?

Idk. what do people typically do? Long running discounts or from time to time?

 

[loveha]

It can be both. As far as %, that depends on how much it cost to make and all that fancy overhead stuff businesses have to calculate to keep the lights on.

As a consumer, I'm happy if it covers shipping and maybe $20. Basically whatever the illusion is that makes it feel like I'm getting a deal lol.

 

[i.mcvick]

.

 

[i.mcvick]

.

 

[UpSideDown]

The amount of misunderstanding in this thread regarding forging, sintering, 3D printing, and composite lamination, really sends it home that most of the “experts” here don’t have a fucking clue what they’re talking about. “Forging” is an interesting term to use regarding carbon fiber. Let’s try not to fry too many brain cells understanding that point, and stop trying to say sintering is like gluing the outside of a block together.

Be right back, I’m going to patent the first forged received-rings-barrel monobloc assembly.

 

[stemikel]

How high are the rings? The website states that they are tall enough to clear most 50 mm objectives. What is the cant? What are the torque specifications?

 

[i.mcvick]

How high are the rings? The website states that they are tall enough to clear most 50 mm objectives. What is the cant? What are the torque specifications?

You’d need to measure the OD of the bell. Or maybe that’s what they meant. O moa and there’s measurements on my website but they are 30mm to center. If there’s specific heights wanted post em up. More likely it is to be the next height I make if you’re posting it.
I actually don’t know if I have the torque on my website, I send an info card with every mount though. 15-17in-lbs rings and 25in-lbs base.

 

[CodeMonkey]

Hello @i.mcvick and thanks for joining and representing your company.

I believe the ring height spec being requested is the rail surface to ring centerline height, or alternatively the rail surface to ring saddle height. Either one can be calculated from the other.

That actually brings up another question concerning design. Does this mount confirm to the MIL-STD 1913 spec (picatinny rail) or the STANAG 4694 (NATO rail) spec. It does make a tiny amount of difference because of the difference in the datum surfaces, and some rail manufacturers may conform to one or the other but not both.

 

[i.mcvick]

Hello @i.mcvick and thanks for joining and representing your company.

I believe the ring height spec being requested is the rail surface to ring centerline height, or alternatively the rail surface to ring saddle height. Either one can be calculated from the other.

That actually brings up another question concerning design. Does this mount confirm to the MIL-STD 1913 spec (picatinny rail) or the STANAG 4694 (NATO rail) spec. It does make a tiny amount of difference because of the difference in the datum surfaces, and some rail manufacturers may conform to one or the other but not both.

Hey, yeah it is 30mm to centerline height I’ll post some better measurements this week, that include rail to saddle as well.

it was built on MIL-STD 1913.

 

[seanh]

Maybe have rings and base separate with different height spacers. The spacers could be standard parallel or ground to whatever angle you need

 

[viking78]

What are the torq specs?
Normally every scope has theyr own, for a different model that factory recomment to use.
Like Vortex Razor it was something like 2 Nm, and Kahles K624 it was 2.3Nm.
Wondering that you were writed, that use the torque note coming in the box.
Over torq will damage the scope, or cause the parallax get jammed.
Too loose, scope wont stay still on the mount.
Wicked looking mounts you are do Mr mcvick.

 

[LeftyJason]

What are the torq specs?
Normally every scope has theyr own, for a different model that factory recomment to use.
Like Vortex Razor it was something like 2 Nm, and Kahles K624 it was 2.3Nm.
Wondering that you were writed, that use the torque note coming in the box.
Over torq will damage the scope, or cause the parallax get jammed.
Too loose, scope wont stay still on the mount.
Wicked looking mounts you are do Mr mcvick.

Converting from post 93. 1.7 - 1.9nm rings. 2.8nm for the base.

 

[Lucreau]

Anyone end up getting one of these?

 

[Secant]

I really wish folks would stop using the word "test" when they really mean "f*ck around".

A test is something that is standardized and can be repeatable by a third party. It also should be well thought out to mimic or simulate real world operations of the product.

Beating, dragging, throwing, setting on fire, dunking in water and all the other internet nonsense means nothing and appeals to only the lowest common denominator that's too dumb to understand what's going on. Total waste of time to do any of that, film it, watch it, discuss it, etc.

I'm gonna get a lot of mileage from that gif.....

 

[stemikel]

That a waste of time.

 

[koshkin]

Still, you have to give the company credit. They came on here. They are behaving like adults. Noone got their panties in a wad due to early criticism. I do not like all these destruction test videos, but they often do well on Youtube with some crosslinking, so there is a reason for them.

Personally, I was going to ignore this mount, but given that the company guys behind it appear to be stand up people, I'll add it to the list of things I want to look at.

I will be publishing a video on scope mounts in the next few days, finally, but I doubt I can get this mount in there. Maybe for the next revision.

ILya