User Panel
Posted: 4/13/2014 8:16:41 AM EDT
I'll start by saying I am not a fan of Mark LaRue, and he is not a fan of me...
...but when I want the best gear, I set emotions aside and buy it. Such as his index clips, and the solid pricing he has on VTAC slings with the QD already on them. The LT104 is a mount I am considering, because: ...small footprint of the levers, split rings (vertical), and light weight. During my research of it, I have found numerous posts on other forums about "footprint" and all sorts of things. I have found unaffiliated articles that indicate that if you bang things around a bit, they DO shift unless cranked down until no-longer QD. Even found reference to military testing in 2012 that indicated failure due to very small footprint, compared to other mounts. Magpul precision video was also referenced. Basically, a bunch of dirt saying the mount shifts around fore-aft on the rail. So, setting all like/dislike/emotions aside for a minute, what's the merit of these claims? What's going on here? I have also seen rave reviews, and one YouTube video by "Lonewolf" (I am sure you can Google it) that indicates that the LaRue mount has "perfect RTZ" and is more than good to go. How would I use it? Tighten it down to where I can open it with my manhands without using molle webbing or any other "levering" tool to pry it open, and then paint a witness mark across the adjustment nut. A Kahles K16i will live in it. Anyway, I came here looking for some information supporting the performance of what looks like the best candidate for my project. Are there reviews/references/tests which have been conducted by a 3rd party that show rough-handling and high round-counts won't phase the mount if used properly? If so, I'd like to see them. Not mud-slinging or conjecture, because we all know that everyone is selling something and egos and facts are often too big to fit in the same room. |
|
My PH 5-25 sits in an LT120 on my .308 700. I have never had an issue with the mount. Next time I am at the range I will do some 5 round groups where I pull it off in between each shot and post the results.
|
|
Every Larue mount I've owned would move fore-aft unless it was cranked down so hard that it would gouge the fuck out of the rail.
With that said, the fore-aft movement never caused a noticeable change in zero. Disclaimer: I'm not talking about shooting .25" groups at 100 meters with a 6mmBR rifle. |
|
Basically I look at it this way: Something will eventually give way with enough commotion to the system. Eventually the optics will break, the barrel with loosen or the the mount will give, if you put the system through enough torture. I just want a mount that wont be the weakest link far before the other things start to fail. Ideally everything would break at the same time and that time would be never.
|
|
What was referenced in the Magpul video?
I have owned 2 LT-104s as well as a 751 and M68 aimpoint mounts. They have all held up just fine and returned to zero for me. I did not put any of them through a Daniel Defense torture test though. |
|
Quoted:
What was referenced in the Magpul video? I have owned 2 LT-104s as well as a 751 and M68 aimpoint mounts. They have all held up just fine and returned to zero for me. I did not put any of them through a Daniel Defense torture test though. View Quote From what I understand, the scope removal drill was a result of a LaRue mount that came loose. Allegedly. |
|
I'm not a Larue fan-boi by any means. I'm simply a fan of quality kit (and Larue makes some damn fine gear). I've owned a couple 30mm scope mounts (LT-104, and LT-139) and a couple Aimpoint mounts (LT-659 and LT-660). I've never had a single problem with a Larue mount that was adjusted as per Larue's instructions. Now, I haven't been abusive to any of my rifles, I don't beat them up, bang them around, or throw them down the driveway; but in normal usage dragging them through the woods, around the farm, in the truck, or on the ATV I've never had a rifle loose zero.
I can certainly see if I took a fucking sledge hammer to a QD mount, or dropped it out of a helicopter, or ran it over...in other words abused my kit; how it could fail. ETA - Oh, and I currently am using one scope on three rifles by having the zero adjustments for each written down. I can switch my scope from rifle to rifle back and forth, make the pre-calculated adjustments and be dead on no matter how many times I mount and unmount it. |
|
Quoted:
ETA - Give me an order number so I can look to see what exactly "every LaRue mount I've owned" comprises of. These guys, renowned for their need for ruggedized kit, tested the livin' sh*t out of all sorts of LaRue mount models at the very sandy White Sands Missile Range, for all sorts of different high-dollar optics, lasers, Night vision, thermals, you name it, before mounting up and heading through the wire ... http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y44/mfingar/LT%20Ads/SEMPER-FI-Ad.jpg View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Every Larue mount I've owned would move fore-aft unless it was cranked down so hard that it would gouge the fuck out of the rail. With that said, the fore-aft movement never caused a noticeable change in zero. Disclaimer: I'm not talking about shooting .25" groups at 100 meters with a 6mmBR rifle. ETA - Give me an order number so I can look to see what exactly "every LaRue mount I've owned" comprises of. These guys, renowned for their need for ruggedized kit, tested the livin' sh*t out of all sorts of LaRue mount models at the very sandy White Sands Missile Range, for all sorts of different high-dollar optics, lasers, Night vision, thermals, you name it, before mounting up and heading through the wire ... http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y44/mfingar/LT%20Ads/SEMPER-FI-Ad.jpg When was this test done and was adm, bobro, etc around? |
|
I was talked into the ADM mount on my Atlas bipod bought directly from the Atlas booth at Shot a year back. Locks up securely, but I damn near tore a fingernail off trying to remove it from the rail. Pulled the damn thing off and ordered the LaRue adapter that I had wanted on it in the first place. Have used ADM, Swan and LaRue - happiest with the LaRue
I have the mounts on two rifles, that have been used pretty hard by myself and others in my dept. All have been impressed and have not had an issue with shift or looseness. Just my .02 cents, but seems like you already have a preconceived notion about them already. |
|
Quoted:
When was this test done and was adm, bobro, etc around? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
ETA - Give me an order number so I can look to see what exactly "every LaRue mount I've owned" comprises of. These guys, renowned for their need for ruggedized kit, tested the livin' sh*t out of all sorts of LaRue mount models at the very sandy White Sands Missile Range, for all sorts of different high-dollar optics, lasers, Night vision, thermals, you name it, before mounting up and heading through the wire ... http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y44/mfingar/LT%20Ads/SEMPER-FI-Ad.jpg When was this test done and was adm, bobro, etc around? Google will answer all those questions for you. FYI, Bobro has been in the market since 1999 (15y) and ADM the same. Here is an example of just the M14 selection program. There have been 8 variations of the M14 EBR since 2005, each going through selection. Out of those 8 variations of the weapons platform Larue, SEI, Sage, KAC, and NSWC were the companies who won contracts for mounts. Bobro has 0, and ADM has 0. Larue is providing 4 mounts, KAC 5 mounts, Sage 3 mounts, SEI 2 mounts and NSWC 1 mount. Again, this is just one weapons platform that has gone through 8 variations since Bobro has been on the market. A few extra hours of google time and some reading you can dig up even more data. Larue provides a high volume of mounts for various .MIL branches. LEO contracts are a bit more difficult to research. ETA - I'm silly, I forgot the link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mk_14_Enhanced_Battle_Rifle |
|
Quoted:
Google will answer all those questions for you. FYI, Bobro has been in the market since 1999 (15y) and ADM the same. Here is an example of just the M14 selection program. There have been 8 variations of the M14 EBR since 2005, each going through selection. Out of those 8 variations of the weapons platform Larue, SEI, Sage, KAC, and NSWC were the companies who won contracts for mounts. Bobro has 0, and ADM has 0. Larue is providing 4 mounts, KAC 5 mounts, Sage 3 mounts, SEI 2 mounts and NSWC 1 mount. Again, this is just one weapons platform that has gone through 8 variations since Bobro has been on the market. A few extra hours of google time and some reading you can dig up even more data. Larue provides a high volume of mounts for various .MIL branches. LEO contracts are a bit more difficult to research. ETA - I'm silly, I forgot the link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mk_14_Enhanced_Battle_Rifle View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
ETA - Give me an order number so I can look to see what exactly "every LaRue mount I've owned" comprises of. These guys, renowned for their need for ruggedized kit, tested the livin' sh*t out of all sorts of LaRue mount models at the very sandy White Sands Missile Range, for all sorts of different high-dollar optics, lasers, Night vision, thermals, you name it, before mounting up and heading through the wire ... http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y44/mfingar/LT%20Ads/SEMPER-FI-Ad.jpg When was this test done and was adm, bobro, etc around? Google will answer all those questions for you. FYI, Bobro has been in the market since 1999 (15y) and ADM the same. Here is an example of just the M14 selection program. There have been 8 variations of the M14 EBR since 2005, each going through selection. Out of those 8 variations of the weapons platform Larue, SEI, Sage, KAC, and NSWC were the companies who won contracts for mounts. Bobro has 0, and ADM has 0. Larue is providing 4 mounts, KAC 5 mounts, Sage 3 mounts, SEI 2 mounts and NSWC 1 mount. Again, this is just one weapons platform that has gone through 8 variations since Bobro has been on the market. A few extra hours of google time and some reading you can dig up even more data. Larue provides a high volume of mounts for various .MIL branches. LEO contracts are a bit more difficult to research. ETA - I'm silly, I forgot the link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mk_14_Enhanced_Battle_Rifle Great info! Is anyone contracted for the SCAR 17? |
|
Regarding mounts moving for and aft. I must say, I don't know how. The lug should be against the rail. But I figure I should inquire regardless. Also, as to the instructions for tightening rings, they advise 30% more torque than the maximum that Kahles advises. Why? Kahles=$2600. Lt104=$200. I'm doing what Kahles says, but would at least like clarification on the larue instructions.
I do know larue mounts move under recoil, but it's only forward. Then the lug and 1913 slot are mated and that's it. It almost seems intentional that forward movement is allowed. |
|
You can tell what someone is fishing for by looking at their bait and technique.
|
|
Quoted:
Regarding mounts moving for and aft. I must say, I don't know how. The lug should be against the rail. But I figure I should inquire regardless. Also, as to the instructions for tightening rings, they advise 30% more torque than the maximum that Kahles advises. Why? Kahles=$2600. Lt104=$200. I'm doing what Kahles says, but would at least like clarification on the larue instructions. I do know larue mounts move under recoil, but it's only forward. Then the lug and 1913 slot are mated and that's it. It almost seems intentional that forward movement is allowed. View Quote How did you test how the mount moves under recoil? The barrel moved too under recoil. How do you stop that? |
|
Quoted:
How did you test how the mount moves under recoil? The barrel moved too under recoil. How do you stop that? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Regarding mounts moving for and aft. I must say, I don't know how. The lug should be against the rail. But I figure I should inquire regardless. Also, as to the instructions for tightening rings, they advise 30% more torque than the maximum that Kahles advises. Why? Kahles=$2600. Lt104=$200. I'm doing what Kahles says, but would at least like clarification on the larue instructions. I do know larue mounts move under recoil, but it's only forward. Then the lug and 1913 slot are mated and that's it. It almost seems intentional that forward movement is allowed. How did you test how the mount moves under recoil? The barrel moved too under recoil. How do you stop that? Most mounts move forward. It's normal. This is why the rail has slots and mounts have lugs. What I find hard to believe is mounts moving the other direction, as some have stated. What am I fishing for? Data like the M14 data. Stuff like that. Something quantifiable. |
|
LaRue:
Can you comment more on what this giant sybian machine is accomplishing in this test? (how long was it run, was the location of the adjustment nuts for the tension changed due to it, how was the usefulness of the test concluded?) http://www.recoilweb.com/larue-tactical-shake-machine-video-18657.html |
|
Quoted:
What am I fishing for? Data like the M14 data. Stuff like that. Something quantifiable. View Quote Then lets assume you don't know how to fish. I'll teach you how to fish instead of pulling fish from the sea and giving it to you like I did with the M14 data. First you google what military weapons systems utilize Larue mounts. Once you get that list, start googling individual weapon systems selection criteria. Then you will generally see when the selection occurred, and what competitors submitted competing products against Larue. Then once you have some quantifiable data based on your own research, you can bring it to a discussion forum and use that data to begin a well informed open discussion on the product and issue at hand. |
|
Quoted:
Then lets assume you don't know how to fish. I'll teach you how to fish instead of pulling fish from the sea and giving it to you like I did with the M14 data. First you google what military weapons systems utilize Larue mounts. Once you get that list, start googling individual weapon systems selection criteria. Then you will generally see when the selection occurred, and what competitors submitted competing products against Larue. Then once you have some quantifiable data based on your own research, you can bring it to a discussion forum and use that data to begin a well informed open discussion on the product and issue at hand. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
What am I fishing for? Data like the M14 data. Stuff like that. Something quantifiable. Then lets assume you don't know how to fish. I'll teach you how to fish instead of pulling fish from the sea and giving it to you like I did with the M14 data. First you google what military weapons systems utilize Larue mounts. Once you get that list, start googling individual weapon systems selection criteria. Then you will generally see when the selection occurred, and what competitors submitted competing products against Larue. Then once you have some quantifiable data based on your own research, you can bring it to a discussion forum and use that data to begin a well informed open discussion on the product and issue at hand. https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=9ce03348381b1d1a0b0ad21972752dc0&_cview=0 Sadly, IVL's are no-longer public, making it a poor datapool, as it's possible that the LT products ran uncontested (although unlikely), also it does not say on what merit the contract was awarded. The only recent thing I have seen is the decision to remove LaRue from the SOCOM ECOS-O contract and find another source for mounting to T1. Sadly, completely meaningless to me. Without FULLY UNDERSTANDING the criteria and reasoning for contract awarding, it's pointless. For example, Hi-point may beat Glock for a $20,000 SOCOM contract. Why? Oh, to create exploding pistols full of C4 to "sneak" to Teri Taliban. I mean, we have no CLUE the criteria and it's a real pain to hunt down, and I am not even sure it CAN be hunted down by civilian resources. |
|
|
I have used both the LT-104 and the LT-111 on my Troy SASS equipped M-1A (looking like an LT-112 is in my future) and on my 16" 7.62 TOBR. No issues at all with the scope mounts!!!!!! I think the key to the moving mounts was the comment about it moving forward until the 1913 lug was engaged..... That should have been a key part of the mounting process. If the lug isn't in the 1913 slot, you haven't mounted it correctly, and it will move.... Mount it with the lug in the 1913 slot and it will not move, and your zero will be repeatable... The only issue I have had with my zero changing has been a screw came loose on the rear of the Troy chassis...... Re-locktited the screw and tightened it, all is well in my world....
|
|
Once you have a good resource located like the FBO.GOV site you just linked to you can utilize google's site search parameters to drill through that site:
Larue Site:fbo.gov Now you can peruse all items on FBO.GOV related to Larue Tactical. The information you are looking for isn't easy to get to (.gov transparency my ass) but it is possible to get enough data to make an educated deduction as to what other products Larue has been compared to by professionals. You may not get the details of the test procedures. But is that a requirement? Do you need to know Jeff Gordan won the race by 2sec, or is the only thing that matters is Jeff Gordan won the race? |
|
Quoted:
I have used both the LT-104 and the LT-111 on my Troy SASS equipped M-1A (looking like an LT-112 is in my future) and on my 16" 7.62 TOBR. No issues at all with the scope mounts!!!!!! I think the key to the moving mounts was the comment about it moving forward until the 1913 lug was engaged..... That should have been a key part of the mounting process. If the lug isn't in the 1913 slot, you haven't mounted it correctly, and it will move.... Mount it with the lug in the 1913 slot and it will not move, and your zero will be repeatable... The only issue I have had with my zero changing has been a screw came loose on the rear of the Troy chassis...... Re-locktited the screw and tightened it, all is well in my world.... View Quote Yes. Which leads to the next question...is it DESIGNED to move? One would think that it actually is. Evidence: -Microscopic contact area (figurative). -Acknowledgement of need to place against the 1913 rail. In which case, the next quesiton is: Are these mounts designed to move forward under recoil, but be attached firmly enough to withstand counter-recoil, be banged around and knocked against dump buckets, the ground, other gear, etc. and not shift BACKWARD from the 1913 lug? In that case, I completely understand the system and agree that contact area...in this case...could not be improved upon, and that Bobro/ADM/Others go about RTZ in a completely different manner, and should not be directly compared to LaRue except in end-result. Thoughts? |
|
Quoted:
Once you have a good resource located like the FBO.GOV site you just linked to you can utilize google's site search parameters to drill through that site: Larue Site:fbo.gov Now you can peruse all items on FBO.GOV related to Larue Tactical. The information you are looking for isn't easy to get to (.gov transparency my ass) but it is possible to get enough data to make an educated deduction as to what other products Larue has been compared to by professionals. You may not get the details of the test procedures. But is that a requirement? Do you need to know Jeff Gordan won the race by 2sec, or is the only thing that matters is Jeff Gordan won the race? View Quote FBO took the vendors list off recently. I remember when I was looking at the BCG PiP they still had it on there and I saw who all submitted what. I miss that :( One thing of note: I can find only 1 award to LaRue Tactical for a mount to a precision optic of higher magnification than 4X in a sea of awards to SAGE, SEI, and CRANE sourced mounts. More of note: http://profiles.smartprocure.us/organization/larue-tactical |
|
Quoted: Every Larue mount I've owned would move fore-aft unless it was cranked down so hard that it would gouge the fuck out of the rail. With that said, the fore-aft movement never caused a noticeable change in zero. Disclaimer: I'm not talking about shooting .25" groups at 100 meters with a 6mmBR rifle. View Quote As a preface I have ADM and Larue mounts. I like them both, if I had to nit pick, personally when adjusted properly, I feel the Larue are easier to remove than the ADM. I have never had a Larue mount that moved fore and aft that was adjusted correctly. I do not have any gouged rails. None of the Larue mounts I use have "slide marks" on the underside when removed, indicating movement when shooting. I do shoot .25" groups at 100 meters with my Larue 308 rifles. I do shoot orange and grapefruit sized targets beyond 700 yards over and over again with consistency. The Larue mount wearing rifles I shoot, hold man torso sized groups out too and including distances of 1760 yards. I am not referencing these as boisterous feats of marksmanship. A lot of shooters are capable of this level of shooting with practice, knowledge and the right rifle set up. Rifles on the other hand, very few rifles, are capable of shooting at this level with any consistency. I reference these instances because rifle set ups that are capable of exhibiting consistent long range accuracy at this level do not have flaws in their set up. Number one, rifles capable of this accuracy do not have mounts that move. As I said in the beginning I like ADM as well. I have never had an ADM mount that moved either. I do think they are harder to remove when adjusted properly. The ADM are easer to adjust as you do not need tools to adjust them but its a one time set up, not something you would typically need to change in the field. I buy Larue mounts because they have proven to me, over and over again, that they are rock solid. If something is not good or fails I am going to say,"I had an issue with that product". I think Larue builds, arguably, some of the best rifles and products available, but if I found in my shooting that there was a failure of a product or sub standard product, I am not going to bullshit someone about it. |
|
Quoted:
LaRue: Can you comment more on what this giant sybian machine is accomplishing in this test? (how long was it run, was the location of the adjustment nuts for the tension changed due to it, how was the usefulness of the test concluded?) http://www.recoilweb.com/larue-tactical-shake-machine-video-18657.html View Quote There are numerous in-house tactics we employ that are not publicly discussed. |
|
Quoted:
There are numerous in-house tactics we employ that are not publicly discussed. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
LaRue: Can you comment more on what this giant sybian machine is accomplishing in this test? (how long was it run, was the location of the adjustment nuts for the tension changed due to it, how was the usefulness of the test concluded?) http://www.recoilweb.com/larue-tactical-shake-machine-video-18657.html There are numerous in-house tactics we employ that are not publicly discussed. Fair enough. I mean, shaking the snot out of it begs some sort of explanation, though, since it was seen fit to make a video for public consumption. Do you test movement on the rail, I mean, what is gained? I'm not looking to built an LT mount in my kitchen, or asking for your TDP. Just curious what the point of that was? |
|
Quoted:
As a preface I have ADM and Larue mounts. I like them both, if I had to nit pick, personally when adjusted properly, I feel the Larue are easier to remove than the ADM. I have never had a Larue mount that moved fore and aft that was adjusted correctly. I do not have any gouged rails. None of the Larue mounts I use have "slide marks" on the underside when removed, indicating movement when shooting. I do shoot .25" groups at 100 meters with my Larue 308 rifles. I do shoot orange and grapefruit sized targets beyond 700 yards over and over again with consistency. The Larue mount wearing rifles I shoot, hold man torso sized groups out too and including distances of 1760 yards. I am not referencing these as boisterous feats of marksmanship. A lot of shooters are capable of this level of shooting with practice, knowledge and the right rifle set up. Rifles on the other hand, very few rifles, are capable of shooting at this level with any consistency. I reference these instances because rifle set ups that are capable of exhibiting consistent long range accuracy at this level do not have flaws in their set up. Number one, rifles capable of this accuracy do not have mounts that move. SOLID! Have you removed and replaced the mount? What zero-shift did you see? How often do you remove/replace to verify this? As I said in the beginning I like ADM as well. I have never had an ADM mount that moved either. I do think they are harder to remove when adjusted properly. The ADM are easer to adjust as you do not need tools to adjust them but its a one time set up, not something you would typically need to change in the field. I buy Larue mounts because they have proven to me, over and over again, that they are rock solid. If something is not good or fails I am going to say,"I had an issue with that product". I think Larue builds, arguably, some of the best rifles and products available, but if I found in my shooting that there was a failure of a product or sub standard product, I am not going to bullshit someone about it. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Every Larue mount I've owned would move fore-aft unless it was cranked down so hard that it would gouge the fuck out of the rail. With that said, the fore-aft movement never caused a noticeable change in zero. Disclaimer: I'm not talking about shooting .25" groups at 100 meters with a 6mmBR rifle. SOLID! Have you removed and replaced the mount? What zero-shift did you see? How often do you remove/replace to verify this? As I said in the beginning I like ADM as well. I have never had an ADM mount that moved either. I do think they are harder to remove when adjusted properly. The ADM are easer to adjust as you do not need tools to adjust them but its a one time set up, not something you would typically need to change in the field. I buy Larue mounts because they have proven to me, over and over again, that they are rock solid. If something is not good or fails I am going to say,"I had an issue with that product". I think Larue builds, arguably, some of the best rifles and products available, but if I found in my shooting that there was a failure of a product or sub standard product, I am not going to bullshit someone about it. Thank-you. Good read! |
|
I rarely remove the high powered optics on these rifles. So I cannot say that they return to Zero or too what extent that they do with certainty. I can say, without hesitation, that the mounts DO NOT MOVE from shot to shot. I can and will shoot a sample sometime this week, if the wind cooperates, 5 shot groups removing the scope after every shot and see what type of movement is exhibited. I do expect that there will be movement present when the scope is removed and replaced. My apologies if my first post was misunderstood. My point was that a properly adjusted Larue mount does not move from shot to shot. I am as comfortable using a Larue mount on my precision rifles as I am using bolt on nightforce rings. The aimpoint mounts I remove all the time, typically every shooting session at the range, with no adverse or noticeable change in zero. That said a half moa change on a red dot at 100 yards would be hard to notice. I can say that if there is any change in the zero of these mounts I have not seen tangible evidence. |
|
Quoted:
I rarely remove the high powered optics on these rifles. So I cannot say that they return to Zero or too what extent that they do with certainty. I can say, without hesitation, that the mounts DO NOT MOVE from shot to shot. I can and will shoot a sample sometime this week, if the wind cooperates, 5 shot groups removing the scope after every shot and see what type of movement is exhibited. I do expect that there will be movement present when the scope is removed and replaced. My apologies if my first post was misunderstood. My point was that a properly adjusted Larue mount does not move from shot to shot. I am as comfortable using a Larue mount on my precision rifles as I am using bolt on nightforce rings. The aimpoint mounts I remove all the time, typically every shooting session at the range, with no adverse or noticeable change in zero. That said a half moa change on a red dot at 100 yards would be hard to notice. I can say that if there is any change in the zero of these mounts I have not seen tangible evidence. View Quote Thanks! I am very interested to see your test results! |
|
Quoted:
Did I miss the low light discussion? View Quote Lowlight is a moderator on another forum which constantly touts a large "contact patch" for the clamping mechanism as the end-all, be-all for a precision mount, and uses the LaRue mount as an example of the opposite end of the spectrum. From what I am seeing, the LT mounts are MADE TO MOVE (forward only) under recoil, and then mate with the 1913 slot and stop. That is my impression, anyway. As such, the contact patch and force are as large as they need to be, if correct. |
|
Why are people not moving the mount all the way forward when attaching it? It does not move forward under recoil if it's already as far forward as it can be.... I would do that when mounting anything to a rail like that.
|
|
Quoted:
Lowlight is a moderator on another forum which constantly touts a large "contact patch" for the clamping mechanism as the end-all, be-all for a precision mount, and uses the LaRue mount as an example of the opposite end of the spectrum. From what I am seeing, the LT mounts are MADE TO MOVE (forward only) under recoil, and then mate with the 1913 slot and stop. That is my impression, anyway. As such, the contact patch and force are as large as they need to be, if correct. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Did I miss the low light discussion? Lowlight is a moderator on another forum which constantly touts a large "contact patch" for the clamping mechanism as the end-all, be-all for a precision mount, and uses the LaRue mount as an example of the opposite end of the spectrum. From what I am seeing, the LT mounts are MADE TO MOVE (forward only) under recoil, and then mate with the 1913 slot and stop. That is my impression, anyway. As such, the contact patch and force are as large as they need to be, if correct. Pretty sure most here know about Frank. Here is the answer to your question. Buy one and try it, or find someone who will let you use theirs. If it meets your needs great, if it doesn't you should be able to sell it with minimal loss. And, for your troubles you will be armed with the first hand knowledge of which you seek. I am starting to get the impression that a Hidester is trying to stir the pot however... |
|
Quoted:
Why are people not moving the mount all the way forward when attaching it? It does not move forward under recoil if it's already as far forward as it can be.... I would do that when mounting anything to a rail like that. View Quote GASP! Blasphemy! You are telling people to *read the instructions* and follow Mark Larue's advice on how to use the product he created? We all know that great men throw away the instructions and figure shit out themselves through trial and error...and if they incur more errors in their trial they blame the product, not their arrogance. |
|
Quoted:
Lowlight is a moderator on another forum which constantly touts a large "contact patch" for the clamping mechanism as the end-all, be-all for a precision mount, and uses the LaRue mount as an example of the opposite end of the spectrum. From what I am seeing, the LT mounts are MADE TO MOVE (forward only) under recoil, and then mate with the 1913 slot and stop. That is my impression, anyway. As such, the contact patch and force are as large as they need to be, if correct. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Did I miss the low light discussion? Lowlight is a moderator on another forum which constantly touts a large "contact patch" for the clamping mechanism as the end-all, be-all for a precision mount, and uses the LaRue mount as an example of the opposite end of the spectrum. From what I am seeing, the LT mounts are MADE TO MOVE (forward only) under recoil, and then mate with the 1913 slot and stop. That is my impression, anyway. As such, the contact patch and force are as large as they need to be, if correct. Is he some sort of engineer? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Did I miss the low light discussion? Lowlight is a moderator on another forum which constantly touts a large "contact patch" for the clamping mechanism as the end-all, be-all for a precision mount, and uses the LaRue mount as an example of the opposite end of the spectrum. From what I am seeing, the LT mounts are MADE TO MOVE (forward only) under recoil, and then mate with the 1913 slot and stop. That is my impression, anyway. As such, the contact patch and force are as large as they need to be, if correct. Is he some sort of engineer? I would call him many things. Engineer is not one of them... |
|
Quoted:
I would call him many things. Engineer is not one of them... View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Did I miss the low light discussion? Lowlight is a moderator on another forum which constantly touts a large "contact patch" for the clamping mechanism as the end-all, be-all for a precision mount, and uses the LaRue mount as an example of the opposite end of the spectrum. From what I am seeing, the LT mounts are MADE TO MOVE (forward only) under recoil, and then mate with the 1913 slot and stop. That is my impression, anyway. As such, the contact patch and force are as large as they need to be, if correct. Is he some sort of engineer? I would call him many things. Engineer is not one of them... Simply being an "Engineer" is not all it's cracked up to be. I work in manufacturing (stamping, forming, laser, etc...) and deal with "engineers" daily. The vast majority need to get out of their CAD programs and back to high school mechanical drawing class. Maybe even learn a thing a or two about how something is made, rather than how it looks on that beautiful 24" widescreen. A.W.D. |
|
Quoted:
Simply being an "Engineer" is not all it's cracked up to be. I work in manufacturing (stamping, forming, laser, etc...) and deal with "engineers" daily. The vast majority need to get out of their CAD programs and back to high school mechanical drawing class. Maybe even learn a thing a or two about how something is made, rather than how it looks on that beautiful 24" widescreen. A.W.D. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Did I miss the low light discussion? Lowlight is a moderator on another forum which constantly touts a large "contact patch" for the clamping mechanism as the end-all, be-all for a precision mount, and uses the LaRue mount as an example of the opposite end of the spectrum. From what I am seeing, the LT mounts are MADE TO MOVE (forward only) under recoil, and then mate with the 1913 slot and stop. That is my impression, anyway. As such, the contact patch and force are as large as they need to be, if correct. Is he some sort of engineer? I would call him many things. Engineer is not one of them... Simply being an "Engineer" is not all it's cracked up to be. I work in manufacturing (stamping, forming, laser, etc...) and deal with "engineers" daily. The vast majority need to get out of their CAD programs and back to high school mechanical drawing class. Maybe even learn a thing a or two about how something is made, rather than how it looks on that beautiful 24" widescreen. A.W.D. My comment was based more on the fact that I do not think very highly of him and could think of many choice words to describe him. It wasn't intended to put down or compliment engineers at all actually. |
|
Any time you have an individual analyzing/comparing things there is a tendency to get hung up on details that sometimes don't matter. When these types of things start impacting your decision making ability that's when you encounter issues. There is even a term for the situation:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analysis_paralysis Analysis paralysis or paralysis of analysis is an anti-pattern, the state of over-analyzing (or over-thinking) a situation so that a decision or action is never taken, in effect paralyzing the outcome. View Quote |
|
12_guage: Thanks for starting this thread, as I also had some questions after reading some things here and there about how much better it is to have a mount engage a larger surface area on the rail in order to prevent any movement. I also wanna say that I own two LaRue mounts (LT129 and a SPR-E LT139), so, obviously, I'm just curious as to whether some of the things I have read have any merit.
|
|
Quoted:
12_guage: Thanks for starting this thread, as I also had some questions after reading some things here and there about how much better it is to have a mount engage a larger surface area on the rail in order to prevent any movement. I also wanna say that I own two LaRue mounts (LT129 and a SPR-E LT139), so, obviously, I'm just curious as to whether some of the things I have read have any merit. View Quote This was exactly my point and what I'm hoping for. |
|
A few data points ...
- I personally have over a dozen LT QD Mounts on small (red dot, 1-4x, 2.5-10x) and large (NF BEAST, ATACR and NXS) glass mounted on my pistol fed carbines (9, 40, 45), AR frames (5.56, 300Blk, 7.62, 458 SOCOM) all the way up to my ULR Rifles (338 Edge +P & LM) ... I've also used them on team issued 50 and 20MM gear ... - When properly adjusted, I've never had any of them shift, slide or cause any damage to any rail. - I've done numerous swapping of glass in and out of the bag and I'm well inside the expected .5 MOA shift Not sure if that's what you were looking for but figured I'd make sure ya'll understand what these really do in the real world. |
|
Quoted:
Simply being an "Engineer" is not all it's cracked up to be. I work in manufacturing (stamping, forming, laser, etc...) and deal with "engineers" daily. The vast majority need to get out of their CAD programs and back to high school mechanical drawing class. Maybe even learn a thing a or two about how something is made, rather than how it looks on that beautiful 24" widescreen. A.W.D. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Did I miss the low light discussion? Lowlight is a moderator on another forum which constantly touts a large "contact patch" for the clamping mechanism as the end-all, be-all for a precision mount, and uses the LaRue mount as an example of the opposite end of the spectrum. From what I am seeing, the LT mounts are MADE TO MOVE (forward only) under recoil, and then mate with the 1913 slot and stop. That is my impression, anyway. As such, the contact patch and force are as large as they need to be, if correct. Is he some sort of engineer? I would call him many things. Engineer is not one of them... Simply being an "Engineer" is not all it's cracked up to be. I work in manufacturing (stamping, forming, laser, etc...) and deal with "engineers" daily. The vast majority need to get out of their CAD programs and back to high school mechanical drawing class. Maybe even learn a thing a or two about how something is made, rather than how it looks on that beautiful 24" widescreen. A.W.D. Absolutely Agree A.W.D. I work with kids that come out of college thinking they know what's up. Why would we vibe this, why would we flow on this, or why would we pressure test this to 35K? Simple: These tools are worth Millions and there is a protocol set in place son. What I build may cost Millions and when used produce Millions for US as a company and the customer. But Mark's stuff is priceless because peoples lives are at stake each and every time they take those mounts out into the real world. I have 2 LT & 4 LT mounts, I have never noticed a difference when removing and switching mounts to platforms. Animals are still dying and holes are still touching on paper targets. #MERICA |
|
Quoted:
I would call him many things. Engineer is not one of them... View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Did I miss the low light discussion? Lowlight is a moderator on another forum which constantly touts a large "contact patch" for the clamping mechanism as the end-all, be-all for a precision mount, and uses the LaRue mount as an example of the opposite end of the spectrum. From what I am seeing, the LT mounts are MADE TO MOVE (forward only) under recoil, and then mate with the 1913 slot and stop. That is my impression, anyway. As such, the contact patch and force are as large as they need to be, if correct. Is he some sort of engineer? I would call him many things. Engineer is not one of them... I figured as much. "Bigger is better, so smaller is inferior" is what I'm getting out of the "contact patch" argument. |
|
|
Quoted:
There are numerous in-house tactics we employ that are not publicly discussed. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
LaRue: Can you comment more on what this giant sybian machine is accomplishing in this test? (how long was it run, was the location of the adjustment nuts for the tension changed due to it, how was the usefulness of the test concluded?) http://www.recoilweb.com/larue-tactical-shake-machine-video-18657.html There are numerous in-house tactics we employ that are not publicly discussed. I know what it does. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
LaRue: Can you comment more on what this giant sybian machine is accomplishing in this test? (how long was it run, was the location of the adjustment nuts for the tension changed due to it, how was the usefulness of the test concluded?) http://www.recoilweb.com/larue-tactical-shake-machine-video-18657.html There are numerous in-house tactics we employ that are not publicly discussed. I know what it does. DADT...... |
|
Hey 12 gauge, quit blowin smoke and buy one..."if you ain't happy we ain't happy"
If you run it through the ringer and it doesn't meet your expectations send it back. End of discussion. |
|
I use a lot of larue mounts.
I use them on optics that get swapped out on a daily basis. I.e. Day scope for night scope. You should have seen the faces of a bunch of deputies when I popped the day optic off and put the d-740 on and proceeded to ring steel at 300 yards in the dark after they told me the scopes would not return to zero. The POI stays the sAme. I adjust them properly and they work as advertised. They adjust easily. The return to zero. |
|
Quoted: Thanks! I am very interested to see your test results! View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: I rarely remove the high powered optics on these rifles. So I cannot say that they return to Zero or too what extent that they do with certainty. I can say, without hesitation, that the mounts DO NOT MOVE from shot to shot. I can and will shoot a sample sometime this week, if the wind cooperates, 5 shot groups removing the scope after every shot and see what type of movement is exhibited. I do expect that there will be movement present when the scope is removed and replaced. My apologies if my first post was misunderstood. My point was that a properly adjusted Larue mount does not move from shot to shot. I am as comfortable using a Larue mount on my precision rifles as I am using bolt on nightforce rings. The aimpoint mounts I remove all the time, typically every shooting session at the range, with no adverse or noticeable change in zero. That said a half moa change on a red dot at 100 yards would be hard to notice. I can say that if there is any change in the zero of these mounts I have not seen tangible evidence. Thanks! I am very interested to see your test results! I just finished testing Larue mount repeatability and tOBR breakdown/reassembly repeatability. I think the results will be of interest to a lot of folks here. I will try to get the data and pictures arranged an make a bee thread today, no promises. I can honestly say I was blown away by the results.
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.