Hello,

Does anyone else have problems with the Picatinny mount? The mount is cracking on mine. I bought the optic second-hand and obviously the previous owner over-tightened the nuts (Steiner specifies a torque of 3.5 Nm).

I can't imagine being that grossly motorized, but apparently it is. However, I find it frightening how little material there is in the affected areas. Comparable aluminum mounts have significantly more "meat" in the stressed areas.





The clamping surface also seems to me to be very small.

Any opinions?

Thanks a lot.

I had a Geissele mount crack like that, not overtightened and they replaced, I'll bet Steiner will do the same

When I was looking at reviews for the T-series, many mentioned cracked mounts.  

The older M-series was available with a nice looking Eratac QD mount, but I've never seen it for sale separately.

If Steiner used Acog compatible mounts for their prism optics it would all be much easier.

+1. This is why I didn't buy one.

OP, send it back to Steiner for replacement.

I did not read about those cracking issues before. Anyway, it was a great deal and I hope I can get it replaced. I am even willing to pay, because I honestly do not know if the previous owner did kill the mount by over tightening.

It really is a PITA that they did not go with some standard footprint, like Stanag, which would have been perfectly possible and would give you tons of mounting options.

I have two Steiner Battlesights with the Eratac mounts. I also have some Eratac mounts on other rifles, zero problems with them. But the Eratac seem to have way more meat on the critical parts.

The Battlesights really were great (if you like fixed magnification).

On a 12.5" SigSauer 716:



On a 16" H&K MR223:

Would be nice if Steiner offered something more like this again.

I've had to replace the mounts on my S432 that I got in 2020 twice by now. The cracks looked similar to the OP's.
The first time I got a replacement from the dealer I bought it from the second time I directly wrote Steiner about it. I had to wait for one or two weeks, so not too terrible, but then I live in Austria and there's no language barrier lol.
I think the S432's manual recommends 5 Nm torque rather than the 3.5 Nm of the T-series? I'll have to look that up.
I have the S432 in storage now, but I'll probably put it on my next build regardless.
In hindsight I should have spended a bit more and rather had gotten a Kahles K4i. These are apparently still for sale here in Europe and got an EraTac mount, though I don't think can change the height of the optic like you can on the Steiner

Edit: I looked up the torque in the Steiner instruction manual, it clearly states 5 Nm for the S-series mount.
I do wonder if the S- and the T-series share the same mounting footprint and if there had been some mixup during assembly?

Steiner did not reply my email until now. I know, it is beginning of the year and they are back in office since yesterday. But I am not a patient person. Especially if somethings broken, I have sleepless nights until it is fixed.

It is fixed now.

But not from Steiner.

I did use a quality Picatinny mount from B&T, which was sitting around with no rings. This mount does have sufficient clamping area and now is the base for the Steiner T432. No thanks to Steiner.



Best thing: it is QD. The B&T mount features QD levers. A feature the T432 as well as the S series do not have.

I would dare to say, that the original mount of Steiner is poorly designed and not suitable for a military style optic (that what they advertised that stuff for).

They seem to follow the Leupold way. Discontinue the cool and good stuff and release new flimsy stuff.

The old battlesights are really built like a tank. And they have quality mounting that does not crack if you give it a sharp look.

Any idea of what the b and t mount is called I have 4 of these and now I'm paranoid.

The B&T mount did not fit the Steiner.

The holes had to be drilled to fit and the existing mini-rail also had to be milled out a little, as it was too narrow and too flat for the riser of the T432.

It was a pragmatic and probably not the most visually appealing solution, but I wanted a functioning and securely mounted T432. Since it really seems to be the case that the cracks in the standard Steiner mounting of the T and S series are a problem, I will stick with my solution.

In principle, any Picatinny base can be used. I just had this B&T lying around unused. I've had the mount for years, the marking is:

BT-21801 mfg by Brügger & Thomet

If you need pictures from the other side of the moung (with the QD levers) let me know.

Don't get me wrong. The optic itself is great, but the Steiner mount really seems to be poo poo.

Thank you for the reply. I agree excellent optic with an achilles heel.

Your welcome.