Posted: 1/2/2010 6:28:27 PM EDT
| any plans on making a mount for this thing so we can replace the icky ARMS mount |
|
I mean no disrespect by this, but I'd keep the ARMS mount on my Elcan. I have ONE LT mount for my surefire M900. Where the AMRS has a thin piece of metal that moves between the cam and the rail (to protect the rail from the cam), the LT mount allows the cam to slide over the rail itself. The Larue levers themselves are nicer, but the cam has already scuffed the black coating off of the rail on my LMT.
Is there a REASON that you did not use the ARMS-type design to protect the rail? If THAT design flaw was not there, I would be buying a lot more LT stuff. |
|
Quoted: I mean no disrespect by this, but I'd keep the ARMS mount on my Elcan. I have ONE LT mount for my surefire M900. Where the AMRS has a thin piece of metal that moves between the cam and the rail (to protect the rail from the cam), the LT mount allows the cam to slide over the rail itself. The Larue levers themselves are nicer, but the cam has already scuffed the black coating off of the rail on my LMT. Is there a REASON that you did not use the ARMS-type design to protect the rail? If THAT design flaw was not there, I would be buying a lot more LT stuff. design flaw? Hah! if you are worried about a little scuff on the rail, as compared to a complete catastrophic failure your focus isn't directed properly. Besides, the worst I've seen from an LT engaging on my rail was a shiny mark, no loss of coating/anodizing. I've taken my mounts off 100's of times with return to zero everytime...everytime. you are doing it wrong... this thread is for those interested in a LT mount for their Elcan Spectre DR's, not for someone to criticize LaRue's proprietary design ....so GTFO or stay on topic please |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I mean no disrespect by this, but I'd keep the ARMS mount on my Elcan. I have ONE LT mount for my surefire M900. Where the AMRS has a thin piece of metal that moves between the cam and the rail (to protect the rail from the cam), the LT mount allows the cam to slide over the rail itself. The Larue levers themselves are nicer, but the cam has already scuffed the black coating off of the rail on my LMT. Is there a REASON that you did not use the ARMS-type design to protect the rail? If THAT design flaw was not there, I would be buying a lot more LT stuff. design flaw? Hah! if you are worried about a little scuff on the rail, as compared to a complete catastrophic failure your focus isn't directed properly. Besides, the worst I've seen from an LT engaging on my rail was a shiny mark, no loss of coating/anodizing. I've taken my mounts off 100's of times with return to zero everytime...everytime. you are doing it wrong... this thread is for those interested in a LT mount for their Elcan Spectre DR's, not for someone to criticize LaRue's proprietary design ....so GTFO or stay on topic please This IS on topic, and it is a legitimate concern from someone who would actually buy a mount for their Specters if that little detail can be cleared up for me. No, I don't like scuffing up my rails for no good reason. I have taken my Specters off multiple times with a perfect return to zero, as well, and I have never had a problem with an ARMS mount (I own many). I do, however, have a problem with ARMS business practices (the whole #17 thing), and I would be happy to support their competitor. But, I also like to take care of my rifles, and I avoid dinging up my rails or scuff marks wherever possible. I'm sorry I'm not as high-speed as you. You can untwist your panties now. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I mean no disrespect by this, but I'd keep the ARMS mount on my Elcan. I have ONE LT mount for my surefire M900. Where the AMRS has a thin piece of metal that moves between the cam and the rail (to protect the rail from the cam), the LT mount allows the cam to slide over the rail itself. The Larue levers themselves are nicer, but the cam has already scuffed the black coating off of the rail on my LMT. Is there a REASON that you did not use the ARMS-type design to protect the rail? If THAT design flaw was not there, I would be buying a lot more LT stuff. design flaw? Hah! if you are worried about a little scuff on the rail, as compared to a complete catastrophic failure your focus isn't directed properly. Besides, the worst I've seen from an LT engaging on my rail was a shiny mark, no loss of coating/anodizing. I've taken my mounts off 100's of times with return to zero everytime...everytime. you are doing it wrong... " this thread is for those interested in a LT mount for their Elcan Spectre DR's, not for someone to criticize LaRue's proprietary design ....so GTFO or stay on topic please This IS on topic, and it is a legitimate concern from someone who would actually buy a mount for their Specters if that little detail can be cleared up for me. No, I don't like scuffing up my rails for no good reason. I have taken my Specters off multiple times with a perfect return to zero, as well, and I have never had a problem with an ARMS mount (I own many). I do, however, have a problem with ARMS business practices (the whole #17 thing), and I would be happy to support their competitor. But, I also like to take care of my rifles, and I avoid dinging up my rails or scuff marks wherever possible. I'm sorry I'm not as high-speed as you. You can untwist your panties now. Panties, that's the ticket ! Cut yourself a small piece out of a set of your hose that has runners in 'em and put it under the lever as you close it. Pops, you're a genius ! " - Independence Day 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I mean no disrespect by this, but I'd keep the ARMS mount on my Elcan. I have ONE LT mount for my surefire M900. Where the AMRS has a thin piece of metal that moves between the cam and the rail (to protect the rail from the cam), the LT mount allows the cam to slide over the rail itself. The Larue levers themselves are nicer, but the cam has already scuffed the black coating off of the rail on my LMT. Is there a REASON that you did not use the ARMS-type design to protect the rail? If THAT design flaw was not there, I would be buying a lot more LT stuff. design flaw? Hah! if you are worried about a little scuff on the rail, as compared to a complete catastrophic failure your focus isn't directed properly. Besides, the worst I've seen from an LT engaging on my rail was a shiny mark, no loss of coating/anodizing. I've taken my mounts off 100's of times with return to zero everytime...everytime. you are doing it wrong... " this thread is for those interested in a LT mount for their Elcan Spectre DR's, not for someone to criticize LaRue's proprietary design ....so GTFO or stay on topic please This IS on topic, and it is a legitimate concern from someone who would actually buy a mount for their Specters if that little detail can be cleared up for me. No, I don't like scuffing up my rails for no good reason. I have taken my Specters off multiple times with a perfect return to zero, as well, and I have never had a problem with an ARMS mount (I own many). I do, however, have a problem with ARMS business practices (the whole #17 thing), and I would be happy to support their competitor. But, I also like to take care of my rifles, and I avoid dinging up my rails or scuff marks wherever possible. I'm sorry I'm not as high-speed as you. You can untwist your panties now. Panties, that's the ticket ! Cut yourself a small piece out of a set of your hose that has runners in 'em and put it under the lever as you close it. Pops, you're a genius ! " - Independence Day
It really was a serious question from someone who would be interested. |
|
Quoted: there, i fixed it for you panty twister. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I mean no disrespect by this, but I'd keep the ARMS mount on my Elcan. I have ONE LT mount for my surefire M900. Where the AMRS has a thin piece of metal that moves between the cam and the rail (to protect the rail from the cam), the LT mount allows the cam to slide over the rail itself. The Larue levers themselves are nicer, but the cam has already scuffed the black coating off of the rail on my LMT. Is there a REASON that you did not use the ARMS-type design to protect the rail? If THAT design flaw was not there, I would be buying a lot more LT stuff. design flaw? Hah! if you are worried about a little scuff on the rail, as compared to a complete catastrophic failure your focus isn't directed properly. Besides, the worst I've seen from an LT engaging on my rail was a shiny mark, no loss of coating/anodizing. I've taken my mounts off 100's of times with return to zero everytime...everytime. you are doing it wrong... " this thread is for those interested in a LT mount for their Elcan Spectre DR's, not for someone to criticize LaRue's proprietary design ....so GTFO or stay on topic please This IS on topic, and it is a legitimate concern from someone who would actually buy a mount for their Specters if that little detail can be cleared up for me. No, I don't like scuffing up my rails for no good reason. I have taken my Specters off multiple times with a perfect return to zero, as well, and I have never had a problem with an ARMS mount (I own many). I do, however, have a problem with ARMS business practices (the whole #17 thing), and I would be happy to support their competitor. But, I also like to take care of my rifles, and I avoid dinging up my rails or scuff marks wherever possible. I'm sorry I'm not as high-speed as you. You can untwist your panties now. Panties, that's the ticket ! Cut yourself a small piece out of a set of your hose that has runners in 'em and put it under the lever as you close it. Pops, you're a genius ! " - Independence Day It really was a serious question from someone who would be interested if you would only change the design of your mount to meet the needs of one arfcom member who thinks the other company's mount is better and should be copied for the sake of said member without coming off as insulting . |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
there wouldn't be an issue for me.Quoted:
any plans on making a mount for this thing so we can replace the icky ARMS mount Is there a warranty issue with end-users pulling the base off and replacing it with an LT upgrade ? ML 
Me either. I hate the current mount, but love the optic. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
there, i fixed it for you panty twister.
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I mean no disrespect by this, but I'd keep the ARMS mount on my Elcan. I have ONE LT mount for my surefire M900. Where the AMRS has a thin piece of metal that moves between the cam and the rail (to protect the rail from the cam), the LT mount allows the cam to slide over the rail itself. The Larue levers themselves are nicer, but the cam has already scuffed the black coating off of the rail on my LMT. Is there a REASON that you did not use the ARMS-type design to protect the rail? If THAT design flaw was not there, I would be buying a lot more LT stuff. design flaw? Hah! if you are worried about a little scuff on the rail, as compared to a complete catastrophic failure your focus isn't directed properly. Besides, the worst I've seen from an LT engaging on my rail was a shiny mark, no loss of coating/anodizing. I've taken my mounts off 100's of times with return to zero everytime...everytime. you are doing it wrong... " this thread is for those interested in a LT mount for their Elcan Spectre DR's, not for someone to criticize LaRue's proprietary design ....so GTFO or stay on topic please This IS on topic, and it is a legitimate concern from someone who would actually buy a mount for their Specters if that little detail can be cleared up for me. No, I don't like scuffing up my rails for no good reason. I have taken my Specters off multiple times with a perfect return to zero, as well, and I have never had a problem with an ARMS mount (I own many). I do, however, have a problem with ARMS business practices (the whole #17 thing), and I would be happy to support their competitor. But, I also like to take care of my rifles, and I avoid dinging up my rails or scuff marks wherever possible. I'm sorry I'm not as high-speed as you. You can untwist your panties now. Panties, that's the ticket ! Cut yourself a small piece out of a set of your hose that has runners in 'em and put it under the lever as you close it. Pops, you're a genius ! " - Independence Day
It really was a serious question from someone who would be interested if you would only change the design of your mount to meet the needs of one arfcom member who thinks the other company's mount is better and should be copied for the sake of said member without coming off as insulting . Wow... this is really my first experience with the LT fanbois, and I must say, I am not impressed. The thread is about asking LT to make a mount for the Specter. Obviously, there hasn't been enough of a call for such a mount from the rest of the world to justify the expense of development (I know it's been mentioned in the AR15 tech forums), so the ENTIRE thread is about meeting the needs of a very small group of members of ARFCOM. I MIGHT have been one of them, but seriously, THIS is the response I get to a legitimate question?!? I have yet to receive anything but a smart-ass (even from the guy who OWNS the company) or obscenely worded answer. I don't know how much more politely I could have worded that. I do know that you could have been a HELL of a lot more polite in your initial answer - hell, you could have even answered my question. |
|
i am a user, call me a fanboy for supporting a company..whatever. You are apparently unable to comprehend why the LaRue mount is more or less never ever going to resemble anything like that other company's mount. Things like patents, proprietary design, better engineering and better raw materials. There are a lot more owners of Spectre DR's than just the people in this thread, my interest in the mount has been ongoing. If you know anything about LT, you would know that if you have a problem with a mount, Mark and company would be quick to remedy the issue. Perhaps your assumption that their mounts leave marks/remove anodizing is a little off base... ETA - perhaps when the other company's mounts break you can call them and ask if they can integrate the LT levers? I'm sure you would be met with a warm reception. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
there, i fixed it for you panty twister.
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I mean no disrespect by this, but I'd keep the ARMS mount on my Elcan. I have ONE LT mount for my surefire M900. Where the AMRS has a thin piece of metal that moves between the cam and the rail (to protect the rail from the cam), the LT mount allows the cam to slide over the rail itself. The Larue levers themselves are nicer, but the cam has already scuffed the black coating off of the rail on my LMT. Is there a REASON that you did not use the ARMS-type design to protect the rail? If THAT design flaw was not there, I would be buying a lot more LT stuff. design flaw? Hah! if you are worried about a little scuff on the rail, as compared to a complete catastrophic failure your focus isn't directed properly. Besides, the worst I've seen from an LT engaging on my rail was a shiny mark, no loss of coating/anodizing. I've taken my mounts off 100's of times with return to zero everytime...everytime. you are doing it wrong... " this thread is for those interested in a LT mount for their Elcan Spectre DR's, not for someone to criticize LaRue's proprietary design ....so GTFO or stay on topic please This IS on topic, and it is a legitimate concern from someone who would actually buy a mount for their Specters if that little detail can be cleared up for me. No, I don't like scuffing up my rails for no good reason. I have taken my Specters off multiple times with a perfect return to zero, as well, and I have never had a problem with an ARMS mount (I own many). I do, however, have a problem with ARMS business practices (the whole #17 thing), and I would be happy to support their competitor. But, I also like to take care of my rifles, and I avoid dinging up my rails or scuff marks wherever possible. I'm sorry I'm not as high-speed as you. You can untwist your panties now. Panties, that's the ticket ! Cut yourself a small piece out of a set of your hose that has runners in 'em and put it under the lever as you close it. Pops, you're a genius ! " - Independence Day
It really was a serious question from someone who would be interested if you would only change the design of your mount to meet the needs of one arfcom member who thinks the other company's mount is better and should be copied for the sake of said member without coming off as insulting . Wow... this is really my first experience with the LT fanbois, and I must say, I am not impressed. The thread is about asking LT to make a mount for the Specter. Obviously, there hasn't been enough of a call for such a mount from the rest of the world to justify the expense of development (I know it's been mentioned in the AR15 tech forums), so the ENTIRE thread is about meeting the needs of a very small group of members of ARFCOM. I MIGHT have been one of them, but seriously, THIS is the response I get to a legitimate question?!? I have yet to receive anything but a smart-ass (even from the guy who OWNS the company) or obscenely worded answer. I don't know how much more politely I could have worded that. I do know that you could have been a HELL of a lot more polite in your initial answer - hell, you could have even answered my question. And you piped up and asked why would you want that because that LaRue's stuff had a "design flaw," then got all bent out of shape when the fanboys tore you a new ass for being ignorant. Neverfucking mind that the arms mounts break, don't hold zero as well, or are made from MIM crap. They don't scuff your precious rails. You were not on topic, you sent this thread drifting off into the fuckoffosphere with your crap and now are bitching about being treated poorly by "fanboys". I ain't even much of a fanboy but I can see plainly what you said that would piss people off. |
|
Quoted:
i am a user, call me a fanboy for supporting a company..whatever. You are apparently unable to comprehend why the LaRue mount is more or less never ever going to resemble anything like that other company's mount. Things like patents, proprietary design, better engineering and better raw materials. All you (or he) had to say was, "the patent of ARMS mounts prevents us from using that little piece of metal to protect the structural integrity of the rail" or you could have told me, "the LT design permits a stronger and more reliable lock-up to the Picatinny rail system and a more reliable return-to-zero after dismounting." There are a lot more owners of Spectre DR's than just the people in this thread, my interest in the mount has been ongoing. If you know anything about LT, you would know that if you have a problem with a mount, Mark and company would be quick to remedy the issue.
I am well aware of their stellar reputation. Which is why... Perhaps your assumption that their mounts leave marks/remove anodizing is a little off base...
....I was so surprised when their mount DID leave marks and remove the anodizing off of my rail (and, no, I'm not doing it wrong - unless you really ARE supposed to put silk panties between the rail and the cam). I was actually very excited when I got that particular Surefire with the LT mount to see how it worked. As I said in the first post, the throw lever is top notch (stronger and more properly designed to deal with the forces applied than the ARMS lever), and I am really impressed with the workmanship. But I was disappointed with that singular design characteristic. That point of contention would, as I said, prevent me from buying a mount for the Specter UNLESS someone could explain to me why that design feature is superior. If there is a reason for me to accept scuffed rails (superior lockup, more accurate return to zero or even just a larger penis) I would certainly consider it. Y'all seem very content to pat each other on the back... please continue - I'll leave you alone. LaRue, I am interested in the actual reasoning behind the designed lack of a metal buffer in your mounts. If you can answer that question without reference to women's undergarments, I'd be happy to read it. I think it's clear that a lot of owners of the Specter WANT an LT mount to replace their ARMS mount with. I don't know if the numbers support the design and development of the mount, but I'm sure some people would buy it. Hell, you could even send your mount to Elcan and then, they'd ship the new ones out with LaRue mounts instead of ARMS. But they'll probably have the same questions I do. |
|
Quoted:
[<snip> LaRue, I am interested in the actual reasoning behind the designed lack of a metal buffer in your mounts. If you can answer that question without reference to women's undergarments, I'd be happy to read it. I think it's clear that a lot of owners of the Specter WANT an LT mount to replace their ARMS mount with. I don't know if the numbers support the design and development of the mount, but I'm sure some people would buy it. Hell, you could even send your mount to Elcan and then, they'd ship the new ones out with LaRue mounts instead of ARMS. But they'll probably have the same questions I do. Tell them to glance through " This Thread ", then get back to me with this uh, "problem".
|
|
Because a floating steel bit that doesn't have any solid reference points will do nothing but fubar repeatability.
Ask me how I know - jet engine shroud repairs with .003" tolerances and dealing with tool designers that didn't understand that concept, or the importance to reference off of machined surfaces, not cast. |
|
Borrowed one of Bravo's pics ...
Ruined shell deflector, trashed ejector window, dust cover gouging with it's ill-designed detent ... ... I'll bet the charging handle lock on the far side is snapping-over and taking anodizing with it every time the disgustingly designed POS works it's horror on such a, I'm sorry, you'll have to excuse me, words are failing me.
|
|
Quoted:
Borrowed one of Bravo's pics ... Ruined shell deflector, trashed ejector window, dust cover gouging with it's ill-designed detent ... ... I'll bet the charging handle lock on the far side is snapping-over and taking anodizing with it every time the disgustingly designed POS works it's horror on such a, I'm sorry, you'll have to excuse me, words are failing me.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v445/bravocompanyusa/IMG_2271.jpg I especially like how he's done some color fill with what appears to be dirt...damn I wish I had enough time/land/ammo to use my rifle the way it was intended. Oh well, maybe I'll just go throw it down the driveway...it's gravel...that oughta look nice...no? |
|
Okay, all jokes, underwear, & snack references aside.
Quoted:
<snip> UNLESS someone could explain to me why that design feature is superior <snip> Pull out the LT mount you have and open the lever so that the cam surface that contacts the underside of the rail is fully visible. See the radiused surface and high polish? That's why it's superior. Instead of taking the easy way out and using a cheap spring steel buffer to protect the rail from a cam that's inherently abrasive, LT chose to put the extra effort into that surface so that it has very little, if any, negative effect on the rail. If the shiny spot that an LT mount creates on the underside of the rail is unacceptable to you, that's cool. But I don't believe it to be a design flaw, and I don't think I'm in the minority (not just in present company) when I say that. In fact, I believe that extra part in ARMS' mounts is a potential flaw, as it is just one more thing that Mr. Murphy can exert his influence on. Glad you've had good results with your ARMS mounts, and I sincerely hope they never fail on you, especially if you take them into harm's way. On a side note, I'd like to see a complete disassembly of comparable ARMS and LaRue mounts to compare a total "piece count". I wonder if ARMS mounts have a significantly higher number of parts? I'd do it myself, but I ain't taking my LT stuff apart, and I ain't wasting my hard-earned money on an ARMS mount. The wife's already pissed at how much I spend on guns as it is.
|
|
Quoted:
Okay, all jokes, underwear, & snack references aside. Quoted:
<snip> UNLESS someone could explain to me why that design feature is superior <snip> Pull out the LT mount you have and open the lever so that the cam surface that contacts the underside of the rail is fully visible. See the radiused surface and high polish? That's why it's superior. Instead of taking the easy way out and using a cheap spring steel buffer to protect the rail from a cam that's inherently abrasive, LT chose to put the extra effort into that surface so that it has very little, if any, negative effect on the rail. If the shiny spot that an LT mount creates on the underside of the rail is unacceptable to you, that's cool. But I don't believe it to be a design flaw, and I don't think I'm in the minority (not just in present company) when I say that. In fact, I believe that extra part in ARMS' mounts is a potential flaw, as it is just one more thing that Mr. Murphy can exert his influence on. Glad you've had good results with your ARMS mounts, and I sincerely hope they never fail on you, especially if you take them into harm's way. On a side note, I'd like to see a complete disassembly of comparable ARMS and LaRue mounts to compare a total "piece count". I wonder if ARMS mounts have a significantly higher number of parts? I'd do it myself, but I ain't taking my LT stuff apart, and I ain't wasting my hard-earned money on an ARMS mount. The wife's already pissed at how much I spend on guns as it is. Thank you for that. Seriously. 
|
|
Quoted:
I mean no disrespect by this, but I'd keep the ARMS mount on my Elcan. I have ONE LT mount for my surefire M900. Where the AMRS has a thin piece of metal that moves between the cam and the rail (to protect the rail from the cam), the LT mount allows the cam to slide over the rail itself. The Larue levers themselves are nicer, but the cam has already scuffed the black coating off of the rail on my LMT. Is there a REASON that you did not use the ARMS-type design to protect the rail? If THAT design flaw was not there, I would be buying a lot more LT stuff. THIS IS THE REASON If the tension is adjusted properly, it will minimize or eliminate any cosmetic "damage" to your rail. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I mean no disrespect by this, but I'd keep the ARMS mount on my Elcan. I have ONE LT mount for my surefire M900. Where the AMRS has a thin piece of metal that moves between the cam and the rail (to protect the rail from the cam), the LT mount allows the cam to slide over the rail itself. The Larue levers themselves are nicer, but the cam has already scuffed the black coating off of the rail on my LMT. Is there a REASON that you did not use the ARMS-type design to protect the rail? If THAT design flaw was not there, I would be buying a lot more LT stuff. THIS IS THE REASON Another fantastic reason - I didn't know that. My mount is probably adjusted too tightly. I will go try to remedy this. |