AR Sponsor
Posted: 10/13/2015 12:44:12 PM EDT
|
So I just picked up a new Leupy and am trying to decide on which mounts I want to use. The two choices I've narrow it down to are the ADM Recon or Arms #22's. What does everyone use and why. Are both systems pretty good to return to zero if the optic is removed?
I want the QD benefit but also debating on whether or not to just buy a set of KAC micros in 45°. Thanks in advance. |
|
The testing done by Recoil magazine a few months back declared Bobro returned closer to zero than any other mount they tested. You can see the brands tested in the picture above. The write-up received some flack on the forums because they likely didn't test more than one or two mounts from each brand.
The article notwithstanding, Bobro was already my favorite and still is. I like the attachment mechanism better. |
|
Quoted:
The testing done by Recoil magazine a few months back declared Bobro returned closer to zero than any other mount they tested. You can see the brands tested in the picture above. The write-up received some flack on the forums because they likely didn't test more than one or two mounts from each brand. The article notwithstanding, Bobro was already my favorite and still is. I like the attachment mechanism better. Another issue would be how well each mount's QD lever tension was adjusted. In addition, they do not mention about how the scope was secured in the mounts and by whom. Did the same person fit the scopes in each mount? Did they use the same amount of torque when tightening the screws? Did they adjust the QD lever tension the same on each mount? That will have a lot to do with it as well. In this test, there is very little notable difference between the Bobro and several of the other mounts. |
|
Quoted: Another issue would be how well each mount's QD lever tension was adjusted. In addition, they do not mention about how the scope was secured in the mounts and by whom. Did the same person fit the scopes in each mount? Did they use the same amount of torque when tightening the screws? Did they adjust the QD lever tension the same on each mount? That will have a lot to do with it as well. In this test, there is very little notable difference between the Bobro and several of the other mounts. Quoted: Quoted: The testing done by Recoil magazine a few months back declared Bobro returned closer to zero than any other mount they tested. You can see the brands tested in the picture above. The write-up received some flack on the forums because they likely didn't test more than one or two mounts from each brand. The article notwithstanding, Bobro was already my favorite and still is. I like the attachment mechanism better. Another issue would be how well each mount's QD lever tension was adjusted. In addition, they do not mention about how the scope was secured in the mounts and by whom. Did the same person fit the scopes in each mount? Did they use the same amount of torque when tightening the screws? Did they adjust the QD lever tension the same on each mount? That will have a lot to do with it as well. In this test, there is very little notable difference between the Bobro and several of the other mounts. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The QD mount with the best return to zero is Bobro. Please cite references and or studies that have proven this. http://i1366.photobucket.com/albums/r772/gbloss/10277038_648109495299310_3716879192166036411_n_zpsxltwqymt.jpg I question the accuracy of the report to the extent that the results show accuracy levels greater than the "background noise" of the limitations on the rifle accuracy. There are very few true .2 MOA rifles, and they are typically heavy benchrest dedicated rigs. When a mount can return to zero in a way that does not decrease the accuracy of the rifle compared to its accuracy with a fixed scope sight, you have meaningful data. This can only be demonstrated if the background noise or artifact is lowered enough to demonstrate the difference reliably. I would say that any mount that is capable of returning to zero within .2 MOA time after time in a rifle capable of shooting that accurately, then, there is no reason to use greater accuracy claims as a basis for selection. Consistent rail positioning alone usually injects greater error than shown in the test. Rather, you look at other factors such as weight (less is better), ruggedness of design (does the military or LE use it?), attention to detail (does it leave marks on the scope tube or put the tube in a bind, or are the threads, if an aluminum mount, inside steel inserts, the design and construction of the rings), and how the mount levers operate and lock and unlock. Those are more important. Every single one of the tested scopes is in the .1 MOA return to zero range except the Burris, which is just over .2 MOA. IF THE DATA IS RELIABLE. Of the group, my favorite is the LaRue Lt-104 because of its other factors, such as light weight, strength, acceptance for military and law enforcement, the method in which it attaches, the unobtrusive levers when closed and the sliding lock on the rear lever, which is much more glove friendly and the inclusion of pressed in steel inserts for the scope ring mounting screws.. My second choice is ADM. I use both. Return to zero on both is so good that I cannot discern a difference in point of impact shift or increase in group size, even with match grade ammo. |
AR Sponsor