Quoted: Not quite the setup you are looking for, but here is my PVS-14 with a Larue mount over a Troy BUIS. Forearm is a KAC RAS II with a Larue low Aimpoint mount. After taking it out and shooting it, I moved the PVS-14 closer to the Aimpoint than is shown in the pic. I have found that the closer the '14 is to the Aimpoint, the more light is transmitted to the users eye, and also the body of the aimpoint seems to make less of a 'footprint' when looking through the NV.
The Larue mount is nice, and clears an ARMS 40 sight, but sometimes I think I would feel a little more confident with something that uses the existing mounting hole like the PRI mount does, rather than attaching to the focusing ring.
img310.imageshack.us/img310/8225/rasiimedium3wm.jpg
I took it out and shot it last night... another user here and I were hitting a fairly large metal target about 300 yards away, that was painted black and VERY hard to see, with no moon at all and quite some distance from any ambient city light. I may have to pick up the light that Victor is selling when funds permit.
Dave
|
You bring up a good point....There has been a few chit-chats over moutning mechanisms that attach to the 14's to the lens ring. I have the ARMS #29 PVS-14 mount and a few things I do NOT like. The number ONE issue I have with it; I cannot leave the mount ring attached to the 14 when using a helmet mount. I have to take the ring off the lens each time because it interferes with the mount.
When I am weapon mounting for focus reasons, I have to bring the ring all the way back so I can still move the lens freely to focus. When I do this, there is not enough room for the helmet arm. Some attach the mount ring forward to the lens, and just turn the body of the PVS-14 to focus. I find under recoil, the housing moves pretty easy, thus getting me out of focus. Sooo, the easy way around this for me was to buy an addditonal 14. To be specific, a new MUM to stay on my head at all times! I know, pretty expensive work-around BUT it worked to convince the "minister of finance!"
The second thing is the design itself. While I still use the mount, I am very concerned if a large impact occurs to the 14 while mounted. I feel there is a chance if the impact was large enough, the lens could snap off the body!!
A pretty expensive situation if that occurred. I have NOT heard of this happening, but ALL the stress (if something like this happened) would be on the lens alone.
Now the thing I REALLY like about the #29 is the incredbile speed one can get the PVS-14 off the mount. Very fast, but the trade off is, the above issues.
I've never tried the PRI but heard good things about it, thanks Duff! I need to try one out one day. I think (if its not been done already) a night vision mount review is in order!