Need mount for MRO - Bobro vs Scalarworks vs ADM

[Kenneth]

Well that's just retarded to make that claim. He's obviously and amazing engineer but I mean come on. I too run his rail and trigger in my AR. Excellent products.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[C4IGrant]

Several, actually. And for different reasons.

I hear people say this all the time, but they really don't do it that much (or don't really need to). IMHO, if it is under ten times a year, I would worry about not having a lever.

C4

[C4IGrant]

What does the Geissele MRO mount weigh? I've got 2 Bobros which as usual are great.
I need 2 more and was going to try the Geissele, but the Scalara combo has peaked my interest.

Anyone know of a distributor that has a MRO Geissele combo?

We do under the package deals section on our website.


C4

[C4IGrant]

Any time I shoot with irons past 50 yards, when using a T2. I zero without the T2 in place (Because anything that likely compromises a T2 will destroy optical patency, such as mud, frozen rain/condensation, or the lens being shattered. All of which I view as more likely than "The dot just went away"), so with the T2 in place , I get a 4MOA shift due to the optical properties of the sight. That is why QD is important to me, for THIS optic. Scalarworks gives me QD, RTZ that is acceptable to me, and is light, strong, and has a great "form factor". While I love bobro, their T-series/MRO size mounts are a bad idea to ME, because the clamping mechanism weighs so much and will grab all sorts of molle and other stuff. For a RDS, the ultra-precise RTZ of the Bobro is not worth the weight or the form factor. The Scalarworks is "slick" on both sides.

I have been shooting irons through Aimpoints for a long time and have never seen a 4" shift when using irons. So there is something else wrong.
Could be your eyesight, angle at which you are looking at the iron sights, etc.


C4

[C4IGrant]

I used to be interested in the Geissele mount, but that video killed it for me. There was an obvious shift in zero when finger-tightened vs. wrench tightened (Geissele said there wouldn't be: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToGS2O2uJR4...there was, almost 3/4MOA according to that BE Meyer's testing video...), and the guy just watched his monitor and stopped torquing when the sight returned to zero, when using the wrench. I'd like to see Geissele's claims actually tested. Such as "torque does not matter"... (how about turning that fancy monitor off and having another person who didn't tighten the mount the first time, so as not to use "torque to angle", come in and tighten it the second time, and flip the screen back on and see what we see...)well, according to all the dancing I saw that dot do, and failure to RTZ with finger-tension...yes, it does.

So in the interest of being fair, I did a little test with my Nightforce. You can find it in this section, as well, but I'll link to it:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...mount-RTZ-test

So...what exactly is the Geissele product offering? It's heavy. It's expensive. It does have a sexy "G" on it, though...

*Nothing against Geissele, and run their triggers exclusively, but false advertising is false advertising...

I would much prefer the Scalarworks mount to the Geissele, for the MRO. It's lighter, I'd wager, has no issue with RTZ (nor does the Geissele, functionally. My issue is with their advertising...), and can be installed/removed without tools. The Geissele should be installed with some form of wrench, as it has no active tension method on the screw/nut, other than bolt-stretch and friction, which are inadequate at finger-tight, IMO/IME. The Scalarworks has the detent/teeth.

I have not tested the Geissele mounts for random torque/return to zero, but tend to believe everything they say (as they have never been caught misleading anyone).

I have no issue tightening down something with a wrench and really don't see it as an issue. Couple that with the fact the HSLD group that requested the mount from Geissele doesn't either.


C4

[WS6]

I have been shooting irons through Aimpoints for a long time and have never seen a 4" shift when using irons. So there is something else wrong.
Could be your eyesight, angle at which you are looking at the iron sights, etc.


C4

Multiple people have noted it. Try it with a T2.

[officerX]

I spy, with my little eye..........

[Coal Dragger]

I used to be interested in the Geissele mount, but that video killed it for me. There was an obvious shift in zero when finger-tightened vs. wrench tightened (Geissele said there wouldn't be: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToGS2O2uJR4...there was, almost 3/4MOA according to that BE Meyer's testing video...), and the guy just watched his monitor and stopped torquing when the sight returned to zero, when using the wrench. I'd like to see Geissele's claims actually tested. Such as "torque does not matter"... (how about turning that fancy monitor off and having another person who didn't tighten the mount the first time, so as not to use "torque to angle", come in and tighten it the second time, and flip the screen back on and see what we see...)well, according to all the dancing I saw that dot do, and failure to RTZ with finger-tension...yes, it does.

So in the interest of being fair, I did a little test with my Nightforce. You can find it in this section, as well, but I'll link to it:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...mount-RTZ-test

So...what exactly is the Geissele product offering? It's heavy. It's expensive. It does have a sexy "G" on it, though...

*Nothing against Geissele, and run their triggers exclusively, but false advertising is false advertising...

I would much prefer the Scalarworks mount to the Geissele, for the MRO. It's lighter, I'd wager, has no issue with RTZ (nor does the Geissele, functionally. My issue is with their advertising...), and can be installed/removed without tools. The Geissele should be installed with some form of wrench, as it has no active tension method on the screw/nut, other than bolt-stretch and friction, which are inadequate at finger-tight, IMO/IME. The Scalarworks has the detent/teeth.

WS6,

Dude, you're way over thinking this. Take this as coming from someone who shares a similar level of OCD about many things, and who also really likes top quality stuff. As a friend I offer these observations, and urge you to consider them:

Stop obsessing over finding the *perfect* carbine optic (or any other perfect anything). We've all witnessed you burn through multiple high end optics looking for that *perfect* solution, extolling the virtues of that optic at first...and then 3 weeks or so later becoming dissapointed due to some minor flaw. Then moving on to the next one, rinse and repeat.

Now I'm seeing you do the same thing on mounts. Dude they all have strengths and weaknesses.

The Geissele video demonstrates what I understood to be a mount that is not torque sensitive. If the claim was made it would RTZ only finger tight that was a dumb claim. Of course you have to tighten the damn thing down to RTZ, you just don't need some special torque wrench to do it. This is not unusual, my Nightforce Uni-Mount does the same thing. The Geissele's claim to superiority is the extreme precision of the optics mounting ring /base and caps, the stiffness of the mount, and the added high precision recoil lugs on the rail interface. I for one am interested in the mount for the additional lugs to give more robust ability to hold zero under rough handling or on a gun with strong counter recoil like the FN SCAR.

Rather than chasing that *perfect* optic and mount which doesn't exist why not pick out a good reliable optics and mount package, slap it on a reliable accurate rifle with a good trigger and get out there and shoot? I find that the more I just enjoy shooting, practicing, or training the less I obsess over minor advantages or disadvantages in the kit (assuming the set up is reliable and user friendly). Plus as long as the rifle puts bullets where they should go, fires every time, and the optics hold zero and give a good view you're $$$ and skill level ahead just focusing on putting well aimed rounds down range. It's more fun too.

[RotaryRevn]

This new lightweight MRO mount from Battle Arms looks very promising at a very good price... https://www.battlearmsdevelopment.co...absolute-black

[WS6]

WS6,

Dude, you're way over thinking this. Take this as coming from someone who shares a similar level of OCD about many things, and who also really likes top quality stuff. As a friend I offer these observations, and urge you to consider them:

Stop obsessing over finding the *perfect* carbine optic (or any other perfect anything). We've all witnessed you burn through multiple high end optics looking for that *perfect* solution, extolling the virtues of that optic at first...and then 3 weeks or so later becoming dissapointed due to some minor flaw. Then moving on to the next one, rinse and repeat.

I've had my Nightforce 1-4, now, for some months, and I am buying another one. It may not be "perfect", but it makes me happy. It just took me a while to find what made me happy, is all! Along the way, I played with some cool things and made some good friends.

Now I'm seeing you do the same thing on mounts. Dude they all have strengths and weaknesses.

The Geissele video demonstrates what I understood to be a mount that is not torque sensitive. If the claim was made it would RTZ only finger tight that was a dumb claim. Of course you have to tighten the damn thing down to RTZ, you just don't need some special torque wrench to do it. This is not unusual, my Nightforce Uni-Mount does the same thing. The Geissele's claim to superiority is the extreme precision of the optics mounting ring /base and caps, the stiffness of the mount, and the added high precision recoil lugs on the rail interface. I for one am interested in the mount for the additional lugs to give more robust ability to hold zero under rough handling or on a gun with strong counter recoil like the FN SCAR.

My question is...how likely are the 65 in-lb clamps to shift vs. the 18 in-lb rings? I don't know the answer to that one, honestly. It is food for thought, though. Also, I now have owned several Geissele mounts. Frankly, I think the machining on them sucks compared to Bobro and Nightforce. Functionally they are adequate, as I have not heard tale of scopes slipping, etc. and I do like the way they stiffened the mount via ribs, etc., although it does make it fairly heavy compared to the Nightforce product (28% heavier for the 30mm 1.5" mount). Ultimately, I much prefer Nightforce's mil-spec unimount, but due to availability, I went with Geissele. I am sure it will work sufficiently, but I don't view it as "the best" solution.

Rather than chasing that *perfect* optic and mount which doesn't exist why not pick out a good reliable optics and mount package, slap it on a reliable accurate rifle with a good trigger and get out there and shoot? I find that the more I just enjoy shooting, practicing, or training the less I obsess over minor advantages or disadvantages in the kit (assuming the set up is reliable and user friendly). Plus as long as the rifle puts bullets where they should go, fires every time, and the optics hold zero and give a good view you're $$$ and skill level ahead just focusing on putting well aimed rounds down range. It's more fun too.

I have done just that. I currently own an FC-2 NF 1-4 in a mil-spec NF Unimount. I have a Geissele 30mm mount and will be ordering a FC-3G 1-4 NF w/ZS as soon as I get a refund from another company that sold me a NF 1-4 almost a month ago and has YET to deliver, despite constant claims of "Oh, warehouse said it shipped (2-3 days ago)".

So that's it for me. Nightforce 1-4's and Unimounts, lol