AK Sponsor
Posted: 1/10/2009 5:13:59 PM EDT
|
Has anyone purchased one of these? What are your impressions?
Posted this question on another forum already with no answer. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Has anyone purchased one of these? What are your impressions? Posted this question on another forum already with no answer. Yep, bought one and like it ... simple yet ingenius idea ... I'll post pics when I get a chance later on tonight. Well I can't find my camera ... but here goes ... this thing is CNC'd from the heaviest duty hunk of steel I've picked up in a while ... DPH should market these as clubs/optic rails instead of just an optic rail. The rail itself is valley'd to allow viewing of the iron sights when optics aren't mounted. It literally uses two pieces to "bite" the sight base at the front, and utilizes a clever little switch for quick detachment with the base fixed on the rear tang. So far, my only concern about this mount is if you lose the little piece that latches tang base and actual rail together, something I will have to message Scott over at DPH Arms about. Now, what I'm sure you even asked for ... does it hold zero? Absolutely ... I'm using an EOTech 512 on it and it's fantastic. When I find my camera pics of the rail and rifle incoming ... purists better stay away from this thread ... you won't like what you see! |
|
I have one too and will echo the comments above about the mount being very sturdy. I drilled the divots the set screws make out a bit, but I don't think you would need to. I was surprised how well the set screws made their own divots. I like the fact that you can use your iron sights with this rail and I like the locking mechanism at the rear. The locking stud that was mentioned above could be lost if you have the top cover off and have field striped the rifle for cleaning. You could drill the base out for a roll pin or just add some hot glue or something similar in the front of the channel to stop this. Here are the things I don't like about the rail.
*Heavy *Optics can't be longer than the rail at the front since you have to flip up the rear sight to flip the rail up for cleaning. I think Rafga's rail will work better for this application when he finally gets it done. *On mine at least, I couldn't get an EoTech to fit the rail. The top angle on the corners of the rail was too steep to allow the EoTech to sit level and grab on when tightened. I have two EoTechs and it did it with both of them. I had to file the top of my rail to get it to fit properly. It works fine now, but I don't like the idea of having to file on a part that is not cheap. I talked with Scott and he told me they copied the Polish rail exactly and that was just a problem with the rail and an EoTech. Just about every picture of a Beryl I have seen has an EoTech on it so??? Perhaps they use a different mount on the ones in Poland or maybe mine was just out of spec. Overall I really like the mount and will order another one soon for my Beryl "clone" I have been working on. Sweatpants, did you have to do anything to your 512 to get it to mount properly? |
|
Quoted: Thanks for the review, it is enlightening. The weight bothers me a little, but the EOTech fitment problem bothers me a lot more. I was planning on running an EOTech if I purchased this mount. I have one too and will echo the comments above about the mount being very sturdy. I drilled the divots the set screws make out a bit, but I don't think you would need to. I was surprised how well the set screws made their own divots. I like the fact that you can use your iron sights with this rail and I like the locking mechanism at the rear. The locking stud that was mentioned above could be lost if you have the top cover off and have field striped the rifle for cleaning. You could drill the base out for a roll pin or just add some hot glue or something similar in the front of the channel to stop this. Here are the things I don't like about the rail. *Heavy *Optics can't be longer than the rail at the front since you have to flip up the rear sight to flip the rail up for cleaning. I think Rafga's rail will work better for this application when he finally gets it done. *On mine at least, I couldn't get an EoTech to fit the rail. The top angle on the corners of the rail was too steep to allow the EoTech to sit level and grab on when tightened. I have two EoTechs and it did it with both of them. I had to file the top of my rail to get it to fit properly. It works fine now, but I don't like the idea of having to file on a part that is not cheap. I talked with Scott and he told me they copied the Polish rail exactly and that was just a problem with the rail and an EoTech. Just about every picture of a Beryl I have seen has an EoTech on it so??? Perhaps they use a different mount on the ones in Poland or maybe mine was just out of spec. Overall I really like the mount and will order another one soon for my Beryl "clone" I have been working on. Sweatpants, did you have to do anything to your 512 to get it to mount properly? |
|
Quoted:
I have one too and will echo the comments above about the mount being very sturdy. I drilled the divots the set screws make out a bit, but I don't think you would need to. I was surprised how well the set screws made their own divots. I like the fact that you can use your iron sights with this rail and I like the locking mechanism at the rear. The locking stud that was mentioned above could be lost if you have the top cover off and have field striped the rifle for cleaning. You could drill the base out for a roll pin or just add some hot glue or something similar in the front of the channel to stop this. Here are the things I don't like about the rail. *Heavy *Optics can't be longer than the rail at the front since you have to flip up the rear sight to flip the rail up for cleaning. I think Rafga's rail will work better for this application when he finally gets it done. *On mine at least, I couldn't get an EoTech to fit the rail. The top angle on the corners of the rail was too steep to allow the EoTech to sit level and grab on when tightened. I have two EoTechs and it did it with both of them. I had to file the top of my rail to get it to fit properly. It works fine now, but I don't like the idea of having to file on a part that is not cheap. I talked with Scott and he told me they copied the Polish rail exactly and that was just a problem with the rail and an EoTech. Just about every picture of a Beryl I have seen has an EoTech on it so??? Perhaps they use a different mount on the ones in Poland or maybe mine was just out of spec. Overall I really like the mount and will order another one soon for my Beryl "clone" I have been working on. Sweatpants, did you have to do anything to your 512 to get it to mount properly? When I mounted it up it's something I noticed ... I have not been able to get it to sit perfectly flush but the bolted tension clamp on the 512 engages fine ... I've tried everything short of hammering it off sideways to make sure the mount is secure. The difference to a flush mount is a couple of degrees. I considered filing down the right shoulder down some, but the benefit seems marginal at best (aesthestic). And I guess we better not lose those studs ... I've dropped it a number of time playing with the mount and it has a tendency to find itself under cabinets and tables. |
|
I am really hoping that mine has something wrong with it since Sweatpants said his worked. I think what Scott was saying was that they copied the Polish rail and if mine was having a problem then the Polish ones must be the same way. He is always in a rush, so he might not have thought about the answer completely before making it. I have the other rail they offer as well and it didn't have any problem with an EoTech. The weight is a bit more than I would have preferred, but I really don't think you could make the same mount from aluminum and have it hold up. The U shaped sight tunnel would be too weak if it were not made from steel and the hinge would have problems too. It is very well thought out and is easy to install. The price is more than I had hoped for, but for something made from a single block of steel and done here in the US it is actually a good deal. It is still a good bit cheaper than the Krebs and even though it has sights on it they still can't be used at the same time as an optic is being used. I think once you hold one in your hands you will be impressed.
Edit Well, I see sweatpants wrote while I was writing and beat me to a post. Filing on the mount is not for the faint of heart, but I have so much experience making things with a file that it didn't really bother me. I almost never seem to get anything that doesn't need a tweak or two to work correctly. Your mount must be better than mine because I could in no way get it to work with my EoTech without the file work. Mine took a good bit of filing. It would work with any other mount I had including several for the Aimpoint. If I didn't want to run one magnifier for everything I have I probably would have just used a low Aimpoint mount and called it a day. |
|
Quoted:
I am really hoping that mine has something wrong with it since Sweatpants said his worked. I think what Scott was saying was that they copied the Polish rail and if mine was having a problem then the Polish ones must be the same way. He is always in a rush, so he might not have thought about the answer completely before making it. I have the other rail they offer as well and it didn't have any problem with an EoTech. The weight is a bit more than I would have preferred, but I really don't think you could make the same mount from aluminum and have it hold up. The U shaped sight tunnel would be too weak if it were not made from steel and the hinge would have problems too. It is very well thought out and is easy to install. The price is more than I had hoped for, but for something made from a single block of steel and done here in the US it is actually a good deal. It is still a good bit cheaper than the Krebs and even though it has sights on it they still can't be used at the same time as an optic is being used. I think once you hold one in your hands you will be impressed. Are you saying the clamp wouldn't lock on your Beryl rail? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Nope, not at all without filing it a good bit. Sorry to hear that! Pictures within the next week ... will be curious to see how yours and mine compare. Well that week came and went, but after some serious talking (dremel action) with the rail and remembering to post pictures here, mine is also all good to go. 
|
|
Quoted: Define "dremel action" please. I find it kinda disappointing that a mount costing this much requires any rework at all for something as common as an EOTech. Waiting on Rafaga at this point...Quoted: Quoted: Nope, not at all without filing it a good bit. Sorry to hear that! Pictures within the next week ... will be curious to see how yours and mine compare. Well that week came and went, but after some serious talking (dremel action) with the rail and remembering to post pictures here, mine is also all good to go. http://i367.photobucket.com/albums/oo118/knfirearms/SSR85/DSCF0092.jpg http://i367.photobucket.com/albums/oo118/knfirearms/SSR85/DSCF0093.jpg http://i367.photobucket.com/albums/oo118/knfirearms/SSR85/DSCF0094.jpg http://i367.photobucket.com/albums/oo118/knfirearms/SSR85/DSCF0095.jpg http://i367.photobucket.com/albums/oo118/knfirearms/SSR85/DSCF0096.jpg http://i367.photobucket.com/albums/oo118/knfirearms/SSR85/DSCF0097.jpg |
| Mine "only" needed the rail filed to work with an EoTech, the rest was good to go. I just got in my second one that will be going on my Beryl clone. I will try and install it this weekend and will report any problems. I know already that it will need to be filed for the EoTech and since the rear sight base that was donated from a Tantal is wider than a normal sight base I will have to file a small bit from the pivot area too. I am on the Rafga first 10 list and look foreword to getting his finished product as well. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Define "dremel action" please. I find it kinda disappointing that a mount costing this much requires any rework at all for something as common as an EOTech. Waiting on Rafaga at this point...
Quoted:
Quoted:
Nope, not at all without filing it a good bit. Sorry to hear that! Pictures within the next week ... will be curious to see how yours and mine compare. Well that week came and went, but after some serious talking (dremel action) with the rail and remembering to post pictures here, mine is also all good to go. http://i367.photobucket.com/albums/oo118/knfirearms/SSR85/DSCF0092.jpg http://i367.photobucket.com/albums/oo118/knfirearms/SSR85/DSCF0093.jpg http://i367.photobucket.com/albums/oo118/knfirearms/SSR85/DSCF0094.jpg http://i367.photobucket.com/albums/oo118/knfirearms/SSR85/DSCF0095.jpg http://i367.photobucket.com/albums/oo118/knfirearms/SSR85/DSCF0096.jpg http://i367.photobucket.com/albums/oo118/knfirearms/SSR85/DSCF0097.jpg On my SSR-85C2, pictured above, the sight base was entirely too wide to even fit on. Works well on other AKs I've tried (namely varieties of WASR). |
AK Sponsor