AR Sponsor
Posted: 5/24/2006 3:44:32 AM EDT
|
I really like our monthly carbine matches (SFDCC) because they give you a chance to test gear. I've always been a bit suspicious of the Vltor mounts and the way that they use the same thumb screw to hold the light in the mount and the mount to the gun. For those that aren't familiar with the mount, here's a couple of pics pic 1 pic 2 pic 3 pic 4 You can see in pics 1 and 2 the light and mount attached to the Daniel Defense forearm. From these pics you can see that it's a pretty tight fit to get your fingers in there to really crank down on the thumbscrew to get it mounted tight. In pics 3 and 4 you can see details of the mount itself and how the same screw is used to hold both the light in the mount and the mount to the gun. I personally think this is a bad design, albeit a compact and simple one. The problem I had last night was that the mount kept coming loose. Because of the awkward location of the screw it was impossible for me to really get ahold of it and tighten it down. The thing that makes the Vltor mount worse than other options (like the Daniel Defense or the Larue Tactical) is that once the mount comes even slightly loose from the rail, the light starts sliding around in the mount. with the tailcap switch that means you're pushing the light out of the mount when this happens. If the light were secured to the mount separately then even if the mount came slightly loose, the light would still be held tight in the mount and you could stay in the fight and reasonably illuminated. For comparison, here is a pic of the Daniel Defense mount. Daniel Defense pic 1 I only wish that DD would make their mount in a straight offset so I can run it on the port side of my rifle and have the tailcap be where I want it for my thumb. Larue is rumored to be making a straight offset version, but it hasn't made it into production yet that I'm aware of. Ultimately I think the best lesson here is that the light will perform better when coupled with a throwlever and when the mount is integral to the light. I think I'll be going with the Surefire Millenium M95 or M96 (or both) if I can find someone with them in stock. |
|
Blue Loc-Tite!  IMHO, I don't consider the Vltor Scout mount a QD mount. When I mounted mine I used a drop of Loc-Tite and gave it an extra 1/4-1/2 turn with a pair of pliers. The best solution is the LaRue light mount. I'm waiting on them to make a non-offset flashlight mount that will work with the E series lights. |
|
I agree compeltely, I think the vltor screw head thingie should be bigger. As regards the DD mount, I sure wish they'd either attach the two springs permanenelty or lose them compeltely. I've lost one from each of mine! ETA: DD is in perfect position for me. You shouldgo for the viking mount, that one goes straight down. I jsut don't wnat to use plastic... |
I agree. Unfortunately that doesn't work for my purposes. I liked the compact size of the Vltor mount because it doesn't interfere with using the light as a hand-held when off the gun. I like to keep the light on my chest rig in a mag pouch and attach it when I need it to keep the overall weight of the rifle down as much as possible. Unfortunately going to an M95/6 is going to add more weight to the rifle when mounted than the Vltor/G2 does. I think the trade-off will be worth it though since the light will only be on there when I need it. |
I agree. I really like the Vltor mount because it's low profile and puts the light right where I like it. But it isn't really a QD mount. You either need to use loctite or a wrench to get it to stay put. Either way you aren't just gonna unscrew it by hand. I don't really need a QD mount for my lights so I still prefer the Vltor to most any other mount I've tried so far. Vltor on top, Viking on bottom. |
AR Sponsor