TargetTalk

wow thats mounted low, how is the dot secured to the rail, this is a slide mount looks like.

GunRunner wrote:wow thats mounted low, how is the dot secured to the rail,

Four screws and a recoil lug. Exactly the same way Aimpoint mounts it to their factory base...
Jerry

Fred T wrote:Gentlemen,
I will post pictures if someone will be kind enough to tell me how to attach a file..
Fred T

Hello Fred..
The way I attach photos, is to post the pic on photo bucket...then paste the picture #number to your target talk reply..I am not real computer savvy, so I don't know all the correct "tech terms". Hope that helps...I have several of your bases here, if you would like me to post pics them, and you can then describe the features..Let me know..

Jerry

Jerry,
IF you wouldnt mind posting a picture of a steel aimpoint base that would be great.

Thanks
Fred T

Fred T wrote:Jerry,
IF you wouldnt mind posting a picture of a steel aimpoint base that would be great.
Thanks
Fred T

I threw in some weights, to compare. One complaint I have heard from the slide mount shooters, is the light weight of the Micro, has caused a different feel of the gun in recoil.. These shooters are mainly shooting factory jacketed/or team issue ammo with heavier recoil. An Ultra Dot with Weaver Low Mount Rings, weighs right at 3000 grains, while a Micro w/factory mount weighs 1500 grains, and a Micro with Fred's mount, weighs 2500 grains.
I'll leave the rest of the info to Fred...

Jerry,
Thanks a million for posting the pictures. As always a picture is worth a thousand words. I am still trying to post a picture of the mount on a pistol, I think the photo file is to large. Anyway..............
Shooters, as you can see the Kodiak Machine base is a little more robust than the factory base. My cross bolt is a #10 as compared to the factoy cross bolt of 4mm (.156). you will also note the two small set screws on the clamp. Those are ajusted at assembly to keep the clamp from tilting when it is tightened. This does two things, one it takes the shear load off the cross bolt and two, it causes the clamp to tighten on the bottom of the dovetail surface rather than the top corner of the rail. Any more questions feel free to post them here or contact me directly.

Fred T

Did this last year.

Now there a Unique pistol you don't see everyday, I like that scope setup.

Nice job Ben!

FP,
Do you know if that's the same frame as the DES 32U?
JLK

Mass Shooter wrote:Now there a Unique pistol you don't see everyday, I like that scope setup.

Nice job Ben!

Thanks, Jim, I hope to shoot it at a match or two this winter.

JohnLK wrote:FP,
Do you know if that's the same frame as the DES 32U?
JLK

I've never held a DES 32U, JLK, so I don't know how the frames compare. I can tell you the 96U magazine inserts from the top so if the 32 goes in from the bottom, they must be different.

What base is that which is mounted to the rail of the 96/U? ... Was the rail drilled & tapped?

Mass Shooter wrote:What base is that which is mounted to the rail of the 96/U? ... Was the rail drilled & tapped?

Drilled and tapped. Generic Weaver base with a flat bottom. We had to keep the base toward the breech end for the thicker metal, but the scope had to go forward so the magazine would clear.

Jerry,

That slide mount is beautiful. I can see how to mount the aimpoint to it, but how did you attach it to the Marvel rib?

Thanks,

Brad

(If you every do decide to write a book, I'll buy the first copy)

That is some beautiful gunsmithing. I did notice that Steve Reiter was running his H1 Micro sights slide mounted.
I really like the Aimpoint Micro. I am surprised that an enterprising gunsmith has not created a frame mount that attaches to the right side of the frame (passenger side) and turns the Aimpoint 90 degrees counterclockwise. This would allow the scope to be mounted even lower to the bore than the mounts that place the Aimpoint upright and place the screws 'under' the scope. The dot intensity adjustment would then be on the top of the sight.

I think shooters get too wrapped up on the low mounting of a scope. Yeah the mechanics/physics say its better but it's not going to change the scores. Fundamentals are what shoot repetitive10's, not low to the bore scopes. I've shot 889 with a grip mount and 890 slide mounted. That's one extreme to the other. I've seen Reiter back in the day shoot mid 890's with his 45 with typical slide mounted scope. I think having the lowest mounted scope is more bragging rights than shooting improvement. Perfect example is there are many sub 1.5" 45's running around that are shooting the same scores in a sharpshooters hand as the 3" gun they used to shoot. Fundamentals are what take us higher into the food chain.
Jon

"Perfect example is there are many sub 1.5" 45's running around that are shooting the same scores in a sharpshooters hand as the 3" gun they used to shoot. Fundamentals are what take us higher into the food chain."
Jon

A bit off topic, but it's kind of like what I've been saying about air pistols, to the dismay of many here.

For me, low mounted scopes are simply more comfortable. I don't proclaim that there is a mechanical advantage, just a personal preference. I have invested enough training time in aligning my sights to the plane of iron sights that that trained response does not have to adapt as much to a low mounted scope.

Jon Eulette wrote:Perfect example is there are many sub 1.5" 45's running around that are shooting the same scores in a sharpshooters hand as the 3" gun they used to shoot.
Jon

Help me out. What is a sub 1.5" .45? Are you referring to group size?

Yes group size. There are many 1911 45 pistols out there that shoot sub 1.5" 50 yard groups. I am referring to the fact that those great shooting pistols are not improving scores for majority of the shooters that shoot them. So having a nearly mechanically perfect firearm (accurate and extremely low scope to bore) isn't improving scores!!! Only applying proper fundamentals is going to improve scores. That's what I was saying.
Jon

That was such a good idea I knew that someone would make it.
It is low mounted, solidly attached and has great ergonomics . . . and yes the empty brass will eject.
http://www.doublealpha.biz/daa-aimpoint ... ight-mount

Shouldn't that be on the other side of the gun? And not blocking the ejection port? It might not interfere, but still, all my frame mounts are attached from the other side.