Page 3 of 3
Re: What reddot did Zins use at Perry?
Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 12:43 pm
by Jon Eulette
Slide will travel to rear during recoil and ejection port is not blocked by the mount.
Jon
Re: What reddot did Zins use at Perry?
Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 12:58 pm
by Isabel1130
Jon Eulette wrote:Slide will travel to rear during recoil and ejection port is not blocked by the mount.
Jon
Yes, I can see that. But why have it on the right side at all?
Re: What reddot did Zins use at Perry?
Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 2:12 pm
by Jon Eulette
Gets the scope lower to bore line. That's why :)
It's not in the way.
Jon
Re: What reddot did Zins use at Perry?
Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 2:25 pm
by Isabel1130
Jon Eulette wrote:Gets the scope lower to bore line. That's why :)
It's not in the way.
Jon
Why is that? I have David Sams frame mounts on my guns. They attach to the dust cover on the left side, and are pretty darn close to the bore.
In case of a jammed round, I really dont like the idea of a scope mount covering the ejection port. It just seems like the least good way to do a low profile frame mount. You opinion may differ but I would like to get some technical details on why a right side frame mount allows you to have the scope closer to the bore line. Im not seeing it, in my head.
Re: What reddot did Zins use at Perry?
Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 2:53 pm
by Jon Eulette
The scope is rotated 90 degrees moving the scope as low as possible over the slide. Probably only 1/8" to 3/16" lower than Dave's mount. Notice nothing between the scope and the slide. Dave's has a mount between slide and scope.
Jon
Re: What reddot did Zins use at Perry?
Posted: Thu May 04, 2017 10:10 pm
by SPPcoach
Isabel1130 wrote: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.
If the optic was mounted that way the optic would be looking at you . . . or the knob would be under the dot. That would make adjustments difficult.
Re: What reddot did Zins use at Perry?
Posted: Thu May 04, 2017 11:54 pm
by Isabel1130
SPPcoach wrote:Isabel1130 wrote: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.
If the optic was mounted that way the optic would be looking at you . . . or the knob would be under the dot. That would make adjustments difficult.
I understand that part now. Everything is a trade off. This is one, I wouldn't care to make for a scope closer to the bore line by an eighth or 3/16 of an inch.
If the price ever comes down a lot on aimpoints I might consider it, but without several modifications I find them difficult to deal with. At one point I owned three of them. The factory mount and screws were totally inadequate and I wouldn't shoot one at Perry or Canton without tube extensions for the rain.
Nice scope but not worth double or triple what an Ultradot cost. I also had some issues with Aimpoint's
Customer service.
Im sure when Zins calls them, they pick up the phone.... :-)
Re: What reddot did Zins use at Perry?
Posted: Fri May 05, 2017 7:36 am
by davekp
I spoke to the AMU armorer at the Dixie regional 2 weeks ago and he said they are using the Aimpoint 9000 pretty much exclusively.
Re: What reddot did Zins use at Perry?
Posted: Sat May 06, 2017 4:04 am
by Isabel1130
davekp wrote:I spoke to the AMU armorer at the Dixie regional 2 weeks ago and he said they are using the Aimpoint 9000 pretty much exclusively.
Yes, a much better scope than the Micro in my opinion. If money were no object probably what I would be using as well.
Re: What reddot did Zins use at Perry?
Posted: Sun May 07, 2017 8:19 pm
by Jon Eulette
I use 3 micros and 1 9000sc. I find no difference in quality just size of view. The 9000 is quite heavy. AMU uses full power match jhp ammunition. For softer loads the 9000 might be a problem. I have no parallax issues with either scope they are both perfectly on call at 50 yds.
Jon
Re: What reddot did Zins use at Perry?
Posted: Mon May 08, 2017 6:28 am
by Christopher Miceli
Jon Eulette wrote:I use 3 micros and 1 9000sc. I find no difference in quality just size of view. The 9000 is quite heavy. AMU uses full power match jhp ammunition. For softer loads the 9000 might be a problem. I have no parallax issues with either scope they are both perfectly on call at 50 yds.
Jon
maybe its the slide weight they enjoy? a nice chugging
Re: What reddot did Zins use at Perry?
Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2018 7:05 am
by Wsuman
These mounts are fantastically elegant and make so much sense to me.
I’m convinced it’s time to get out of the UD rail mount on my Pardini.
Is anyone making Aimpoint mounts this low for other platforms than 1911s?
Walt
Re: What reddot did Zins use at Perry?
Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2018 7:54 pm
by -TT-
Wsuman wrote:Is anyone making Aimpoint mounts this low
KC Crawford sells the Kodiak Machine mount that's pretty darn low and pretty darn nice. I have the regular model, for Picatinny-type rails, with a different center screw it fits Weavers too. About 1/4" lower than the stock Aimpoint base it replaces.
The Pardini model shows out of stock, but KC is very responsive and helpful.
https://kcskustomcreations.com/product/ ... ini-mount/