Spuhr unimount vs seperate rings

Kevin M. said:
Curious to know if the people having issues with the SPUHR unimount bubble level is one of them not having proper cheek rest position and causing a bad cheek weld perhaps?

I am able to simply open my left eye and the bubble level is right there for me. No issues with any of the 6 units I have used.

An interesting lesson I learned that drives home just how important a good cheek weld is to accurate shooting was learned at one of hungrys precision rifle clinics a few years ago.

Lie down prone behind your rifle and focus on a spot on the wall or on a target at the range. Keep cheek weld so you can see the target clearly, and hold the position for 5-10 minutes. If you start tensing up and getting strained, you don't have good cheek weld and are putting a lot of stress in your neck to hold the position. A simple trick he used was to hand out simple foam pads (1/8" or 1/4" thin camping/ yoga style pads cut into small pieces work perfect) and tape them to your rifle stock to increase the height of the cheek weld, and repeat the exercise. Repeat adding more foam until you get the perfect height.

When you hit the right spot for your perfect cheek weld, you will likely be able to sit as still as a sack of potatoes behind the gun with virtually no stress until the end of the exercise. This small and easy test made a huge impact on me because it shows you how fast you really get uncomfortable and shaky behind the rifle with improper cheek weld, and equally how much more comfortable it is to shoot a rifle with perfect cheek weld.


Try it out with your rifle and the results may surprise you if you don't have a properly set up cheek riser.
Click to expand...

Give it a try in 10 years, you'll find that the eyes don't focus as well on things that are close regardless of how good your cheek weld is.
 
The Golden Girls said:
I personally would go with the Spuhr mount, 1 piece, I see it like eliminating variables, less parts to work loose. Yes they are expensive, but at least they are truly well made and thought out. All the best. Dave & The Girls
Click to expand...

Yep. Especially for a 50BMG.

17499805_10154501651584352_1884371414_o.jpg
 
I love the Spuhr mount, I am very pleased with it. I am pretty sure they were designed with the PMII in mind, and all of the clearances worked out very well on this setup. Highly recommended if you can swing the crazy price tag, I snagged this one on the EE for a little less than retail.

IMG_1457.jpg
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1457.jpg
    IMG_1457.jpg
    97.6 KB · Views: 74
I prefer separate rings. I can space the rings where I want and I can pressure the picatinny rail lugs how I like. In this setup, three rings are pushing forward on lugs while one is pushing back. It makes for stability in both directions during the recoil pulse.

 
propliner said:
I prefer separate rings. I can space the rings where I want and I can pressure the picatinny rail lugs how I like. In this setup, three rings are pushing forward on lugs while one is pushing back. It makes for stability in both directions during the recoil pulse.

Click to expand...

I have to admit that is pretty slick, very nice setup. There is certainly a recoil pulse to contend with there on that big girl.
 
Wildey said:
I have to admit that is pretty slick, very nice setup. There is certainly a recoil pulse to contend with there on that big girl.
Click to expand...

The Spuhr has just a single lug engaging underneath and relies mainly on clamping force for security. When you get into 40oz scopes it had better be tight.
 
Wildey said:
I never really considered the number of lugs, I can see how your setup would be more effective for heavy recoil/heavy scope.
Click to expand...

Yes, Spuhr relies a lot on clamping force that's 90 degrees to the direction of recoil. Granted, their one lug should prevent any forward movement and they do clamp really well.

I like a certain Badger ring setup that uses a set screw to force the ring ahead to the lug, but I wonder if that screw might gall the lugs. I'd like to see it up close.
 
MartyK2500 said:
It's a .308, which i will want to try 1km some day, but realistically, i only have access to 700M right now.
So 20moa rail + 34mm tube elevation range of adjustment should get me far enough.

Once i know height, i might find a spuhr on EE i see xtra highs pop up from time to time as people trade for lower
I still need to see chassis first hand. I got a feeling my standard height atrs rail will be lower than top of non-railed handguard.
As MDT sells a jacked rail for the ESS, just like cadex has a jacked rail for their first strike
Add a 56mm objective to that, i definately won't be going low. Either high or xtra high
Click to expand...

Wait until you get your scope and chassis. Then stack coins on top of your reciever and your scope on the stack. Stack until you have the clearance you need from the rifle. Then measure the height of the stack and boom, you have the height you need. IMO, the spurh mount is nice if you are swapping the scope between rifles and/or you have a flat top rifle. Rings will swap over fine as well, but if you are really knit-picky, the spuhr should hold a little truer as to its zero.

I thought the integrated bubble level was cool as well. But, I have an MPA BA chassis on the way, so the level is included in the stock!

Oh, and you'll have lots of room for adjustment to shoot to 1km with a 20 moa rail. If you said one mile, depending on the caliber, you might be pushing it.
 
mebiuspower said:
The AI dovetail don't even have any recoil lug?
Click to expand...

All of a sudden i was thinking yeah i only have 1 recoil lug on my mount, and was thinking it's only .308 shouldn't move.
You got me thinking, AI in 338 Lapua, still got the dovetail with no possible recoil lug, so either AIs design is flawed or recoil lugs are over rated
Edit, just saw they do have 1 recoil lug
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom