A bit of an example of what I look for in a scope mount
Last Thursday, I did a livestream on scope mounts. One of the gentlemen who joined me for the stream suggested I try a mount I had not seen before, called the Pinnacle mount from Optimum parts company. I made a mental note to look into it a little more carefully and see if I want to test one.
Now that I looked at the pictures on their website, I lost all interest. Here is why.
I attached a couple of pictures from their website. There are two obvious things there that I see that are a potential problem. Now, a bunch of people I am sure use these mounts without any issues, but what I am doing here is essentially just playing the odds. I want to minimize the probability of a failure at the worst possible moment.
Problem 1: the screws between the ring caps have conical heads. That's just a bad idea. The ring halves can not self align on the scope tube, so the probability of shear and deformation on the scope tube is higher than it should be.
Problem2: there are purely cosmetic (I presume) grooves in the top ring half that compromise the stiffness of the ring.
They did not have a good picture of how the rail clamp works. While it looks a little suspect as well, I would need to take a more careful look to be sure.
To re-iterate: none of this guarantees failure, but it is enough for me to lose all interest. Given how many options are out there, why would I want to?
As a matter of general principle, I intensely dislike all the cosmetic cuts and skeletonizations, unless there is evidence of analysis. I want function over form, not the other way around.