Looking at different mounts is sort of an ongoing thing for me.
There is no perfection in this world, but some get close. I have been pretty open that I am quite impressed with the Area 419 mounts, for example, and I now have two of them, one 34mm and one 36mm that my Tangent 7-35x56 lives in. Over time, I expect to have more of them. They work well and seem to ahve the fewest compromises of all of the single piece mounts I have tried to date.
That having been said, I do not plan to stop my continuous overview of different mount designs. One that keeps on popping up is the M-Brace mount by American Rifle Company. I have one and in my use it has worked rather nicely. However, I live in what qualifies as a fair weather state.
Also, I was looking into LRF mounts and the LRF bridge on the M-Brace is very nicely done.
Last time I talked about these mounts, I mentioned that I am not a fan of hinges. To me, it is a solution looking for a problem. Also, I heard of several people having issues with the mounts cracking around the hinges when it got really cold. That sorta made sense to me and re-inforced my suspicions about hinges, especially since the single screw in the ARC design is tightened to a fairly signifiant torque setting. The reason people like these mounts is that it is a single screw design. However, there is no free lunch. Something somewhere is going to be stressed.
Up until recently, I have only heard of ARC mounts/rings cracking in the cold second hand. I had it on my list to do some experimentation, but now it looks like I do not have to. A friend of mine lives in a colder state than I do and he sent me a few pictures where two of his M-Brace mounts developed cracks around the hinges. He is an avid competitor and he spent quite a lot of time in horrid winter blizzards trying to shoot a match or two last winter. He looked at two of the M-Brace mounts he has and sent me these pictures. Now, this is not hearsay. This is directly from someone I know who is a serious shooter and has good attention to detail. I have high confidence that he did not screw anything up when mounting the scopes.
Now, does that mean that M-Brace mounts are a no go and all that? Absolutely not.
These are very good mounts, but if you spend a significant amount of time in temperature extremes, this is something to consider. Also, there is a LOT of these out there and I have only been able to dig up a few occasions when this happened with only two being from someone I actually know. This is clearly very uncommon. By comparison, I have seen FAR more issues with Spuhr mounts. So many more that I lost count. We are talking an order of magnitude or two. With the M-Brace, it is likely a combination of extreme weather conditions and a tolerance stack up where the mounts were on the tighter side of things and then went through multiple extreme temperature sycles.
While I dislike the hinges, what I really like about the M-Brace mount is the accessory mounting method. That serrated itnerface is robust. The way the LRF bridge mounts is likely among the sturdiest in the industry and has the least likelihood of transferrign any shock to the scope body. If I were looking to set up a weapon mounted LRF on something with serious kick, the M-Brace would definitely be in the running.
What I do not like is that I can not remove the scope from the mount without removing the bridge. Then again, that's mostly a problem for people like me who mount and re-mount optics all the time.
Once the LRF bridge is on there, two of the accessory mounting points are occupied. There are two on the bridge itself, but they are less useful for me since they are a little higher up. I would normally want a level on there, but I can't see it because of the side focus turret.
Beyond that, my only real complaint with the M-Brace mount is that it is relatively heavy. Then again, once you are dealing with a three pound precision scope and a pound-plus LRF, four extra ounces of aluminum in the mount is not really a major issue.
Ultimately, we choose gear based on the application and accept compromises where appropriate. Everything has some sort of a compromise to it. WIth the M-Brace, it appears to be the same thing that makes it stand out from other mount designs out there: the hinge.
I am 6’ 1”, and the ONLY Con I see is that it’s just a bit shorter than I’d like. Maybe 5-7” taller would be perfect… I did not really see any other cons. The Field Optics FPH-105 video head is naturally not capable of tilting sideways and it allows mounting XF-100-400 lens immediately above the center column. Of Arca Swiss 38mm QR plate It makes having a heavy gimbal head or (what I used extensively with longer focal length lenses - Induro GHBA Gimbal that could work with any ballhead that is sturdy enough to keep it from slipping). In the beginning of my experiments with telephoto I would simply turn the ball head’s stem 90 degrees to the side and rotate the collar on the lens 90 degrees, but it just did not seem stable, especially with light tripods. Call me paranoid but suspending $2500 like this kept me from enjoying the experience. This time the FPH-105 video head provided nice stability at a fraction of weight (9.0 oz) and it’s 7 lb load capacity was just enough to support my setup. 2.5" height above the top of the central column was about the same as the XB-25P ballhead. I must admit that I always hanged my bag on the hook at the bottom of the central column for stability, and it seemed very stable. I would not do this in Iceland where the winds on the coast were insane! I think some common sense will keep your gear safe: if the wind is blowing you off your feet, leaving your gear on tripod is not good idea. In Oregon, ocean breeze did not concern me, and the rig worked perfectly!
