Any one had this problem w/ Larue Mounts?

[skypig53]

http://i469.photobucket.com/albums/rr52/christian_caine/OpticComparison.jpg

The gear in question is an Aimpoint Micro H-1 on a LT Medium (HK) mount and an Aimpoint 3X Magnifier on a LT Short Flip to Side Mount. It is mounted on a S&W M&P15T. No cant built into the upper receiver's rail. The pics on the left are what is depicted on Larue Tactical's website and the pics on the right are what it looks like on my rifle. I am aware that there is a slight offset, i.e. the magnifier sits higher than the optic, that is made clear on LT's site. The gear I received however Has quite a bit more offset than what is depicted on the chart. I am also aware than the medium RDS mount is designed to be mounted on an HK/Gas Piston type operating system to give a lower 1/3 co-witness when using a diopter sight. I went with the medium mount to get the absolute co-witness with standard AR BUIS.

I emailed LT and was told to remove the magnifier from the mount to look for a 3T or 3S marking (T for tall and S for short). I did so and it is indeed the short mount. Upon relaying this info to LT their response was basically, no impact - no idea and if it isn't too awkward then go with it. I replied that that wasn't going to cut it and have yet to receive a reply.

I'm a heartbeat away from throwing it all back in the box with the photos I've taken and demanding a full refund but LT has never done me wrong before and I'm hoping the issue is just slowly filtering it's way up the chain of command until someone with some sense will admit that it's just jacked up and a replacement is in order.

Has anyone seen anything like this with this set-up or Larue products/customer service in general?

Am I just jacked up and this isn't as big a deal as I'm making it out to be?

[andy_ita]

have u sent this pics to LT?

[Mike]

http://i469.photobucket.com/albums/rr52/christian_caine/OpticComparison.jpg

The gear I received however Has quite a bit more offset than what is depicted on the chart.

From looking at the graphics at the LT website I assume that is a "photoshop mount":

http://www.laruetactical.com/pics/Charts/LT-649-S_Chart.jpg

http://www.laruetactical.com/pics/Charts/LT-649-T_Chart.jpg

Compare the position of the locking lever in both pics - the LT-660-HK mount seems pretty much the same amount to high that your actual picture suggests.
The locking bases should be identical and thus on the same height. So somebody messed up either scaling or positioning of the whole mount on the LT-649-S Chart.
You even can see some "air" through one of the slots below the HK-Mount. So this probably "works as designed", just the graphic is misleading.

Just my 2 cent...

[skypig53]

From looking at the graphics at the LT website I assume that is a "photoshop mount":

http://www.laruetactical.com/pics/Charts/LT-649-S_Chart.jpg

http://www.laruetactical.com/pics/Charts/LT-649-T_Chart.jpg

Compare the position of the locking lever in both pics - the LT-660-HK mount seems pretty much the same amount to high that your actual picture suggests.
The locking bases should be identical and thus on the same height. So somebody messed up either scaling or positioning of the whole mount on the LT-649-S Chart.
You even can see some "air" through one of the slots below the HK-Mount. So this probably "works as designed", just the graphic is misleading.

Just my 2 cent...

I don't think it's anything sinister like photoshopping. I actually turned the RDS optic around on the mount so the locking levers of both mounts were on the same side of the rifle.[:D] I did however mount them as depicted in the chart originally. I just think the problem is more obvious with the throw lever out of the way.

I do agree in so far as the issue is the height of the RDS mount and not the magnifier mount. I don't think it's out of the question for even a GTG company like LT to have something come out of the mill a few centimeters off now and then. Shit happens and I am patient as long as things are working their way towards a satisfactory solution.

[Mike]

I don't think it's out of the question for even a GTG company like LT to have something come out of the mill a few centimeters off now and then.

Probably they are really only lacking in PS-QC...


I don't think it's anything sinister like photoshopping.

I still do - but of course I can be wrong. This is what I mean:

http://www.abload.de/img/wevo_lt_660_a6o68.jpg

Have a look at the see-through-portion at the first picatinny cut from the right. When the mount would be correctly seated, this would not happen. The fuzzyness indicates that this is was inserted by a graphics program rather than photographed in the real world. The differing finish also indicates that.

Compare the seat of the mount with the other picture with the non-HK-mount:

http://www.abload.de/img/wevo_lt_660_bksrh.jpg

The throw-levers should be at the same height by design - at least they are at the LT670-EO and LT-660 I own and use.

[Mike]

To further clarify my point that this is mainly a photoshop issue and not a "real world" issue:

http://img7.abload.de/img/animwuuc.gif

Watch the lever moving up and down between the two pictures.

So what you see with your actual mount is the offset LaRue is talking about in the graph, only that the effect is much bigger as the PS setup suggests. This is what I meant by "works as designed".

[skypig53]

To further clarify my point that this is mainly a photoshop issue and not a "real world" issue:

http://img7.abload.de/img/animwuuc.gif

Watch the lever moving up and down between the two pictures.

So what you see with your actual mount is the offset LaRue is talking about in the graph, only that the effect is much bigger as the PS setup suggests. This is what I meant by "works as designed".

Well that's just [deleted] fantastic.

So I suppose that Customer service suggesting that I "go with it" was their way of telling me to pack sand.

oh well, the rifle has been fired numerous times since I got the RDS and mount so I suppose I'm stuck with it. I got the magnifier last week. I'll see if I can fabricate some type of shim to go between the RDS and the mount.

Thanks Mike that clears things up nicely.

[Stickman]

Has anyone seen anything like this with this set-up or Larue products/customer service in general?

Am I just jacked up and this isn't as big a deal as I'm making it out to be?



Based off that image, I'm not sure how anyone would be happy receiving that. Try talking to someone higher up, and email them the picture. I'm sure they will be more than happy to help you.

Let us know how it all works out for you.

[Skintop911]

Email the man himself: mark@laruetactical.com