M14 Forum banner
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,822 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I was going to trade my National Match for something else. But I decided that since I had the rifle and it shoots really good I would scope it out. I have been looking at mounts and I am torn between the sadlak airborne or the A.R.M.S. model 18. I am looking for a very low profile and solid mount. I will also be using the lowest rings and the smallest diameter belled scope I can find. What have been your experiences with either of these scope mounts.
Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,667 Posts
ARMS 18 is a great mount! I believe it is still the lowest out there. The only possible issue is that the receiver has to be in spec for the ARMS 18 to mount as designed. I have a Fulton receiver that had zero issues with the ARMS 18.

I have no experience with the Sadlak mounts, but I do have their guide rod and tools which are top quality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
316 Posts
I use and like arms mounts. had the problem that one didn't fit a receiver correctly so useless on that rifle and have had the problem on some rifles that ejected cases to jammed between op rod and mount every 15-20 rounds or so. they're solid mounts that aren't going anywhere once you've got them set on there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,040 Posts
I have a Sadlak Airborne and really like it. Top quality part and fit my rifle perfectly. If a scope mount doesn't fit a receiver properly, it's most likely the receiver, not the mount. If you're running smaller objective optics, then the lowest mount with low rings might be advantageous but if you're going to run an optic with a larger objective and need some clearance then the height of the Sadlak might be of benefit. Either IMO are of equal quality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3Gunnah

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,609 Posts
You can't go lower than an ARMS #18. I have a small bell scope and it barely clears the barrel. I have to make sure the rear sight is below 100m when I put the scope on, also. I use a Leupold Mk 4 2.5-8x36 on quick-detach Leupold rings.

I can shoot this relatively comfortably without a cheekpad on my USGI walnut stock, though it is nicer with the thin neoprene cheek pad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3Gunnah

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,481 Posts
Arms #18 it's strong ,stable and the lowest, use the ring height for different objective lens size. Use the QD rings and you don't have to remove the mount to use your sights.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3Gunnah

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,684 Posts
Well if you know your scopes outer dimensions NO EXPERT made a ring height calculator in the optics section, just ask some of us to provide the required mount measurements off of our rifles and see which one is a better fit for your scope and ring choice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
832 Posts
I've scoped only 3 M1a's, the limiting factor on getting the scope height the lowest was the eyepiece hitting the iron sights. On all 3 I was able to get the eyepiece right down on the sights using Sadlak mounts on all. If I would have had a lower mount I would have to use higher rings to clear the iron sights but the scope would be at the same height.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,822 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
This is the best site ever, full of excellent people. Because of the kindness of a member I will get to try out a mount to make sure it works before actual purchase.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,822 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
I talked to my local shop today about bringing me in a Nikon Prostaff 5. I think I would probably go with that if it fits. But I will be using a Bushnell 4 -12x40 in the meantime until it comes in.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
I have a Vortex scope on an ARMS # 18 with a set of TPS medium height rings on my NM and it sits about as low as Hammonje's. I doubt I could get it any lower or more solid. No problems with staying tight and keeping zero.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
98 Posts
I put the ARMS #18 on my SuperMatch. nice and low. Since I was putting ascope on I was NOT concerned with the iron sights anymore and out came the rear aperture. That allows a real low setup that you won't need a cheek riser for. The problem initially with this setup was that spent cartridges would occasionally jam under the scope / mount. Be prepared to tweak the ejector spring to allow the empties directly to the right and not forward at the 2 o'clock position that they normally go. Once I did this I haven't had a problem.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,352 Posts
I have both mounts. Some guys experienced ejection problems of the brass hitting the mount on the ARMS, I never did, and had it mounted on a couple of rifles.
I have degenerating vertebrae in my neck so now I need some height to my scope.
Really like the airborne mount.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top