How Good Could $50 Precision Rings Really Be? Featuring DiscoveryOpt
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 лип 2024
- My Patreon - / c_does
My SubscribeStar - www.subscribestar.com/c_does
Buy it Here - rebrand.ly/1iiqgve
We take a look at Discovery Optics' Precision Machined Rings, and figure out if they could possibly be any good for the $50 that they can be found for.
00:00 - OverView
15:57 - ReZero Test
18:23 - Conclusion
#discoveryoptics #precision #fpr
Just some things I use:
Under Cabinet Lights - rebrand.ly/8g5aku6
Weight Scale - rebrand.ly/s2gisg8
Packing Tape - rebrand.ly/hj6ta9a
ADM Recon - rebrand.ly/shq7x7p
C_DOES is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com, Adorama.com, and Primaryarms.com
![Lp. Последняя Реальность #97 ЧЁРНАЯ МАТЕРИЯ [Анти Скинт] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/k4MjXCzKsYw/mqdefault.jpg)
I discovered that company a little bit ago and after my first set of mounts from them I ordered more and replaced pretty much every set I have with the exception of some $200-300 mounts I have. I haven't heard nearly as good things about their actual optics, but the mounts they produce seem to be absolute top stuff and great cost.
I have a pair of the 34mm ones on a Sako A7 &mm Mag, and they have never disappointed.
Simple, inexpensive, aesthetic, and robust. Fantastic.
I have 3 sets of these rings, and they are worth every cent you pay for them!
Great review!
Fat bottom screws, you make the rockin world go round
These rings are amazing. I own several sets. As a machinist, I focus on the machining and fitting. I own both high end, name brand rings and budget. These inexpensive rings outperform some of the top tier sets. If you don’t like the white writing, get a sharpie.
crazy bastards even hand lapped the plastic box lol
I have 3 sets of them, in 35 & 34mm and I really like them with zero issues so far.
Very happy to see those. I’ve bought some Area419 Match rings and they absolutely don’t worth the price they’re asking for!
I just picked up a cantilever Discovery scope mount. Same plastic box. Fit and finish is excellent. $33 delivered.
Looks nice. Thanks for the great review !
They should include a proper size bit instead of a wrench to encourage using a torque driver.
C, would you please post the measurements of the recoil lugs? I was looking at these rings a couple days ago, but I don't know if they'll mount on my weaver rail. 😢
0.196 in (4.98 mm)
@@Gabbythecat5150 Bet. Thank you. :)
Wow. Those look really well made!
Ive thought about trying a set of QD rings instead of the ADM recon QD scope mount for my go-to AR to save a bit of weight.
The ADM weighs almost 9 oz i believe. I think i can get rings that weigh about half that.
Ill look into this company. Thanks for the info.
I went down the same road as you and ended up switching back to adm. the weight savings usually matter towards to far front end or the rear of the rifle. The middle I could really tell a difference. Just my experience, hopefully to save you some money
@@GuacIsExtra99 - yeah I get it. Weight balance is often more important than outright weight. But what's more important than front to rear weight bias and balance is weight up high, even on the receiver which is central.
A heavy scope sitting up high on the receiver, while generally well balanced for and aft has a tendency to make the rifle want to roll around its bore axis and becomes very "flip floppy", which is my problem.
If I could save 3 to 6 ounces up on top of the receiver it makes a big difference in handling.
I doubt QD rings would save that much but standard bolt on rings might pare weight down just enough.
I'm at about 32 oz between scope, QD mount, mag adjust lever, bubble level and scope caps. About 8.5 oz of that is my ADM recon QD mount.
Some 2 oz rings would help alot imo.
@@holdernewtshesrearin5471 that’s true yea the side to side is more with a heavier mount and optic
@@GuacIsExtra99 - it all matters. Depending on the type of rifle you're building and what you're doing with it.
Mr. C_DOES
I realize this question isn't an apples-to-apples comparison, but I was wondering if you'd recommend these scope rings over the UTG 'Accu-sync' QR mount. For the $ which do you think is a stronger/more reliable product? Which is more likely to hold zero? If it's the rings due to their inherent design strengths (not quickly removable) do you think the QD mount will hold zero well enough to not really be a factor in your decision.
Thank you.
I think it's more fair to compare one piece mount to another one-piece mount instead of rings?
Good to know
I would be willing to bet, whoever is MFG'ing those for Discovery is the same company that is making Arken's rings (which are also excellent rings at a similar price point). They look eerily similar.
Literally just offbrand Area 419 rings, but look nicer and 25% the cost lol.
All for it.
Area 419s are way nicer, they even make their own screw inhouse. Different worlds.
@@linkchen8245 If A419 is much nicer, then these must be total dogshit as I was extremely unimpressed with my A419 rings.
@@GldenRetriever whats wrong with 419'?
@@linkchen8245 For the price and all the bold claims they make, it doesn't hold up. A lot of finish imperfections and weighed close to 50% more than the competition (specifically talking about the 34mm one piece scope mount).
When they say these will be some of the nicest and best machined scope mounts you'll ever get and be one of the lightest in its class, you aren't seeing any of that. I returned mine the day I got it and am sticking with more budget offerings that are nicer made, just as durable, and only like 25% the cost.
@@GldenRetriever Oh ur talking about their new One piece mount. Too bad they did not live up to the price...
Can I ask a question as someone who doesn't know much about scopes and magnified optics .I have a $400 Vortex Crossfire2 3-12. My rifle and optic are already more accurate than I am. What does an optic that is twice or three times more expensive get me? I don't mean that in a sarcastic way.
Nothing can be applied across the board, but generally, the more expensive the optic the better the internals are. Meaning the turret adjustments are more robust and precise and also parallax adjustment will be more precise.
You will most likely get better glass with less distortion and chromatic aberration.
Speaking as a hunter, its an etra 5 or 10 minutes at dawn and dusk of being able to take a clean shot on an animal. That is about the only time I have ever really noticed the extra 1 or 2% of light transmission. But, for that once in a life time hunt, its worth the cash.
Whether an lpvo, mpvo, fixed power scope etc a lesser expensive optic can be perfectly suitable for whatever your intended purpose for the firearm is. Let's focus on the utility- does a more expensive optic benefit you in the way you intend to utilize the rifle and optic? Let's consider this from the perspective of a hunting rifle- a more expensive optic may provide advantage in optical resolution useful for identifying a once in lifetime buck in low light or extend your time in the field at dawn and dusk through better light transmission. You may gain additional confidence that your optic will better survive temperature and environmental changes by better seals for the internals potentially preventing an expensive hunting trip from disaster. There are legitimate reasons why a more expensive optic is worth considering but it really comes down to "Will you leverage the enhancements that the money represents?" I have decent rifle scopes but in my case I can't justify better than decent, my use case is 2 gun practical shooting competition and I don't require enhanced capability above a certain level of performance. I can appreciate the higher quality options but recognise that there isn't an advantage available that the equipment offers that would significantly improve where I finish in a practical shooting match.
It can be better glass, better internals, better fit and finish, better warranty, different focal planes, different features, etc, but sometimes you're paying for a better name or place of manufacturing, night force , Leupold, etc, although usually these companies produce a really nice, really durable scope, but there's plenty of those in lower budgets too. A lot of cheaper optics are made in Asia while some more expensive ones are made in Europe and North America. Once you get into the $200ish and beyond scope price I think you're usually getting beyond randomly breaking under recoil scopes, but it depends on your use case. Once you get past a certain price, your return on investment or cost to performance ratio, whatever you want to call it, is going to go way down. I think $200-$1000 is where most people are buying scopes that are practical, but some would differ. If it's made well enough for you and does what you need it to do, who cares what someone else thinks?
Better reticles, better eyebox, better field of view, better illumination, better glass clarity, and usually more durable too.
A better eyebox will let you get behind the scope faster and better in less than ideal circumstances.
Better glass clarity is going to let you take more confident shots.
I would think cnc would be more accurate than hand lapping huh?
if its from a trusted company yes?
You should get their name right in the headline...add the y.
XD Thanks mate. Long nights show face.
Those seem pretty nice for the money. Now can they make them without all that writing all over?
you can cover the writing up with some birchwood casey aluminum black
Embrace rattle canning every rifle
Spray paint.
I'm only here to listen to CDoes say "wonderful" over and over again...
These rings prove why mounts like Badgers are WILDLYYYYY overpriced.
Badger has a Chinese clone that is EVERY bit as good, you can hardly tell the difference. Badger's cost $400 (plus add ons) the clone is $57 (including the add ons)
Title of video is wrong. "Discover optics".
So, my issue with pre-lapped rings or rings that claim that no lapping is necessary is: stacked tolerances. You can’t guarantee that the scope base or picatinny rail on the rifle is machined with the same precision. Therefore, you can’t guarantee that the rings are truly aligned.
This is what I was taught too. Mount everything, then lap for as close to perfect alignment as possible to maximize contact with scope body.
Because of this, I wonder if pre-lapped rings are truly lapped for alignment, or just polished for machining marks
So do you lap your scope body and your scope base and your picatinny rail? To make sure they’re all perfectly flat?
@@joeymedina7115 pic rail would be irrelevant, given a solid tension, as lapping the rings would adjust for that.
And, technically, yes, it would be nice if you could lap the scope body too, but I can't imagine that's advisable
but if pre lapped ring got mounted and became unaligned, would it be a problem with the rail being off-spec or misaligned which should be replaced?
@linkchen8245 As I was taught (noting then all the caveats that come with that statement) lapping rings was greatly needed in the era of hand machined mounting holes, especially those of sporterized mil-surp. The misalignment was commonly significant enough to cause minimal contact between any set of rings and the scope body, causing movement under recoil. Lapping created straighter planes in the rings, allowing increased friction. Leupold's dovetail mounts allowed the yaw of the alignment to be adjusted to match the discrepancy without lapping, making it a desirable product for rifles of this era
Practically speaking, modern machining has likely made lapping somewhat irrelevant for all but the most task oriented builds (high recoil, high repeatability, etc). The average hunter or Saturday shooter (including yours truly) will likely not see much advantage to lapping in most cases
Following the intent of the lapping practice though, so long as the out-of-spec base still allowed rings to be sufficiently clamped as to not move, lapping would correct for most other misalignment caused by the spec deviation. Personally, I still do if for 2-piece mounts (rings), but not for 1 piece picatinny. Ymmv
Nice review and nice rings. Unfortunately the torque sequence numbers and torque values are a turn-off for me. Right up there with firearm mfg that put "Read manual before use" on side of gun. No doubt this is in response to amount of returns they get.
Or it could be that people buying Discovery optics know little about optics or how to mount them.
@@stevennewman4778 this is it
I like it that my rings tell me what torque I don’t have to find the owners manual when I take something apart
it's chrome plated so it's def good
That’s not chrome plating; it’s bare aluminum.
I’ve bought $30 rings that hold zero on a 308 😂 I’m praying for the day a UA-camr actually tells the truth about these lol a lot of CONSUMERS are going to have a heartbreak when they find out they’re being exploited
Is C-Does a little person?
no lol
Man 😂
Is this a sponsored video?
Almost guaranteed
Maybe watch the video and find out. He mentions it 2 minutes in.
@@jason91notchI was specifically wondering if it was sponsored, as in, he's basically filming an ad for them. Whereas some people are given items to review but are still allowed to be honest about them.
@@BeansBroBeans It's the latter of the two.
@@NotTargetlatter? Meaning what?
those rings should be $5 not $50
You couldn't get aluminum cans melted into brick of the same weight for five dollars dude
$5 you can not get a burger
this guy never shot a gun.
😂😂😂