Bassett Scope Mount and use of Iron Sights - M14 Forum

M14 Forum


Bassett Scope Mount and use of Iron Sights

This is a discussion on Bassett Scope Mount and use of Iron Sights within the The M14 forums, part of the M14 M1A Forum category; A lot of people have asked about the use of iron sights and amount of adjustment available when scopes were mounted. With my own mount ...


Go Back   M14 Forum > M14 M1A Forum > The M14

Reply
 
LinkBack Moderator Tools Display Modes

Old February 27th, 2008, 12:47 PM   #1
Master Gunner
 
flintsghost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Frostbite Falls
Posts: 927
Bassett Scope Mount and use of Iron Sights

A lot of people have asked about the use of iron sights and amount of adjustment available when scopes were mounted. With my own mount which Bill made I have 20 moa of rake in the mount - this was one of Bill's very early mounts and he took it off his own rifle to sell to me. Later versions have less rake. When I mounted a Leupold 4-12x40 AO 1" tube scope in medium weaver rings as recommended and did my initial tests, I could not see the front sight completely because the 40mm front objective was in the correct place to block all but the bottom half of the front sight where the screw mounts it to the flashider.

HOWEVER, Today I tried a different set up. I had gotten a set of Weaver low 30mm rings which are about the same as every other makers medium and the lowest Weaver makes in 30mm. I mounted a Leupold Mark 4 M1/LR 3.5-10x40mm scope with a 30mm tube. I noticed when I was adjusting cant and the small amount of eye relief adjustment that I had, that this scope set pretty high. When I got done I found that I could actually see the entire front sight and would be able to use my iron just as if it didn't have a scope. I was able to get 17 clicks of elevation before my bell began to show in the top of my sight picture and was able to still see well enough to shoot with my iron all the way to 20 clicks of elevation. There was still elevation left but I was out of front sight view due to the front bell. If memory serves me right from my old M14 days 17 clicks is way out past 300 meters. I blush to admit that I don't use iron at all any more simply because my eyes aren't that good and I have an astigmatism that makes using scopes a trial if I try to wear glasses. I'm going to try to take pictures to illustrate this but they won't be up till later this evening. I am also going to try another 30mm Mark 4 which is a 4.5-14x50 M1/LR to see what it offers and will try to take pics of it also. There is more than enough room for it on the handguard but it may interfere with iron and I will edit this post to add that information when I know for sure. This should answer a lot of questions about whether iron can be used with the Bassett mount or not. Bill knows as I called him and told him when I discovered this little serendipidous factoid.

With a Leupold Mark 4 4.5-14x50mm LR/M1 30mm, you can't see enough of the front sight screw through the rear aperture to get much of an idea where the rifle is pointed so, Iron is not useable with that scope combination. But the scope does fit well and clears the handguard with room to spare using "cheap" weaver LOW 30mm rings.

The added pictures show 1.) the Mark 4 3.5-10x40mm LR/M1 on the Bassett mount with low weaver 30mm rings. One can readily see how much room is under the scope front to rear. 2.) shows the rear sight aperture all the way bottomed out. 3) shows up with 20 clicks of elevation and at that time I can see all of the front sight post and slightly above if aiming 4.) shows the Mark 4 4.5-14x50mm LR/M1 on the rifle in the Bassett mount.






Last edited by flintsghost; February 27th, 2008 at 02:45 PM. Reason: Add pictures and text on 50mm objective
flintsghost is offline  
Remove Ads
Old February 27th, 2008, 04:14 PM   #2
BDH
Old Salt
 
BDH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: La Mesa, CA
Posts: 1,550
Angry Mount height?

Is your mount the current mount that is a bit taller than the older mounts? Romi Bassett emailed me that the newer mounts are taller than the one I have.
Thanks,
Bruce

BDH is offline  
Old February 27th, 2008, 05:41 PM   #3
Banned Camp
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 1,109
Does mount height have any effect on brass being ejected?

JunkyardDog is offline  
 
Old February 27th, 2008, 05:59 PM   #4
Master Gunner
 
flintsghost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Frostbite Falls
Posts: 927
Quote:
Originally Posted by BDH View Post
Is your mount the current mount that is a bit taller than the older mounts? Romi Bassett emailed me that the newer mounts are taller than the one I have.
Thanks,
Bruce
My mount is the current height that Bassett calls high or standard as opposed to the low. Bill took it off his own gun and sent it to me. At that time I had his low and his standard/high and the prototype picatinny rail mount. This is the same exact height as his standard/high.

flintsghost is offline  
Old February 27th, 2008, 06:03 PM   #5
Master Gunner
 
flintsghost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Frostbite Falls
Posts: 927
Quote:
Originally Posted by JunkyardDog View Post
Does mount height have any effect on brass being ejected?
NO, the M1A's tend to eject more to the side than to the top. Even with the picatinny prototype that sets right over the middle and above the bolt, the ejection of rounds on my M1A doesn't hit the mount. This mount with 30mm rings puts the scope a bit higher than that as you can see from the pictures. I used the low mount with high extension rings during my initial test and it was much lower than this and the rounds eject just fine and don't mark the scope or the mount at all. I don't think ejection is an issue with any of Bills mounts and except for Bill, himself, I'm one of the few who have used and shot all of them including the new prototypes.

flintsghost is offline  
Old February 27th, 2008, 11:51 PM   #6
Banned Camp
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 1,109
This just keeps getting better and better!

JunkyardDog is offline  
Old February 28th, 2008, 12:52 AM   #7
Lifer
 
Visigoth9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 2,141
All performance standards and qualities aside which so far have been positive

he ought to bevel those hard edges and maybe throw a radius on those corners...

besides hard edges=finish wear

get a little industrial design into it...

Visigoth9 is offline  
Old February 28th, 2008, 09:03 AM   #8
Scout Sniper
 
Groundhog's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 766
I want a plastic one...

I kid, I kid!!!

Groundhog is offline  
Old February 28th, 2008, 10:54 AM   #9
Master Gunner
 
flintsghost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Frostbite Falls
Posts: 927
Quote:
Originally Posted by Visigoth9 View Post
All performance standards and qualities aside which so far have been positive

he ought to bevel those hard edges and maybe throw a radius on those corners...

besides hard edges=finish wear

get a little industrial design into it...
I have one of his mounts that is older and a friend has three, the first of which was purchased in 79-80 and they don't have problems with finish wear and are used all the time. I understand what you're saying but if he takes the time to do all that prior to sending them out for "hard anodizing" which is an incredible finish, then instead of costing $97.50 it would be $125 or more. Hand work takes time, slows down the process and while it does end up with a little nicer aesthetics, it doesn't do much for functionality, and does cost money.

flintsghost is offline  
Old February 28th, 2008, 11:09 AM   #10
Snappin In
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Vancouver, Western Canada
Posts: 25
Speaking only for myself, of course, it strikes me that aesthetic concerns are the only issue with this mount. It seems like it works really well and it's clearly a simple machine (the best kind) but personally I'd be more than happy to pay another $25 and get something a little prettier.

I can't quite bring myself to get a weaver one (partly because all my stuff is picatinny anyway) mainly on account of the aesthetic aspect.

I guess that's dumb but M14s are so pretty to me I just can't bring myself to put an ugly mount on one, no matter how well it works!

Fortunately I find the picatinny prototype a lot more attractive!

misanthropist is offline  
Old February 28th, 2008, 11:41 AM   #11
Master Gunner
 
flintsghost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Frostbite Falls
Posts: 927
Quote:
Originally Posted by misanthropist View Post
Speaking only for myself, of course, it strikes me that aesthetic concerns are the only issue with this mount. It seems like it works really well and it's clearly a simple machine (the best kind) but personally I'd be more than happy to pay another $25 and get something a little prettier.

I can't quite bring myself to get a weaver one (partly because all my stuff is picatinny anyway) mainly on account of the aesthetic aspect.

I guess that's dumb but M14s are so pretty to me I just can't bring myself to put an ugly mount on one, no matter how well it works!

Fortunately I find the picatinny prototype a lot more attractive!
Well that's a personal choice. Another factor to consider is he is a one man operation. If he stops to make it prettier, which everyone doesn't particularly care about (that's why they make chocolate and vanilla) then he can't be working on the other orders or finishing up the tooling and tests to make the picatinny mount. Personally, I like it just fine. But feel free to send them an email and express your opinion. Bill's the kind of guy that will read it and consider what you are saying. He may or may not act on it, but I know he will read it.

flintsghost is offline  
Old February 28th, 2008, 12:39 PM   #12
Lifer
 
4570govt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: AR,USA
Posts: 3,388
Only thing I don't like about the mount is, that now there is a sizeable waiting list for another one. I really like the one I have.

4570govt is offline  
Old February 28th, 2008, 03:10 PM   #13
Banned Camp
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 1,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4570govt. View Post
Only thing I don't like about the mount is, that now there is a sizeable waiting list for another one. I really like the one I have.
Darn, knew that would be the case now that I've got some money freed up!

JunkyardDog is offline  
Old February 28th, 2008, 05:13 PM   #14
Master Gunner
 
flintsghost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Frostbite Falls
Posts: 927
Fear not, you order one and he'll get it to you pretty quick, comparatively speaking.

flintsghost is offline  
Old February 29th, 2008, 01:00 AM   #15
Master Gunner
 
flintsghost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Frostbite Falls
Posts: 927
I talked with Bill Bassett last night about the back log of orders. He told me the website says delivery
in 2 to 4 weeks and he is busting his butt to try and keep it under 2 weeks.

Also for those who think his mount is ugly he says to tell them, "they should see the guy who makes it,"...his words exactly.

flintsghost is offline  
Reply

  M14 Forum > M14 M1A Forum > The M14


Search tags for this page
bassett mount on m1a and iron sights
,

bassett sights

,
can you use iron sights with basset low mount
,
combination see through scope/iron sight mount
,
how to use both iron sights and scope on m1a
,

iron sight scope mount

,
iron sight scope mount m1a
,

m1a iron sight high scope mount

,
scope hits rear site
,

scope mount iron sights

,
using iron sights with weaver mount
,
what is the scope mount that you can use the iron sights with called
Click on a term to search for related topics.

Moderator Tools
Display Modes




Top Gun Sites Top Sites List