WAC QD Pro (shots fired)

[EMDII]

Fired over 100 rounds today w/ the QD Pro. A grand day, indeed. Shorts, sunshine, 500m range, and also brought the Savage 110T for surgical work!

The WAC QD Pro is excellent.

Details:

- RTZ (return to zero): After the install/remove test (below), I fired 40 rounds in 3-round groups. That makes 13 sets. Between each set, I removed the QD Pro, and re-installed. All the rounds went into a 3" pastie at 100m, using the BSA 30mm red-dot. If you have a DSA, you MUST use QRW rings to do this. Instead, you can slip the QD Pro off and on and be guaranteed a true RTZ, w/ no apparent shift in POI. This is also true of the ARMS, and I prefer this method.
IF you remove a scope from the QD Pro, you can use the iron sights w/o removing the QD Pro from the rifle.
While using the BSA red-dot, I could use the iron THROUGH the red-dot. Neat trick.

- To break lucky 13, I added a scope, did a quick BZO, and removed it twice and slipped it back on, firing 3 rounds each time. All 6 rounds went into 1.5" at 100m (all done off a bench).

- Slip-on: I reported the QD Pro did not slip-fit into my Hesse FALO-C initially. I talked w/ Dwight, who indicated order of preference was T-48 (WAC's design basis), yadayada, and Hesse last. None of the manufacturers considered the rail/slot size a critical dimension, as they were installing a sheet-metal bodycover. They are all different, slightly. I took a very small jeweler's file and chamfered the front edge of the RS rail on the QD Pro to about a 45 degree angle. Slipped on the QD Pro until it stopped, squeezed the rail slightly, and finished slipped everything on by using the heel of my hand. Every time I took it off, it slipped on again simply by squeezing the rail ever so slighly, and heel-of-hand pressure.

- Finish: Before firing, I removed the scope or red-dot a total of 20 times, tightened things up, and repeated. By the end of this cycle, the rail slots had a very slight sheen where the foot of the calmp actually contacted the QD Pro. Seems more than adequate: few people remove and reinstall a scope completely 20 times in a few years. But you never know. The contact between the recoil shield of the TMH and the back face of the QD Pro showed some slight marks or burnishing. The inside of the rail had a scratch, and I found out my rivet had backed out from my 50 year-old Israeli BC! Damn the luck! Scratch is not deep, into the anodizing only.

None of these issues are showstoppers or need fixing IMO. To prevent brass kisses, I applied a target pastie onto the exterior. Just like I treat my other covers, BTW.

I find the QD Pro to be an excellent bodycover/integral scope mount. It has sufficient beauty for those aesthetes among us, and is sufficiently rugged for those of us who are hard-core shooters. I think I could pound tent pegs w/ it. It's VERY light (Important when I added the weaponArts stock/PG combo to the FALO-C!), made attractively, and tough as I demand. I had high expectations, and the QD Pro met each and every one.

Negatives, and the competition:
- Trying to be objective here, but I found nothing to complain about. The big 'QD Pro' lettering on the RH side is nonetheless subdued by the finish.
- The shape, when mounted, reminds me of a S&W Sigma, or Walther P99 slide. I like the shape overall: it is VERY sleek looking, and modernizes the FAL look whereas the DSA is kind of chunky on top. Both are effective, but the QD Pro is prettier, if that matters.
- The brass kisses on the e-port will probably concern some, but that's life. I'm practical, more than I am aesthetic, so if the Al gets a little scuffed, I'll repair it and drive on.
- DSA; massive, monobloc, quite like the USS Missouri. Show-me tough. The inside rails really are a RPITA.
- ARMS: slip fit, adaptable, newer versions retain the recoil plate/spring buttress, so it looks a bit odd. Some do not have a FL Picatinny rail, as it stops about 2" from the front. Some users report that the nose requires trimming before it'll slip onto the the receiver properly. I have two, and I'm keeping them, and the QD Pro.
- Tapco/Leapers: the real sleeper, works just like a DSA w/o the freight tab. Tough as nails, more square but less top heavy than the DSA. If you're looking for an entry level bodycover/scope and have a tight budget, the Tapco/Leapers is a real bargain that works!

If you are looking for an alternative to the DSA or ARMS, GET the QD Pro. I think it'll suit you fine. WAC seems to have melded the best aspects of the ARMS, DSA, and Tapco/Leapers into a single unit, at a excellent price. You get what you pay for.

A great six hours at the range! Did I mention I shot a 100m/1.13cm (.444") 3-round edge-to-edge group using the Savage? What a wolf in sheep's clothing!
:D

[ December 02, 2001: Message edited by: EMDII ]

[amstel78]

Good report! I've been eyeballing that WAC QD mount, and probably will try it real soon!

[kotengu]

Dagnabit Ted! I'm trying with everything I've got to stay an "iron sights purist" but with all these exciting new products coming out it's getting harder and harder......

......mmmmmuuuuussssttttt rrreeeesssiiiissssttt.........

Great review, BTW - very informative and loaded with "need to know" facts!

[EMDII]

'You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile........'

I too am an iron-sighter, but I'm also near 50. Optics are not a bad thing, as long as you train on the backups.

[DJ]

Good review Ted. I received my QD Pro this past Monday. It slid snuggly into my Imbel receiver R1. It fits quite well, with no gaps and no sloppiness. I have a set of Weaver rings and a Unertl 4x scope on my 7 mag, so I decided to try that out. Alas, the rings are the low rings and will not allow the scope to set down in the rings without the bells contacting the mount. I tried the rings off of my Anaconda with my Bushnell 30 mm red dot and it not only fits but looks good too. I have everything set to go, but I won't be able to get to the range for awhile. We're in the middle of deer season here and they frown on shooting except on established ranges, and the only established ranges around here are Game Commission owned and operated, and they frown on "evil black assault rifles".
I'll give a shooting report as soon as I can get to the range. I also have some pics if I can figure out how to get them posted.

[ December 02, 2001: Message edited by: DJ ]

[Gaspipe]

You hafta laugh - went out to test and sight in the KVANT scope on the Williams.....

The KVANT is a 4x48 wide angle Russian job with a 30mm tube. It has a dual lit reticle (red or green, depending on light conditions).

Initial five shots at 30 yards got me on paper, so I backed out to 100 yards. A few more shots and I started zeroing in. Over the next 20 shots, they became more and more wild. Mainly high and right. Kept adjusting and scratching my head. Everything looks ok.

After 30 rounds, I'm not even on paper anymore. Took another look, and the front ring had given up and the attachment had sheared. These were cheapo Leapers. No spares, so off came the scope, and finished the mag (10 shots in about 20 seconds) into a nice 10 shot, 3 5/8" group with a hot, dirty barrel with the Williams' still on.

Started questioning my desire for the complexity of optics... :D

Back on went the 40mm Blazer red dot and all's well. I very much like the Williams mount. It's got brass kisses to prove it.

[Fallschirmjäger]

Hey evil one...

Any pics with the mount on? :)

[EMDII]

My DC is a Polaroid, and FUBAR.

The WAC site has a pic w/ one mounted.

[Fallschirmjäger]

I kind of wanted to see how it would look on a rifle with the typical rear sights. Does it block them at all?

[EMDII]

No! I thought I'd posted that (I'll go back and check) that I could look through the red dot, and look through the iron at the same time. Cool, and when I removed the red-dot, The QD Pro does not obscure the irons one bit. Very well thought out execution.

Lance has discovered one problem: the rail is slightly wider than a Picatinny spec: mine is .849, vice the .835 M-1913 specification. This is 14 thou, so it's not just the hard coat. BUT, my sights all "itta fitta fine" so the problem appears restricted to Russian-made rails that are also out-of-spec.

Still, WAC can address this soon I hope.

[Wiggins]

I have regretted not getting the QD Pro with my receiver ever since about a week ago when I noticed that the price difference for just the receiver, and the Combat Elite System was only $20. Oh, well, I won't be putting a scope on my FAL (whenever I finally do get it assembled) for a while anyways.

Kyle

[Mr. Pink]

just my .02 so far.

Even with a set of high rings none of my scopes (inc a 4x WA simmons, a 3x9 redfield, and the gigantic 8x56 russian one fwra was selling) fit. They all hit the non-folding metric rear sight. There is adequate room on the inch sights when the rear is folded down.

So if ya got metric sights plan on using extra high rings.

After firing I've also got some real good dings in the upper lip of the ejector port. The metal is cratered and there is no trace of the infamous super hard anodizing. This is cosmetic at this point. There is the usual brass kissing on the rear of the ejection port with no trace of damage to the mount there.

Also rings fit the mount a little funky. See other post in general discussion about this. The angled keepers don't fit the angles on the mount very well. It seems tight and I assumed it was the cheap tasco rings, but now I see others have trouble too.

The fit and finish out of the box on this thing is outstanding.

I'm just gonna have to go test it a little more.

[EMDII]

Get a folder, and a corrspondingly adjusted foresight pin. Is how I did my FALO-C. Got a Canadian rotor backsight, and got a taller foresight.

VOILA! No problem!

I used Millet and other rings, and had no problems w/ them.

Good update, especially about the backsight. This is a common problem for any bodycover/scope mount on a metric.

[Mr. Pink]

Hey Ted,
Messing around with mine more last night. By pressing on the upper forward part of the rail from charging handle side to ejection port side I can get a bit of side to side movement on mine. Does yours do this? My accuracy was not quite as good as yours (3-5" groups at 100) - but I was shooting 20 shot groups rather rapidly. I'm weak that way.

After reading my earlier post I gotta say the marking on the upper part of the ejection port isn't as bad as it sounds. The marks are small and there's only 3 or 4 of them so far.

[EMDII]

Nah, I haven't detected that side-to-side motion. What is your receiver?

FWIW- as the loads are axial and/or vertical during firing, that movement probably doesn't affect accuracy much, if at all. Does this movement 'spring back' after you release it? If so, then the base itself is returning to zero after you release it. But I'll try to shift during my next shooting session.

Accuracy- you're using a scope you said, and can't make three inches. Sounds like a more fundamental problem, as the mount would have to be all over the place to make that big a CEP (footprint). What does the rifle shoot w/o any scope, just iron? What rounds you using? And,like you say, RF may make for a bit more dispersion. I was aiming and firing more-or-less every 5 to 10 seconds or so to see if the mount/rings/optic bounce around any during a string of one full magazine.

Notably, if the mount is .849" (.835" spec) wide, then the angle down-under might be a bit more acute, and make the rings (what kind?) fit oddly. The Millett rings fit snugly and w/o movement, as di the Leupold I just hauled out and checked.

Good update, especially on the brass markings being nolo contendre.

Thanks!

[ December 05, 2001: Message edited by: EMDII ]

[Mr. Pink]

It's on an Imbel and does the same in my entreprise.
Rings are aforementioned cheap tasco highs. They don't look great but seem to be holding for now. The mount slides in easier than the other mount I've seen - maybe 2-3 times harder to push in than standard cover. Same feel for both my receivers. The other QD-Pro I've seen needed considerable persuasion to slide home on an entreprise. I need to head on over there and see if it moves too.

Scope is old redfield golden five star stolen from my 7mag. I got about 1" out of that old ruger and scope combo so I don't think the scope is the problem.

Springback - yes, but can we be sure it's coming back to the same spot? A good point though about there needing to be lots of motion for a large 'footprint' However this would seem to eliminate any ring problem too - I'd have to see evidence of or feel movement between rings and scope for there to be as major a problem as i seem to be getting. Note it doesn't drift off just groups large.

Ammo - malaysian surplus I believe. Borrowed from buddy. Didn't expect much from this but....

Iron sighted I usually get around 2MOA out of it at 100 with carefull slow shots off bench. Faster shots out of this rifle and shooter while kneeling or sitting will bounce beer can around range at 100yds. That's still around 3-4".....so who knows.

so I'm gonna - check other mount (look at yours too please), change ammo, test fire, change rings, test fire, change shooter, test fire, then change mount and test fire. Hopefully the ammo and/or rings thing should take care of things.

[EMDII]

Dwight indicated the QD Pro was fashioned of the T-48 rail specs. He also indicated the IMBEL was (IIRC) down-list fromt he T-48 and the Entreprise. Mine fits the Entreprise Type 1 like a glove w/ NO slop. Easier to install than the Hesse, but not a drop-in: some F=mA required!

7075-T651 has a rather good stiffness rating, so it shouldn't deform permanently from our efforts. Can roll a Volvo 850R over it and it won't bend. Ask me how I know!

Seems like RF, coupled w/ looseness in the receiver, is adding some to your woes. Try deliberate timed fire and see what gives.

Keep doing the updates! This is the fun part, wringing it out.

FWIW- I got about the same results shooting my ARMS mount and a BSA on my FALO-C. I didn't shoot the Entreprise to see if there were any differences. To many variables for me that day!
:D

[fn4bb]

All, FWIW, my QD fits like a glove on my Imbel metric CAI Frakenfal upper cobbled to an Aussie inch lower. I miced it at .849 at 3 points rear, mid and front.

I too have been unable to get my Weaver type (read cheap) rings to fit, so I have not shot it yet. :( I have not given up yet, I'm going to take it off and take it to a gun store and check out rings. Not really what I wanted to have to do but life aint perfect and the mount looks awesome so I want to do whatever I can to keep it! ;)

BTW, I e-mailed George about the problem and he has been very responsive, so I gotta beleive that if it won't work out for me he will take care if it. :D I think that the fact that he took the time to get back to me on a $60.00 part while at the same time he's got a helluva lot of other bigger ticket things going on, says alot! :) Just my $.02

[Gaspipe]

Mine lives on an Entreprise type 1 metric and it required some Herculean effort to get it on. It fits like a glove, with very little if any perceptible slop. It fit so tight, I plan to not remove it often.

Finally set it up with Leupold quick detachable rings and a Bushnell Banner 3x9 scope. I'll shoot it tomorrow [if the rain ever stops] and try it again.

[Mr. Pink]

Noticed gaspipe's has a bit of movement (with springback) just like mine and the arms mount also has this.....just apply thumb pressure to front of mount and you'll see the thing deflect.

I couldn't even get my mount on his rifle...

So I'm thinkin' ammo and/or shooter at the moment for my accuracy problems. Someday it'll stop raining and I'll head out to the claypit for somemore testing.