I don't care about "Nike Swooshes", and I don't want to discuss the founder's personality or worth as a human being. I am curious about the interface, and how it's done for people who've beat the crap out of it. A lot of the newer mounts have larger surface areas/clamping surfaces. I am curious if there is any merit to the idea that over time (such as Grant of G&R tactical alluded to secondary to his claimed high-speed videos of weapon mounts during recoil, where he claimed that the LaRue system could create a dent which grew and grew with use), the rail could be dented and zero lost/the mount needing to be adjusted again. Especially after an impact to the optic/mount.
Anyway, legitimate design shortcoming, or BS? Anyone seen the nut come loose, the rail dent, the mount loosen up, etc. in the real world?
Reason I ask is I am looking for a mount for my T2 that is: Absolute co-witness with a height of 1.5X" above rail surface, and the lever on the right side.
GDI fits the bill, and LaRue LT751 fit the bill. LT mount weighs half the GDI mount.