Doctor Sight On A Cmore Style Mount

[Adam B]

I know that carter custom has done one but I cant get ahold of him. Does any one know where I could find a mount that has the 5 screw c-more pattern for a doctor sight. take a look at this pic below

[Front Man]

I can't open or view the image.

FM

[warpspeed]

Try John Allchin Gunsmithing & Parts (805) 784-0569

[smokshwn]

That simply looks like a Allchin/STI/Dawson type mount with a docter base screwed to it.

Just a question though, If you are going to mount a Docter that way why give up the bigger field of view, intensity control, and reliability of the C more?

[Jaxshooter]

I toyed with that also. I just drilled and taped an old mount I had laying around. It saves weight if nothing else.

[wolfgang]

Just a question though, If you are going to mount a Docter that way why give up the bigger field of view, intensity control, and reliability of the C more?

Hy, I did this too because of the way lower Aiming Point. After switching to Cmore I alsways had the feeling that my former and lower scopes just felt more "natural" to aim with.

see attachement for direct comparison

[Radical Precision Designs]

It is common to claim that what we are using for our purposes it is the "best possible" solution to "all" in a similar need. It is so with cars, boats, guns, and even "spouses". I wonder why then designers and inventors continue the search for a better wheel? If there is no hope or possibility, why even try?

I hear the complaints of how "archaic" and cumbersome the C-More sight is, and how we all wish its designer did some upgrading to it. The usual settleing answer is: "because there is nothing better out there, or as reliable..." This is true! But the complaints and desire for something better is still there, asking, yearning.

The real problem is when something does come out it gets dismissed instantly and derided with the expression: "It's not a C-More, get a C-More". Very often many shooters won't even consider looking at something else, even though they complain about it constantly. It reminds me of a bad marriage that should have gotten a divorce already.

A little bit of R&D can show/illustrate the wisdom of some of our conclusions. Many people will say that the windows of the Docter, J Point, Pride/Fowler, Tru-Glo, etc. are smaller than the C-More's wiondow. This is true, but it is also true that because of its body design the C-More requires that it be mounted rather forward in relation to the wrist pivot point, which makes its window mostly a specific diameter/view size. Other, smaller body sized red dot sights can be positioned further back in their mounts (frame mounted) to effectively project a similar or even bigger "perceived" window with a smaller arc angle of dot travel. Remember that there is no magnification in these lenses. If we are to be slaves of the amount of dot travel/jump, wouldn't it be better to mount it further to the rear. With the C-More there normally would be an increase in ejection obstruction due to its widening of the body over the ejection port should you move it further back. With the Serendipity model it would be impossible altogether.

Some of these other smaller sights are also designed to be mounted in the slide. Because of their very low dot positioning they are more natural pointers, especially mounted in the slide. This same characteristic will make it an excellent candidate for frame mounting if so desired.

Dot perceived size in relation to distance to your eyes is another consideration. The closer you position the dot to your eyes the bigger it will be seen projected over your target. Therefore a smaller initial dot could be used. (Of course there is the question of actual lumens in relation to dot size, but that is another issue of personal taste and choice.)

The point is that more attention should be given to existing "other" possibilities, besides the C-More, as the nice folks at C-More do not seem to be making any fruitfull changes any time soon to improve their product and have settled in their laurels.

Should there be a demand for some of these newer designs, and a communication addressed to their designer/builders, probably some of their shortcommings might be looked into for a better product. At least it would give a chance to level the market, and give us a better/bigger variety of viable choices.

I am sick and tired of reading the same reply whenever somebody posts about something other than our "beloved" C-More. Blind loyalty is just that: blind. The C-More is a great sight and has proven itself worthy through many years of good service. Nobody can take that credit away. But perhaps we can give a "real/fair" chance to researching other possibilities?

[Newguy]

The Docter on the C-More mount looks like a fly on an elephant. Okay, hyperbole, but I still don't understand why you wouldn't mount it directly into the slide if you want it as low as possible. That would kill three birds with one stone -- low-mounted, it won't get in the way of ejection, and it will make the gun slightly lighter. OTOH, getting pounded by the slide wouldn't help reliability too much. BTW, I thought the Docter wasn't being imported anymore, at least until they found another distributor.

I agree with Venry about the C-More being old technology. The biggest thing going for the C-More is reliability, which in red dots, is a BIG PLUS. If I thought the Docter would be as reliable (plus reasonably priced) frame-mounted I'd jump on it.

[Adam B]

The Docter on the C-More mount looks like a fly on an elephant. Okay, hyperbole, but I still don't understand why you wouldn't mount it directly into the slide if you want it as low as possible. That would kill three birds with one stone -- low-mounted, it won't get in the way of ejection, and it will make the gun slightly lighter. OTOH, getting pounded by the slide wouldn't help reliability too much. BTW, I thought the Docter wasn't being imported anymore, at least until they found another distributor.

I agree with Venry about the C-More being old technology. The biggest thing going for the C-More is reliability, which in red dots, is a BIG PLUS. If I thought the Docter would be as reliable (plus reasonably priced) frame-mounted I'd jump on it.

I had a gun with a slide mounted doctor and it beat the hell out of it, I liked the low profile but still lost the dot when the slide cycled. My idea of the doctor mounted on the c-more mount is that you get the best of both worlds, the sight dosent get beat to hell with the slide cycling it and a low mount that you can keep track of the dot during a shot cycle (although the mount isnt quite a low as a slide mount but lower than a c-more would be).

[rtr]

I'm intrigued about switching out my Cmore with a Docter on a frame mount. So does anyone make one?

What is the approximate weight difference of a docter on a frame mount, versus a Cmore on a Dawson frame mount?

[BritinUSA]

I think the C-more is about 3.5oz.... The Docter scope is about 1.5oz

You probably won't notice much difference once it is on the gun.

With regards to the reliability issue, I've had a llot of slide mounted optics. I hava also tried C-Mores (twice). I don't like the C-More, I just can't get along with it, I have also broken one of the earlier ones (back in UK).

I broke several tasco scopes, and one Docter scope. The Docter was a 2nd generation. I have two Docter 3rd Gens, re-inforced by Beven Grams and I have NEVER had a problem with them.

I had them mounted on a several guns, regular Open, Commander and now a EAA/Tanfoglio.

I would like to see the import issues resolved but I'm also keeping an eye on any new scopes of a similar type. The dot on my Docter sits at the same height as the front sight would be on a iron-sighted gun. The dot disappears for the tiniest fraction of a second during recoil, but once the dot is visible the shot can break. For some (like me) the Docter scope is the best scope on the market.

[Radical Precision Designs]

I'm intrigued about switching out my Cmore with a Docter on a frame mount. So does anyone make one?

What is the approximate weight difference of a docter on a frame mount, versus a Cmore on a Dawson frame mount?

There are various manufacturers, including "Carter" that makes Docter, Optima/J-Point, Pride-Fowler, Tru-Glo side installed mounts. You can also remove you C-More from your present side mount, re-drill and tap for the sight of our choice. "Jaxshooter" posted above having done just that. If you wish, you can switch between the C-More and the Docter/Optima-JPoint or whatever, and use which ever pleases your fancy, all in the mount you presently have. That is unless you have an integral "blast shield" into the mount such as the Alchin side mounts, then you would need to remove/cut-off the blast shield as it would be in the line of sight of the much lower looking sight.

There are a few options/mounts available. If you can't find one, send me an e-mail and I'll see what I can do.

[surfmaster]

How about an Allchin mount like the one below:

http://cgi.ebay.com/colt-kimber-1911-45-al...1QQcmdZViewItem

I know it is for a Tasco Optima but does anyone know if Allchin makes one just in the above link but for a Docter?

[eric nielsen]

I'm trying to make a photoshop picture of a right-side-only Docter mount idea I had. Not much success yet, maybe I'll just use a crayon & draw it out for Venry to look at.

Saw this in a catalog [the kind you don't ask for but get anyway] and thought this sight looked "interesting" - seeing as how it has the same screw positions & cover as the Docter:

http://www.sportsmansguide.com/cb/cb.asp?a=282686

Of course, this is the same company [el monte ca] that sells PDP3 copies for $19.95...

[AlamoShooter]

I'm trying to make a photoshop picture of a right-side-only Docter mount idea I had. Not much success yet, maybe I'll just use a crayon & draw it out for Venry to look at.

Saw this in a catalog [the kind you don't ask for but get anyway] and thought this sight looked "interesting" - seeing as how it has the same screw positions & cover as the Docter:

http://www.sportsmansguide.com/cb/cb.asp?a=282686

Of course, this is the same company [el monte ca] that sells PDP3 copies for $19.95...

I do not know about the North Star ?scopes? _BUT I have had a good look at lots of China/ Hong Kong copies of scopes like Hakko's Panorama the cast parts are of low quality and will not hold a screw, the lenz is low quality and the parlax is terible = like in feet bad not in inches bad.

Buyer be ware = a set of striped out screws on a $150 bargan = is no bargan.

Jamie

[Radical Precision Designs]

I'm trying to make a photoshop picture of a right-side-only Docter mount idea I had. Not much success yet, maybe I'll just use a crayon & draw it out for Venry to look at. (I'm waiting for it!!!!!!!)

Saw this in a catalog [the kind you don't ask for but get anyway] and thought this sight looked "interesting" - seeing as how it has the same screw positions & cover as the Docter:

http://www.sportsmansguide.com/cb/cb.asp?a=282686

Of course, this is the same company [el monte ca] that sells PDP3 copies for $19.95...

Eric-

I've seen these NcStar sight at some gun shows. They are much different when you hold them in your hands. They actually feel fine, but the dot (in those I handled) left a lot to be desired, including the small size. Good for a .22 LR rifle, I think?

[wolfgang]

replace C-more with Docter ?

I just did it again with my Modified Gun.

Pictures:

The Cmore had a lot of gunsmoke on it all the time. Now the much lower Docter doesn´t catch any smoke. Even without the Blastshield.

The Doctored gun now also points much more natural. Next weekend will be our german nationals. We will see how it works out.

Have shot one Match with the new sight and I felt much more confident on moving targets, espc. swingers.

PS: mount was made by german gunsmith Karl Hamann, Wolfsburg

Edited August 3, 2006 by wolfgang

[BritinUSA]

That is a sweet looking gun !

I love the design of modified.

[dean]

hey all,

I am Dean with www.docterusa.com

I am developing a frame mount for the docter which will have the same screw holes as the c-more.

The mount will take the sight further back onto the gun to achieve the least amount of flip as it would be if it were on the slide itself.

Please call me if you have any questions or need any docters..

thanks

Dean

www.docterusa.com

[Adam B]

Dean,

Please let me know when you have the frame mount for the Doctor ready I am interested.

Thanks

Adam Boynton

[wolfgang]

@ Dean:

I am developing a frame mount for the docter which will have the same screw holes as the c-more.

The mount will take the sight further back onto the gun to achieve the least amount of flip as it would be if it were on the slide itself.

I would suggest not to go farther back. Just like I did on the Modified Gun. The End of the Mount / Sight is exactly leveled with the foot of the Barrel in the unlocked position.

This is to have a fully free ejectionport. So there is just nothing that could interfere with the ejected brass.

I would consider this as more important than mounting the sight 1/2" more to the back.

If you have these mounts, please post it. I think there would be also demand from europe to get them.

Also make some just without holes to fit other patterns like Weigand style.

Greetings Wolfgang

[eric nielsen]

Bottom of the page here has a mount for Weigand pattern:

http://www.jackweigand.com/sm3.html

I could try that on my gun & cut off everything forward of the last 3 holes, which is all my mount uses. Then flatten the top off & drill Docter screw holes at the back. Maybe...

As you say Wolfgang it's back over the ejection port but probably looks prettier that way. Or, you could cut off the back of the rail & mount forward like the Modified guns.

Edited August 8, 2006 by eric nielsen

[wolfgang]

"it's back over the ejection port but probably looks prettier that way"

Good point but what more essential ? nice looking or 100% reliability ? I just shot our nationals last weekend and shared my new modified pistol with another shooter due to gun problems.

That gave me the possibilty to watch my gun very close in a match. 1st thing I noticed was the totaly equal ejection of the brass. Like a Standard gun. The other shooters in my squad (Cmore) had brass flying in all directions. So if each case first touches the scope or mount before it really clears the gun.

It must be likely that at some time something gets stuck.

So why not prevent every possible cause for a failure ?

Just my idea about it.

PS: the W mount is very soft and weak material. I worked on one years ago. If you even think of thinning the topstrap, i wouldn´t do it.

[Radical Precision Designs]

I am presently working on two different mounts for these "reduced height/size" red dot sights: Docter, Optima/JPoint, Pride fowler and Tru-Glo.

One of them is as discussed with Dean (the Docter man) and the other is as discussed with Eric Nielsen. They both have great potential and sometime soon will be available through various channels/resellers.

The one I have been working the longer is the side mounted (left side) which will utilize the normally available drilled holes for a C More, either the four or five holes patterns. This one has two mounting/drilled positions/locations for the the sights, the first being just barely flush with the barrel's breechface and the other one further back, almost flush with the rear of the slide. As for practical mounting preferrences according to my findings either position will work well. The drawbacks are minimal. With the sight flush with the barrel's breechface I have noticed some propensity to "fogging" of the lens due to residual gases approaching from the rear, but not as bad as you would get from shooting with it on a forward mounted C-More equipped with barrel rear porting "without a shield installed". On the rear mount position, I have not noticed any real interference with brass ejection as compared to a C-More, because unlike the C-More the complete assembly of the Docter (et al.) is much narrower providing much less mass to be in the pathway of the ejecting brass. That has always being a problem when mounting the C-More further back than recommended because of the actual physical dimensions of the sights body.

The second design, as discussed with Eric positions the mount on the right side instead of the left. One variant uses the existing "Serendipity" four holes to anchor it, while another will require new drilling further back. Both set-ups clear the ejection port well enough and also have the dual mounting positions availability.

Both mounts set-ups will be available through various standard sources very soon. Either myself or any of these sources will endeavour to keep you informed as to their availability and functionality/reliability. Thanks for your patience.

Edited August 18, 2006 by Radical Precision Designs

[Aristotle]

I checked Doctor's website and saw no mention of it. Then again this thread is 2 years old so I don't know if it was axed during this time.

I'm looking for a Jpoint frame mount, anyone producing one yet?