IMO, anything that moves is subject to wear. the tolerances need to be "sloppy" or they would be more susceptible to seizure.
if they were used in a very warm/hot, cool/cold environment i would suspect some change in performance.
for the moment, i personally, choose solid, rigid bases/mounts...
JMO... ? ?
Bill;
There is a good discussion with plenty of information and different points of view here:
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=152688.0
Have fun!
HM
I recently installed one on my HW97 and it seems to work as designed but can't say My groups are any better. In fact I don't think it groups as tight as it did before I installed them. I believe the mount to be the newest ZR version.
Your comment about some degrading of accuracy would seem to hold merit.
I haven't personally tried the device yet, but the engineering design is sound enough as to preventing scope breakage, long the bane of springers, especially the magnum ones. I would think at least a little play or slop has to be built into the device, or it wouldn't be able to slide fore and aft at all. Still, the RWS 54 rifles rely on the same system, and their accuracy can be extremely good.
If the device is made properly, I would think accuracy problems due to wobble, etc, would be minimal. The plus side should be much longer scope life, and in the real world some additional accuracy is to be gained there in the long run if the internals of the scope stay put. So, if there is a trade at all, it could be a little accuracy for much longer scope life, and that seems a fair trade.
I reserve the right to express my final opinion until I examine then try one of them in person.
