Tim,
You make some good points.
I wonder how many of the standard mirror compasses actually get much use. Most of the non-professional users put maybe a couple of hours use after they first get them. Being carried in a pocket doesn't count.
Military, engineering professionals and geologist use them for several hours a day, for months on end.
The countries you mention now are supplementing other compasses as a cost savings measure, so that everyone can have a compass. Most all of them still have professional models for non supplemental use, except the Swiss Reica (now Suunto/Reica ?)
My point wasn't that M-73,G-150's or lensatics were indestructible, just more durable than baseplate/mirror compasses.
Also of the maybe 10+ baseplate/mirror compasses that I have owned, all of them eventually get the bubble, most never go away.

Just a little note the M-73 uses filtered kerosene.
The SIRS G-150 does use iso OH still.
The newer ones seem more temperature and altitude compensated, or maybe I been lucky.
It's just that no maker seems much interested in low light readability apart from the Military/Marine focus mfg.
Tritium is just great, shame the luminous markers on most baseplate compasses are a JOKE, you might have just enough time to read it after charging with a flashlight before it goes out.
Brunton Pocket transits are rated 0.6 degrees or 10 mils specified.
All actual use is not as good of course, and your right when unmounted it's even worse.
Merridian has a cardian swivel so even hand held it's good to about 1/2 degree.

Lastly the declination compensation built into baseplate compasses are nice, I don't find that a protractor (douglas-square) or an aviation style (with magnetic compensation) are much hassle to carry in the map pouch.

Also the main point I was trying to make (Hope there was a point?) was everyone is going to buy more than one compass anyway.
So maybe you first start with a little variety and find what you like.

"The countries you mention now are supplementing other compasses as a cost savings measure, so that everyone can have a compass. Most all of them still have professional models for non supplemental use."

I really don't think that's true anymore, if it ever was, depending upon what you consider a 'professional' compass (Compasses issued to artillery units for precise fire control excluded, of course). Both Silva and Suunto have NATO stock numbers for their standard long-baseplate compasses, and certify them for military use for conventional land navigation and unit maneuvers. They have been in use for decades now, and considered first-line (not substitute standard) issue in all countries I have named. They are durable, waterproof, and available in mils, degrees, or both, with self-illuminated markings (tritium). At one point, the U.K. was issuing the lightweight protractor or baseplate compass (Silva 4 NATO or Suunto M-5) concurrently with the older prismatic individual 'oil bottles' with cost cited as a factor, but the compass proved so satisfactory for general field and infantry use that all subsequent purchases have been the Silva 4-type baseplate compass. Since UK land forces in particular are well known for holding onto, servicing, and reissuing small quantities of equipment long after its discontinuance by other armies, I don't think you can draw any negative conclusions by their continued use of existing stocks of the older prismatic individual compass (Back in 1980, the British Army did get hold of a bad run of Suunto M-5M baseplate compasses using an experimental liquid fill - it reacted with the compass pivot and turned the liquid blue-green, which didn't help Suunto's rep any, as the same defective compasses were unfortunately re-issued for many years thereafter!). SAS has used the Silva Model 54 (54M/6400), which is a prismatic sighting, tritium-lit baseplate compass (available with cover) also used by various military forces in Northern Europe as well as by the Australian Land Forces. Canada has long issued the Silva Ranger, a mirror-sighting baseplate compass with hinged cover, with complete satisfaction, and has also issued the Suunto MC-1, MC-2, and the Silva Model 54. None of these compasses can be considered low-end, and I disagree with you that the 'oil bottle' designs are any more soldier-proof than current baseplate or mirror-sight models. The UK does not use a cover with their lightweight baseplate compasses, and the British land forces manual instructs lightweight compass users to take more care in ensuring that the set bearing on night marches is not accidentally jostled, but it apparently hasn't been a problem in the field.

Even U.S. forces have experimented with the Silva of Sweden Ranger and the Silva 54/6400 - the Ranger is particularly popular as a private-purchase compass with Special Forces and Army Rangers for jungle operations, as it doesn't fog up or become incapacitated through humidity or water immersion like the standard U.S. lensatic model.

"a little note the M-73 uses filtered kerosene."

Both of mine came filled with pure iso alcohol. One was recently serviced/refilled and the repair tech confirmed the alcohol fill. They seem to be fairly versatile designs and I have even heard of some owners using filtered diesel fuel as a substitute. I understand that Silva's 'oil bottle' design, the MK IV, used to be filled with a light viscosity oil, much like its other compasses.

"Tritium is just great, shame the luminous markers on most baseplate compasses are a JOKE, you might have just enough time to read it after charging with a flashlight before it goes out."

That's true in many cases. Suunto has made a considerable effort to improve luminosity of standard models with its fully luminous bezel, which is an improvement and was one of the factors cited when the U.S. Forest Service selected a Suunto (M-5SK ('Smoke Killer'), a derivative of the M-5N NATO military model) for official issue to its forest fire fighting employees. They have also begun using larger luminous markings on many of their newer models. Silva of Sweden's Model 4LU and 54LU have fairly good luminous markings. Recta's matchbox compasses have excellent luminous markings, though their less expensive baseplate models often have little or no luminous points. Silva's top-of-the-line 25 Ranger TDCLE mirror-sight compass uses a replaceable, non-magnetic battery to provide illumination good for 6000 sightings and it works very well. In addition to tritium vials, I have long waited for manufacturers to adopt the photoluminescent lighting that so many marine handbearing compasses use today - it is both bright and fairly long-lasting.

"Lastly the declination compensation built into baseplate compasses are nice, I don't find that a protractor (douglas-square) or an aviation style (with magnetic compensation) are much hassle to carry in the map pouch."

Personal preference. It's more bulk and weight. Ultralight backpacking, long-distance backpacking, and adventure racing, etc. is now the rage, and they would strongly disagree with you - hard to convince those guys to even carry a compass along. If you carry a heavy prismatic compass, a protractor, and a protective pouch, you could probably substitute a small GPS instead and still have a nice baseplate compass along for no increase in weight.

I too would highly recommend against a Brunton 8099. Mine has had 3 capsule replacements for huge bubble issues. In most baseplate compasses a small to medium sized bubble will not greatly affect the use of the compass. But in the 8099, since it is a compass card type compass a bubble will inhibit the card swing making the compass an expensive piece of useless junk.

This fact coupled with bubble issues on every trip now has relegated my 8099 to the cupboard.

I like my Suunto global (ranger type) compass about the best of any that I own.

Here are a few of mine....



The Suunto global, the Recta matchbox, and the old Leupold (Michael's) forestry compass get more use than any others.

I purchased a Cammenga Model 27 because it is NOT liquid filled. Silva etc are good for general use, but beware of their inherent lack of robustness. If push comes to shove, use a baseplate compass to obtain bearings on a map, but I for one can do it faster with a protractor. Takes practice, but practice does make perfect. <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

"Silva etc are good for general use, but beware of their inherent lack of robustness."

What constitutes a 'lack of robustness' may be in the eye of the beholder, but many would disagree with you depending upon the compasses you are comparing and the abuse to which they are put (drops, compression by heavy weight, extreme temperatures, etc.) No compass is immune to abuse or environmental effects, least of all the issue lensatic. The lensatic compass is frequently rated highly by its owners for its ruggedness, but remember that today it is issued by a relatively small number of military forces. There are reasons beyond simply cost and its need for a separate protractor:

I. It is more subject to card/pivot freezing in extremely cold temperatures (one reason the Finns chose a liquid-filled compass years ago).

2. It is more subject to malfunctions/inaccuracy in rainy/humid environments than liquid-filled baseplate compasses, since its capsule is NOT waterproof.

3. Because of its metal housing, it is assumed to be sturdy, but in fact a compass is only is strong as its weakest link. In this case, the compass' deep-well design results in a pivot that tends to bend when subject to impacts on hard surfaces, resulting in compass inaccuracy. The government acceptance tests call only for the lensatic compass to be drop-tested from moderate height onto a table covered with fine sand.

"..use a baseplate compass to obtain bearings on a map, but I for one can do it faster with a protractor. Takes practice, but practice does make perfect."

I would assume that most people find it faster and easier to use a full-size protractor than using a small baseplate compass in the role of protractor. The point is, you can save carrying a protractor by carrying a dual-purpose instrument. 'Standard' or full-size baseplate compasses come with large diameter dials and 3.5" or longer baseplates, which do make things a bit easier. But it's strictly a personal preference thing.

Please don't take this as a indictment of either baseplate compasses or liquid filled, I own about 20 that have one attribute or the other (real Silvas,Suunto-Recta,Brunton-Nexus;8099,15TDCL,Global,Matchbox).
I will note that the largest buyer of Compasses in the world is the US Government. Mostly the armed forces.
A couple of comments;Apparently the US Army many years ago found that the liquid was the most common defect in their repairs.
As has been discussed in other post some of the military aspects are not needed by many non-military users, notably a mils scale.
Personally I think that self illumination is a good feature for MOST users if they know it or not.
All that being said, given the numbers of Lensatics in the field and the number of years in use, the US Military is either knowns something about it or is bone-headed (could be either, I served 6 years in the US Army and learned LARS,the M2,Lensatic,MGRS, etc,The right way vs the Army way).
Lensatics are heavy (as are some military prismatics, G-150,M-73 etc), but very rugged too.
Now nothing is GI proof.
Yes the military did experiment with the 15TDCL (good choice), but when I did the military it was well known that in ALL the schools especially RANGER school, that possession was contraband.
In the field you carry what they give you, but anything else too.
And you are right a lot of soldiers,airmen,marines carried baseplate type compasses.
So personally (and without any DATA to prove it) I feel that the Lensatic is MORE robust than the baseplate compass.
Certainly I could be wrong, wouldn't be the first time.