Author Topic: Dednutz Game reaper scope mounts (Read 1623 times)

hotjob · « **on:** July 19, 2007, 10:48:53 AM »

Check out this rock solid mount for the H&R rifle. All one pc. mount. www.dednutz.com

d_hiker · « **Reply #1 on:** July 19, 2007, 11:29:44 AM »

At first I thought they were a little pricey, but then I realized if you combined the cost of a mount AND rings, it isn't too bad. Two less mechanical joints to loosen. You do lose the flexibility of where to place the rings though. So setting the scope position for eye relief may be a little harder.

quickdtoo · « **Reply #2 on:** July 19, 2007, 11:53:11 AM »

Anyone read his statement on steel vs aluminum?

Quote

Steel can shrink or expand up to two and a half times more in temperature variations than
aluminum.

He's got that backwards, steel has less than half the coefficent of thermal expansion as aluminum!!

Tim

tomb · « **Reply #3 on:** July 19, 2007, 12:54:26 PM »

Got my dednutz scope mount from natchez today..the are a little cheaper $45.83.(54.95 at dednutz)..good looking mount ...now if the 25-06 ultra hunter would just show up. natchez has the high 1" black only, you will need to go back to dednutz to get the silver....if I ever get it all under one roof Ill follow up ......

hotjob · « **Reply #4 on:** July 19, 2007, 01:20:20 PM »

When using a tempered aluminum vs 12L14 steel the steel will move more from 75 degrees to 20 degrees. You can test this at home. Get a pc. of each and mic them. Place them in the freezer for one hour and then remove and mic them again. The steel will shrink more than the aluminum. This is why you need to tighten all screws and windage screws on a steel mount when it is cold. All of the steel parts on a mount shrink and can loosen when it is cold.

quickdtoo · « **Reply #5 on:** July 19, 2007, 01:29:24 PM »

Steel has a much lower coefficient of linear thermal expansion than aluminum, ~11ppm compared to 23ppm for aluminum.

Tim

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_thermal_expansion

wgr · « **Reply #6 on:** July 19, 2007, 02:37:10 PM »

looks alot like the old t.c. duo mounts they are alittle heavy but rock solid

skifastchad · « **Reply #7 on:** July 20, 2007, 06:16:37 AM »

I read something about the new one piece scope rail and ring system here last year. I think it was called the dednutz? I am wondering if anyone here has tried one and how it holds up to repetitive firing of a big kicking gun.
I have a leupold rifleman weaver style mount on my handi 450, and even with locktite, it is not working well. I need a better solution.

Thanks
Chad

quickdtoo · « **Reply #8 on:** July 20, 2007, 06:48:38 AM »

Chad.

I put 3 rings on my 375H&H Encore, using Burris Signature Zees, it holds just fine with max loads, the same could be done on an H&R.

Leupold PRWs or QRWs would be good rings to use, but since you have the Rifleman rings on there, just add another. I have a couple scopes mounted in Riflemans, I use Burris' "friction paper" idea with an address label in the bottom ring, seems to work fine with just 2 rings on the 500 S&W with full house loads. Lapping the rings will also help by creating more surface contact with the scope and helps prevent ring marks, 75% contact area is recommended.

Tim

edgemark · « **Reply #9 on:** July 20, 2007, 06:59:19 AM »

I really had never given thermal expansion any consideration in scope mounts. I prefer steel for high recoiling rifles.

Generally aluminum has a greater expansion than steel, but the alloy does matter, but this is not my point

IF, and I mean IF thermal expansion is a consideration and I don't know that it is, then consider that the rifle frame is made out of steel and the scope tube is most likely made out of aluminum. They are certainly expanding and contracting at different rates no matter what the scope mounts are made from, so they are definitely flexing i relation to each other!

edge.

PS the thermal expansion is inch per inch, so the larger the object the more that it moves.

Mac11700 · « **Reply #10 on:** July 20, 2007, 04:57:39 PM »

Edge...there isn't any real heat concerns with using any aluminum scope tube as compared to steel tubed one...If either tube got hot enough where it were a real consideration...you wouldn't be holding the rifle it was mounted on for very long...

The NEF rail works just fine with all of my Leupold QRW's...Warne Maxima's..and with my Dura Sight rings...with the Dura Sight's being the least costly...and having a lifetime guarantee...http://www.durasight.com/z2_alloy/scope_rings.html...and the beauty of these are...you can get the rings first...then upgrade them to QRW style later on if you want...

Mac

cwlongshot · « **Reply #11 on:** July 21, 2007, 07:23:26 AM »

Chad,
I agree with Quick.

I used to shoot a 357 Herrett ALOT. That darn thing gave me fits!! If it wasn't the ammo head space shoulder problems it was the scope and base. With that gun, its pretty much a given you need three rings. (Remember this was also almost 15 years ago. Rings and bases have come along since.) I had the factory screws shear right off!!! I re-drilled using #8 screws and even they began to shear! I re attached with new #8's as well as EPOXIED the base to the barrel!! That worked!!! But with three rings, I never had the scope move in the rings.

I have seen the rifleman rings. I know they are Leupold, but they are also there bottom line product. I would suggest a better ring. I really like the PRW's from Leupold. they have a greater surface area and might just be enough wit only two rings.

BTW, I also have a 500S&W as well as a 45-70 Handi. BOTH wear Leupold PRW's and both recoil.... ALOT with top loads. Neither has had a hint of a problem with there scopes moving.

CW

skifastchad · « **Reply #12 on:** August 03, 2007, 04:04:04 AM »

Thanks for the quick replies, I didn't get around to reading them until today.

My problem is not the ring to scope, its the ring to rail interface that keeps loosening up. I have never had good luck with weaver rails on hard kicking guns. The dednutz just seems like a good idea to me, since this is one less movable part. I guess I will be the guinea pig and let you guys know how it works when I buy one of these solid mounts.

bluebayou · « **Reply #13 on:** August 03, 2007, 06:19:56 AM »

Hey, Quick, +1 on your "friction paper" or address label fix. I have a glossy Bushnell Trophy that moved no matter what I did short of crushing the scope. Two address label pieces inside the rings did the trick (they did make an unnerving squeaky noise when I tightened them down).

Thanks, Quick.

~Ace~ · « **Reply #14 on:** August 03, 2007, 06:54:33 AM »

The Big, Fat Stainless Recoil Lug on the WARNE rings is a blessing on the heavy hitters. ~Ace~

quickdtoo · « **Reply #15 on:** August 03, 2007, 09:27:31 AM »

Glad it worked for ya Blue!!

I've not had any trouble with Burris Zee rings on heavy kickers and I have a lot of em mounted. When you mount Weaver style rings, you need to push the ring forward so the cross bolt or lug is against the front of the slot before you tighten the ring to the base so it can't move under recoil.

The Leupold PRWs or QRWs are a much better ring than Warne rings in my opinion, those vertical spilt rings are not only harder to mount but they can't be lapped for proper mounting.

Tim

bluebayou · « **Reply #16 on:** August 03, 2007, 11:03:38 AM »

My complaint about any brand's split vertical rings is that it defeats one of the benefits of the Weaver style base: removability. I guess that "removability" is a word.

~Ace~ · « **Reply #17 on:** August 03, 2007, 11:23:15 AM »

My WARNE QD's (Vertical split) are Removable... And I Lapped them

The PA's could not be lapped as accurate, but as repeatable as they are you could improve them lapping... I will play with some next week and see what happens. ~Ace~

dpastordan · « **Reply #18 on:** August 04, 2007, 12:20:32 PM »

I just discovered this mount about a month ago. I had a problem with a set of mounts for my 7mm Mag BAR. Since that will be my long range deer rifle, I thought a mount that I would keep one scope on would work. It does. I like Dednutz approach for those rifles that will have only one scope on.

GatCat · « **Reply #19 on:** August 05, 2007, 12:24:32 AM »

skifastchad, I just mounted a Dednutz system on my H&R Model 58, I haven't shot it yet, but I like it so far; Fit and finish are first class. The main reason I used it is that i wanted to make the rifle as light as possible. I replaced the wood stocks with H&R plastic, shaved I think it was about 8 oz, the rifle has the tapered barrel, one pound lighter ( in .30-30 ) then current non-tapered versions. The Dednutz system is 1 1/2 Oz. lighter then H&R base with weaver rings, and has nothing protruding to catch on "stuff". I put a Leupold 4X compact on it, and removed open sights. I don't plan on playing "scope bingo" with it, so the QD feature is a non-issue for me. I am thinking of using the Dednutz system on a .444 , a .500, and a .35 Whelan in the future, if the one I now have works as solid as it looks.
Mark