Opinions wanted on QD rings

[rdlange]

Looking for 'good' QD rings so I can remove scope and reattach without rezero.  This is for an H&R Handi rifle. Warne, Leupold, Burris... which works how.? 

Might comment on one piece bases too.  Considering a Warne M681M Picatinny.

Thanks...

[Empty Quiver]

I have been very happy with Warnes. I have used them on both an AR-15 and on a 1895 Marlin. I make a point to attach them to the scope in such a manner as they are very tight on the bases. I have the scope off dozens and dozens of times and can't tell any difference worth fretting over, certainly less than my own incompetence behind the trigger.

[Lloyd Smale]

Ive got a set of leupolds that are nice. they wont get you right back exactly to zero every time but there close enough that a deer would be hit right at a 100 yards if you didnt have time to recheck them. I dont think theres such thing as a set that will get you back to zero a 100 percent of the time.

[Victor3]

 Best I've used as far as return to zero goes are Leupold QRW rings. Probably work well because they're thick machined steel and don't tweak much when tightened. Unfortunately, they weigh a ton.
 
 When using any QD rings that clamp to a Weaver or Picatinny base, it's important to have the clamping areas lined up very parallel to one another. If not, any torque from tightening them that was different than the last time you mounted the scope will tweak the tube and/or base differently, throwing off your zero. I've also found that lapping QD rings to fit the tube helps zero remain more consistent between mountings.

[Swampman]

I have a set of Leupolds on my Ruger #3 and I like them.  I'm using Weaver bases.

[LanceR]

I have Warne 30mm Maxima QD rings on my CZ 550 FS and the zero stays put. 

The levers a somewhat sharp so I indexed them such that they wouldn't bite my fingers if I ever had to single load or clear a malfunction and where they wouldn't get snagged on brush or loosened while handling the rifle.  I have kept them cranked right down tight though and it would take a pretty good knock to start to loosen them.

Lance

[tobster]

I use Warnes on a muzzleloader so I can remove the scope and  keep it out of the way during cleaning. I like being able to index the tightening levers, but other brands are probably capable of that as well. They seem to return to zero when remounting.

[Zachary]

I use both Warne and Leupold.  I don't think that you can go wrong with either.
 
Zachary

[diesel instructor]

Waaaay back when (40's & 50's) B&L had adjustable bases that when installed on many rifles, one NONADJUSTABLE variable scope could be switched from rifle to rifle after zeroing each set of bases with it and each rifle would maintain almost perfect zero. had that set up, don't know why I ever got rid of it, at my age, that's a bit far back to remember. was kinda handi though. from 220 Swift to 300 H&H, same scope. only needed one,

[Brithunter]

I use several types of Quick Release scope mounts from makes such as Apel to Leupold. All if correctly installed will return to zero.


Even though Apel do not claim this with their Roll off mounts I have found it to be so. In fact i used a rifle fitted with these on my hunt in Missouri back in 2003. Despite the tender caresses of the baggage apes    who's careful attention was clearly shown by the dents and scars on my new alloy and composite rifle case and the rifle being zeroed on Bisley's ranges when the scope was refitted, I carried it in my holdall as cabin baggage  , and zero checked no adjustment were required. The first shot was bit off from the clean bore but te next three fell exactly where they should.


   I nearly always remove a scope for rifle cleaning if the mounts allow me to do so. I have found that even the old Parker-Hale rings and bases return to zero as do the Weavers that are fitted to a couple of rifles. The EAWswings are brilliant but expensive. The Leupold Q/R lever operated mounts work but the bases did require some lapping to fit the action profile of the p-H 1200 Super perfectly.


The only problem I have encountered was when using a set of Hilver lever operated Q/R rings with which it's possible to not get one ring on it's dovetail correctly. This was down to operator error and not paying enough attention to what I was doing. Leaving getting ready too late and rushing  . When put on properly they also return to zero.


So you pays your money and you take s your choice. Fitted properly to the rifle and set up correctly yes they return to zero. However I would say one thing I have never tried testing them as say over 200 yards as I do not hunt at further distances as a rule.

[2506shooter]

I've had very good luck with the original style Weaver detachable top mount rings: http://www.weaveroptics.com/rings_bases/rings/detachable_top_mount/
Lap or shim the base (if needed) and lap the rings for a true fit.  They will rotate a very small amount as you tighten the steel top band so be sure to allow for it.  Also be sure to tighten the two top steel band screws evenly so there is a uniform gap!  I also make sure both of the rings are positioned to have the dovetail cross bolts rest against the forward part of the base cross slot. Make sure to move the scope forward when re-attaching the scope for the best return to zero. Some people like to have the rings spread out, forward ring resting on the forward part of the slot and the after ring resting on the after part of the slot to eliminate any movement.  I like to have both cross bolts supported against the forward shoulder of the slot during recoil - your choice, probably doesn't matter much.

I have these rings on a custom bolt gun and have been asked why I have those old, ugly, cheap rings on such an expen$ive rifle, I reply that they're strong, lightweight, easy to remove and re-attach and they always return to zero - what's not to like?

I've tried many types of rings over the years and the only ones I like as well or better than the Weavers are the Talley vertical split, Conetrols, S&K and Gentry.  Conetrols are very nice but a little heavy and quite a bit more expensive than the Talleys because you need the Conetrol base as well.  Conetrols are probably better suited to certain types of rifles.  S&K's and Gentry's are not QD.

[Victor3]

I have these rings on a custom bolt gun and have been asked why I have those old, ugly, cheap rings on such an expen$ive rifle, I reply that they're strong, lightweight, easy to remove and re-attach and they always return to zero - what's not to like?

 Well, I for one think they look great. A simple, elegant design that must still be in demand, seeing as how Weaver's still selling 'em.
 
 They (along with Weaver 3/4" rings on our .22s) were the only rings my Dad had, so the only ones I used, even for several years after I bought my 1st scoped rifle. I left them on some of Dad's old guns along with the steel K-series scopes he mounted. Still seem to work pretty good, even after half a century. 

[2506shooter]

Well, I for one think they look great. A simple, elegant design... 

Agree 100% - I don't think they're ugly at all, and they work!

Just reread your first post.  You'll probably be very happy with the Warne QD!
Check this out for a good, strong base. http://www.midwayusa.com/product/882678/ironsighter-1-piece-weaver-style-scope-base-h-and-r-ultra-nef-handi-rifle-matte