Author Topic: What scope base and ring do you use and why? (Read 2197 times)

Freezer · « **on:** May 14, 2011, 05:01:19 AM »

As mentioned in earlier posts I'm having a custom rifle built. One piece rings and base are out. Now I need to decide what base and rings I will use. I do not intend to remove this scope (Leupold VXL CDS) once I have it installed and set up so quick release is not a factor. My other rifles have one piece Leupold style bases but I have no particular reason for using them. I'm leaning toward Leupold base and rings because of their reputation for quality and being American made. What are the advantage of one piece bases vs two piece base. I have alignment tools and lapping tool so that won't be and issue. So what do you use and why?

Flemc1 · « **Reply #1 on:** May 14, 2011, 05:28:34 AM »

I didnt know there was any other than Leupold

Chris

charles p · « **Reply #2 on:** May 14, 2011, 05:32:12 AM »

Lots of people like Burris rings with inserts. I mostly have Leupold. I have a Mod. 70 featherweight that has Conetrol. They make a nice rings set too. There are several good sope types.

243dave · « **Reply #3 on:** May 14, 2011, 06:32:15 AM »

I like the weaver style bases. But for rings get the Burris signature zee rings, they have the plastic inserts. Not only do they hold firmly but they won't leave ring marks on your nice Leupold scope regardless how tight you crank the screws down. As for the one or two piece bases, if it was a tactical rifle I'd go with a solidly built one piece steel base. But for a pretty gun I prefer the two piece because I think they look much better.
Dave

Delbert · « **Reply #4 on:** May 14, 2011, 06:40:01 AM »

I got Weaver "Grand Slam" steel 2-piece bases on my bolt action rifles, because they're stronger and Leupold 1-piece bases on my lever action rifles. Also have 2-piece aluminum Weaver bases on other rifles. Nothing wrong with either type, and I don't notice any advantage, except I know that the 1-piece bases will not "torque" the scope tube if the receiver isn't drilled in a straight alignment, but if drilled correctly, it doesn't matter, and you'll know immediately if drilled incorrectly. Biggest problem is not all rifles will allow the usage of a 1-piece base. I use Weaver "Quad Lock rings because I found them to have better holding capabilities, giving no scope dents, with the 2 straps on each ring to be better than one large strap, that generally requires lapping. I've heard that Talley and Warne makes very good rings and bases, and that Burris "Signature Zee" rings with the inserts, are superb rings also, if you don't want any scope marks, and they have adjustability if scope is out of extreme alignment, but I don't have any of these rings or bases to access their quality with their higher costs.
Del

Drilling Man · « **Reply #5 on:** May 14, 2011, 07:31:55 AM »

I use Weavers... Why? Because when they are PROPERLY installed, they are VERY strong and still quite light weight.

DM

pastorp · « **Reply #6 on:** May 14, 2011, 07:45:23 AM »

I use talley lighweight ringmounts on a lot of my rifles. If I can't use them for some reason then I use weaver Bases & rings.. Like DM says they are a strong mounting system.

Regards,

Dave in WV · « **Reply #7 on:** May 14, 2011, 12:04:11 PM »

M70 30-06 / Leupold two piece base and dual dovetail rings. Light, good looking and stronger than the windage adjustable rear ring style.

Remington 7600 pump / Warne one pice Weaver style base and Burris Signature zee rings. The base is better looking to me than a Weaver base and I used the offset inserts in the rings to get a decent zero without using the scope adjustmentsfor other than fine tuning the zero.

Remington 660 / Deadnuts DNZ one pice ring base. It is light, strong, and covers less of the ejection port and I needed to use a one pice base setup.

Winchester M52B repro / Weaver bases and Burris zee rings. Few options and I do not like/trust the windage adjustable rear ring setup. Burris zee rings look good.

bulletstuffer · « **Reply #8 on:** May 14, 2011, 12:16:17 PM »

Quote from: Flemc1 on May 14, 2011, 05:28:34 AM

I didnt know there was any other than Leupold

Chris

+1 Never had an issue with Leupold scopes, rings or bases...ever! Go with the best you can afford.

Good luck,

Bulletstuffer

bcraig · « **Reply #9 on:** May 14, 2011, 01:14:31 PM »

Weaver bases and Weaver rings if weight is any kind of issue at all.
On Hard kickers Leupold Dual Dovetail although I have never had ANY problem with the Weavers as long as you make sure the ring screws holding the rings to the bases are tight .

Craig

parkergunshop · « **Reply #10 on:** May 14, 2011, 01:40:44 PM »

If you are installing two piece scope bases on a hard kicking rifle, ie. 338, 358, .375 or 458 mags I would upgrade the base screws from 6x48 to 8x40, this is what I use on both one piece and two piece bases on these calibers.

One note the two piece bases don't have the recoil shoulders that fit against the receiver like the one piece bases that means that they don't handle recoil as well. the little 6x48 screws can sear off under recoil.

I use both Leupold and Redfield bases and rings see little difference in qualiity.

I also like the ability to adjust the rear base ring for windage when bore sighting a scope and sighting the rifle in, rather than running the adjustments to excess in the scope.

Empty Quiver · « **Reply #11 on:** May 14, 2011, 04:48:16 PM »

I have two sets of Warne rings, in a word they are robust. Dovetail receiver on the Tikka, and Weaver on the Marlin. I put a set of Leupold Dual Dovetail rings and bases on my Winchester 70 Super Grade. They have a good classy look and compliment the lines of the rifle and glossy scope nicely.

Drilling Man · « **Reply #12 on:** May 14, 2011, 04:50:25 PM »

I've seen single dovtail bases shear off the single dovtail on hard kickers and spit the scope clean off, so i have no use for them! Weavers are MUCH stronger and lighter too.

DM

Freezer · « **Reply #13 on:** May 14, 2011, 05:35:30 PM »

This is going to be a multi purpose bean field/varmint gun. Weight is not an issue, it will weigh over 9 lbs, quality and accuracy are. It's a 1909 Arg action re barreled with a Shilen lite varmint taper, chambered in 6.5-06 with a thumb tang safetyand matt finish. It will wear a Leupold VXL CDS and a Harris bi pod but I need to figure out what the height will be. I'm going to invest in quality for this one so when it's done...it's done. As much as this one will weigh I have no intention of carrying it in brush or steep terrain. This will also be my only "pretty" (only a gun nut could say this) rifle. My other rifles are built for the woods not looks.

My concern was function, looks, durability and ease of loading. I think it would be easier to load a rifle with two piece a base but everything I own has one piece base. I've always been sceptical of the clamp on adjustable style rings and like the look and finish of rings with the recessed allen screws.

This has been very informative and interesting reading, thanks folks keep it coming. I have more research to do and I'll let you know what I decide.

351 power · « **Reply #14 on:** May 15, 2011, 11:19:19 AM »

i'm finding i like the weaver quad lock rings with weaver bases. 4 large screws in each ring and with the 2 seperate straps there is likely full contact under each one

diggler1833 · « **Reply #15 on:** May 22, 2011, 02:50:36 AM »

i have had great luck with Nightforce, Leupold and IOR tactical rings/bases. I'm not a huge fan of cheap mounts, just like cheap optics. Stronger and heavier is what I go with, light and fancey has never been a option for me, but then again I drive 26 tons of apocolyptic death for a living too.

Swampman · « **Reply #16 on:** May 22, 2011, 02:54:17 AM »

I've used all kinds but I believe the Talleys are the best by a long shot. The Leupolds aren't that great esp the one piece base Leupold systems which are weak and heavy. I also like Weaver Tip-Offs and Burris Zees. Just don't use a one piece base if you want best accuracy.

parkergunshop · « **Reply #17 on:** May 22, 2011, 07:14:10 AM »

Swampman,

I agree that the Talleys are good base/ring combinations, I have as set on a P14 Winchester Enfield Action mounted with 8-40 screws. Just one improvement needs to be made for the hard kicking calibers upgrade the mounting screws to 8-40 vs 6-48. I do this to all .338 caliber up rifle bases two or one piece. Two piece bases are a little harder for the novice to drill and tap for, but I do like the easier ability to load cartridges into the action on a single shot basis on the bench and even in the field as noted earlier.

One point on some of the less rigid actions like the 98 Mausers, a one piece base makes the action more rigid and can actually help accuracy. In the military rifles the Enfields and Springfields are more rigid than the Mauser and on them and the Remington, Ruger, Winchester, Savage and most other commercial Actions little is gained by having a one piece base.

The recoil shoulder on a one piece base properlly mounted does make up for the 3 screw installation vs the 4 screws used on two piece bases. But again .338 and up use 8-40 screws for mounting.

Swampman · « **Reply #18 on:** May 22, 2011, 07:18:42 AM »

I believe the one piece base puts stress on the action and I know my 700s shoot better with two piece bases. I try to use lighter scopes and rings on hard kicking guns so they don't rip loose under recoil.

It has worked so far.

parkergunshop · « **Reply #19 on:** May 22, 2011, 08:12:20 AM »

Swampman,

When you work on guns for others, you have no idea what kind of scope they may choose to use. The tendency over the past few years from my viewpoint has been to over scope rifles, mounting huge variables with oversized tubes and rubberized rears.

I made up a really nice 338/06 on a VZ24 action with a low scope bolt, did the accuracy testing using my 24X leupold with no issues. Owner returned the rifle because he mounted a huge Zeiss variable scope with a rubberized rear, the bolt handle was rubbing on the rubberized rear had to grind on the bolt handle and change the scope rings from medium to high.

You are correct about using light weight scopes on hard kickers, I have straight power 2 1/2X, 3X and 4X Weaver and Lyman All American scopes on my .375, 45-70 and 458's with a post and cross hairs. But these mounts still have 8-40 screws, on a rifle for dangerous game better safe than sorry.

Swampman · « **Reply #20 on:** May 22, 2011, 11:55:07 AM »

I don't understand the whole Hubble scope thing. In fact I have been moving away from even the 3-9X40 scopes to 2-7X33s and lower.

yooper77 · « **Reply #21 on:** May 22, 2011, 12:08:57 PM »

Quote from: Freezer on May 14, 2011, 05:01:19 AM

As mentioned in earlier posts I'm having a custom rifle built. One piece rings and base are out. Now I need to decide what base and rings I will use. I do not intend to remove this scope (Leupold VXL CDS) once I have it installed and set up so quick release is not a factor. My other rifles have one piece Leupold style bases but I have no particular reason for using them. I'm leaning toward Leupold base and rings because of their reputation for quality and being American made. What are the advantage of one piece bases vs two piece base. I have alignment tools and lapping tool so that won't be and issue. So what do you use and why?

Leupold steel 1-piece or 2-piece standard or dual dovetailed bases without question or hesitation the best of the best in optics.

yooper77

Swampman · « **Reply #22 on:** May 22, 2011, 12:15:33 PM »

Leupold makes good scopes. I'll use their bases and rings if I have no choice. I had too on my Model 7.

jmayton · « **Reply #23 on:** May 22, 2011, 12:24:57 PM »

Weaver bases of various manufacturers and Warne rings. I like one-piece bases, but they're not required in my opinion.

chefjeff · « **Reply #24 on:** May 22, 2011, 04:46:12 PM »

I concede weavers are pretty strong. BUT they are UGLY. Minus one in the looks dept. Two piece quality bases are more asthetically pleasing with a streamlined pair of rings. One piece DNZ's look pretty good on some rifles.

Swampman · « **Reply #25 on:** May 23, 2011, 12:44:54 AM »

Weaver makes about the lowest lows. I like the old ones with large nobs and buy them when I can.

yooper77 · « **Reply #26 on:** May 23, 2011, 03:01:03 AM »

Freezer,

I haven't tried these but for a true custom look here are some expensive but nice scope mounts. http://www.conetrol.com/ (Guaranteed for Life)

yooper77

Drilling Man · « **Reply #27 on:** May 23, 2011, 07:07:21 AM »

Quote from: chefjeff on May 22, 2011, 04:46:12 PM

I concede weavers are pretty strong. BUT they are UGLY. Minus one in the looks dept. Two piece quality bases are more asthetically pleasing with a streamlined pair of rings. One piece DNZ's look pretty good on some rifles.

After crawling through the alders and bear grass for weeks as a time, i never had even one brown bear worry about how my scope mounts looked. But, when i pulled the trigger on that rifle, it sure got his attention on how it worked!

My hunting guns are for "go", not for "show". I want my scope mounts, low, light weight and rugged!! And the Weavers do all of that!

DM

Freezer · « **Reply #28 on:** May 24, 2011, 04:35:27 PM »

Yooper77, those are some nice looking rings! Thanks! Like I said this gun will be my beanfied gun. It will be too heavy for the woods but great for the bench or distant varmint/deer hunting. This will be the one gun I own where I want it to look good.