Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Talley disappointment

No, I used the first set. They were very poorly machined. That's why I sold the rest. They certainly do work if you don't mind having a scope with marks all over it, a ring that's pinching the scope, etc. If these were the only rings made, I'd make them work, but why use these pieces of junk when there are so many better quality rings out there?

Are those the ones with the polymer inserts?

That's bullsh^^, plain and simple. I have probably a dozen, and no marked up scopes or anything else that's problematic. So do a lot of others who've commented.

You have zero, but you looked at a set once and feel you're qualified to comment. You're not.

Melvin Forbes uses them. Why don't you call him up and tell him he knows nothing about guns.

If you lap aluminum rings, you're more likely to mark up a scope IME.

Yes they are. They are excellent IMO.

smokepole,

He said he used them.

How many of the scopes you mounted with Talleys, that have not been lapped, have you pulled and found no marks? No cheating, now. Some you actually pulled and inspected.

None. How about yourself.

Amen!

That's the exact reason I don't even take my guns out of the safe, much less into the 'woods'. Why some are happy with a scratch on anything is beyond me.

Ringman, PS: if you read his first post he said he sold them "after opening the first set." That means without actually using them. I believe that version.

Who would buy multiple sets of scope rings, sell them all after opening the first set because they were so messed up, and then go ahead and install/use a set?

I have used multiple sets (haven't kept count) of both the matte blue and silver Talley lightweights, and still have them on three of my center-fire rifles. I have not seen any marking or deformation on any of the scopes. In fact, the only rings that I have seen leave marks have been the Ruger factory rings and the occasional set of Leupolds.

I confess that I am pretty much an inveterate scope swapper. If there were commonly problems with Talley lightweights, I should have run into at least one bad set. So far, it hasn't happened.

In my limited experience compared to others.
Only sets (couple) that marked the scope were sets that the bottom half were like pinched together and the scope had to be pushed into the ring. That hasn't happened in several years so I figured it was a early production issue. I have used probably 20 sets in the last ten years.

DNZ although not very attractive are also very functional and what I prefer on the T3.

smokepole,

Ringman asked,


smokepole answered,


You mean you never took some apart or you never found marks after taking them apart?

As far as whether I did or didn't is not part of this thread. You didn't accept the OP word that he installed a set. YOu brought up how many you have used. If it weren't for Talley's light weight, I would stick with Burris Signatures.

I've used the Z rings with inserts.I think they were Z rings. They have the Weaver bases. I haven't used the dual dovetail rings. May have to give them a try. I love rings with polymer inserts. I have Sako rings with them too.

SIGNATURE ZEE rings are the ones with the Inserts that go on the weaver style bases.

+ 1

Ringman, do you often refer to yourself in the third person? Would you prefer that I follow suit?

You asked me "how many," and I gave a very direct one-word answer. Interpret it in whatever way Ringman desires.

And you're correct, I didn't accept what the guy (not the OP) said the second time, because it conflicted with what he said the first time.

But how about my unanswered question--who would buy a few sets of rings, open the first set and get rid of the others because the first set was all messed up, yet still install and use the first set? Would you?

smokepole



I never do.



There's no suit to follow since I don't. If you want to please do.



So, in other words you have NOT taken any apart so you don't know if the scopes are dinged or not.



It's not called "conflicted". It's called elaboration when more information is needed.



You choose to be foolish at times. This is one of them.

So you don't understand what referring to yourself in the third person means?

Wrong, Ringy. Just in the past two months I took apart three sets of Talleys, no scope marks. One was a scope I drug all over the mountains in Alaska and beat the crap out of, wore the paint off the side of one of the rings.

I have marked up scopes in the past, but it's been long enough that I couldn't tell you which rings I used. I can tell you it was before I knew how to mount a scope correctly. Those, I don't blame on the rings.



Ringman, there's only one fool here and it's not me. What the guy said is ridiculous, and can be dismissed out of hand.

No one who's knowledgeable and experienced with scope rings would look at a set, pronounce it too messed up to use, and then go ahead and use it.

Then again, maybe he did. In which case, he just demonstrated that he doesn't know what he's doing when it comes to mounting scopes. Good thing you're convinced he's worth listening to.

Ironbender, thanks for explaining what "third person" means so I didn't have to.

smokepole,



You could have stated that the first time instead of this verbal running around the bush.



Then why did you respond?



His communicating skills are no better than mine. I didn't catch where he explained to me where I referred to myself in the third person.