Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Anyone want to critique my use of windage adjustable mounts? Please?

I originally posted this in the other thread, but figured it might get seen more if I just started a new thread. Looking for any input.

I dislike the windage adjustable mounts, and the one-piece bases even more. But I have them on one rifle- a .338WM that's 8.5 lbs total with the Leupold VX1 and one-piece base with windage rear rings. Here's why:

I was gifted this rifle by my grandfather years ago. It shot like [bleep]. I had the factory laminated stock bedded, trigger replaced, crown redone, changed scopes, changed mounts, changed scopes and mounts some more...

I finally got it fixed. When re-bedding it myself, I noticed that the front action screw was contacting the bolt lug. Filed down that screw, re-bedded it, and it shot better. Re-bedded it again into a BC Medalist, and it's reliably at least minute-and-a-half of angle every time I've taken it out. And I don't just mean three shot groups. I stacked 8 into a 1.5 MOA group while dialing the scope's magnification up and down to verify that it wouldn't change point of impact.

But I was just getting into rifles when I first started messing with this, and didn't figure it out until I let a friend with a barrel nut and a vice take it home and attempt to take the barrel off so I/we could re-barrel it. I don't know what he was doing or what he was using, but he was leveraging on the receiver and somehow managed to twist the receiver a CH. Two piece mounts don't line up anymore, and torque a scope. You can actually see the misalignment if you look down the receiver with no scope or mounts on it.

And since it's not just a matter of off-axis mounting holes on a straight receiver, that means that a traditional one-piece Weaver/Pic base with all 4 screws in place would be torqued or put torque on the receiver, right? I figured my best bet was to bed a one-piece Leupold base to the receiver with Devcon while not having the 3 screws tightened down all the way. It was slightly difficult to get all 3 screws into their respective holes, which further makes me think that a rail would induce torque somewhere. After the Devcon set up, I tightened everything up with Loctite and used the rear windage screws to bore sight the rifle before hammering them on as tight as I possibly could.

So far, after only MAYBE 150 rounds, it's holding. But it still concerns me, and I still don't like windage bases or one-piece mounts. Anybody want to pitch in opinions on whether or not it will continue to hold? Anything I could have done differently/better? And if it doesn't hold, then what? Clamp it in a vice and see how close I can get the receiver to straight?

I tried Burris Zee rings with the inserts first, but the way the receiver is twisted makes it still pretty difficult to get everything really lined up. The right side of the rear of the receiver is slightly "lower" than the front. My only other thought would be to try and bed a one-piece Pic rail as straight as I can, then cut it into two piece bases and use the Burris rings with inserts to fine-tune it, but I'm not sure how well that would really work. And again, it's holding so far... Any input would be appreciated.

Send it to a smith and get the receiver straightened and new barrel if necessary.. Send the friend the bill for the receiver work. Then pick good mounts and have no worries.

^^^^This or weld the bolt closed and hang it over your fireplace.^^^^

Your asking if anyone wants to "critique" something? In the optics forum?

Or hang it up your friends ass

Fugkin sodomites...

Take it to a smith, have it done correctly, never look back.

Take it to gun smith and have him do it right. I have a friend that jammed a shell in his 3,000 dollar custom gun and beat the bolt open with a brass hammer. I never let anyone other than a smith work on my rifles.

buy a Tikka

Just use a gun smith and fix it however you see fit. For the ones that would send the friend the bill no wonder they are on the internet and not visiting real people.

Get you a new gun and don't let Bubba work on any more guns.

Lol. Just not sending gun work to shadetree gunsmiths

Unfortunately, I think shade tree gunsmiths might be the only kind around here.

The rifle is serviceable as it is- for now. The thread about windage-adjustable bases has me wondering though. No other suggestions besides see if a real gunsmith could straighten it out? Does anyone have any idea how likely that might be to work?

I asked this in the other thread, but didn't see an answer.

What kind of rifle is it? That would be a factor for me as to whether the investment is warranted, maybe also how difficult it might be. The Grandpa factor is a big deal, I know.

You've changed trigger, stock, bedding, mounts, scopes and all, just to get it to a standard you seem less than thrilled with, and now the receiver's twisted. Personally I'd be rid of it, rather than spending any more time or money on it.

This , hang it in a place of honor and move on.

The mounts will be fine if you aren't hanging a Hubbell sized sniper scope on them.
Your csabbed together fix is working.
If the accuracy level is ok with you, use the damn thing.
If it isnt, get it fixed, but good luck getting a gunsmith that lakes it better.
If I was to send it off to be fixed, I would probably go all in and get a re barrel along with the action fix.

There are two issues here, Tweaked Receivers and Windage Adjustable mounts.

1. Windage adjustable mounts worked just fine for years. The internet came out and they became a poor choice.

a. Back in the 1980's when I was shooting friendly sporter rifle benchrest locally, I had a pre 64 Win 70 in 220 Swift with a Redfield 4-12 mounted with a one piece windage adjustable Redfield base. I shot the full season with my son and I sharing the gun; we won half of the available money that season and We never clicked the scope one click the entire season.

b. I had a Mauser 98 in 257 Roberts with a 2-7 Redfield scope again in one piece Redfield windage adjustable base. I fell hard bear hunting, flat on my back on the ice and rocks and directly on my scope. I dented the elevation turret and the Objective bell very deeply. I took aim on a target approx 75 yards away and hit it so I continued to hunt. At the end of the season I took that rifle to the range and shot it at 100 yards. It was dead on.

c. The one piece bases do cover the loading/ejection port a bit; usually with no effect. It is beneficial to first mount the base with the front end to see if the back is down on the receiver or floating in the air then to remove those screws and tighten the rear end down and see what the front end is doing. Shim as needed and lock her down.

d. I use Leupold QR, QRW, and Dual Dovetail mounts these days on factory guns. Mausers and Springfields still get one or two piece windage adjustable bases as they were not made as scope ready guns. Some get Weaver bases as well. I will also add that the QC of some of the budget factory guns scope mount holes might cause folks to revert to 1c above.

2. A Tweaked receiver is never going to be right. If the gun shoots acceptable with the steps you took, live with it. I think it will not get worse.

I won't have windage adjustable, redfield style bases. They can pull out when the rifle is dropped on the scope..... However Gentry makes a couple of bases that are not so vulnerable to such damage. Used them on my old Big Stick Special in.25-284. Yes. the rifle went down hard on the scope. Scope held and kept it's zero. Yo might consider them.
However, a "tweaked receiver" is something that would have me worried. It may well put bad stresses on a scope or bedding. E

I would have gotten rid of it looooong ago if it hadn't been a gift from my grandpa. Hell, I wouldn't have ever bought it in the first place.

And I'm ok with it how it is. Just wondering if anyone else has any ideas besides the one-piece base that is working- for now.