Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Talley Lightweight Failure

Jane,

At least you can “afford” to read about it…you “lucky” kchunt. Hint. Congratulations?!?

Don’t “forget”,that Imitation is THE most Sincere form of Flattery. Hint.

Fhuqking LAUGHING!……………..

Thanks. You actually had me looking at Polish Me Silly nail polish on Amazon. I suppose it will work just as well on shotgun and muzzleloader optics. I just need to settle on my signature color. I'm thinking the paradise rainbow color. I like that it's "Vegan and Cruelty-Free Fast-Drying Nail Polish." Hopefully it won't jump off when I'm lined up on a turkey.

I've enough rifles,that I likely use a "few" colors and fly through it like tape. You obviously won't. Hint.






Fhuqking LAUGHING!.......................

The technical "expertise" on materials, corrosion, torque, fasteners, and mechanical failure exhibited in this thread is something else. Engineering isn't something you can learn from YouTube videos and repeating words you don't understand.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Anyways, I'm going to try it.

Yes, DNZ mounts are better.

Hawkins Already out now.

Wish you all the best with your optics.

That's what I'd run, or a set of Leupold Dual Dovetails. They really aren't that much heavier than the Talley lightweights, but give you a lot more strength and reliability. I gave up on Talley's a long time ago, except for on 22's.

I was forced to buy a set of Talley Lightweights for my ULA muzzleloader recently. I had quit buying the Talley’s LW’s due to reading about all the failures. I’ve been buying the Burris XTR bases with APA rings on my bolt guns and DNZ rings/bases for my single shots lately and I’m happy with those setups.

For light rifles and low mounting of sensible hunting scopes, there’s ZERO reason not to use Talley LW mounts. Even their medium height is lower than the lowest combo on other styles of setup. If you need/want a rail or need a higher mount scope, there’s tons of options. If you just want skinny rings, ugly, and less screws, there’s DNZ. Trashing Talley LWs is likely just another campfire ‘fad’….like repping fixed 6 leupolds then trashing Leupold, or pimping SWFA then trashing SWFA. I’ve just never had any issue with Talley LW regarding construction or durability. Outside of an accidental drop, I don’t try to rock bounce test anything….maybe that’s my problem?

Good to know. I should just keep using the Talley lightweights that are mounted on my rifle then, right? Since it's a light rifle with a sensible hunting scope? Obviously I've been using my rifle and scope to drive fence posts as you can see with all the dings and dents on the scope mount, scope tube, and rifle action.

As an aside, the Talleys I have on the gun are listed as also fitting Savage actions. Is this true for any 2 piece scope bases? The listings on Midway and Brownells for Ruger American scope mounts are slim pickings, but Savage has over 100.

In case you missed it earlier in your thread.

I did miss that, thank you.

This is not new. It’s been occurring for many years. It’s not a fad. Again, you have to understand how these break. It’s from stress induced fatigue. Repetitive strain. Not trauma. This is a failure occurring after years of arthritis, not a blown ACL from a sideswipe tackle. It’s from round count, not dropping, rock bouncing or any other such nonsense. People blaming the user don’t understand the shortcomings of the ring.

Take a ring half of a T LW out of the package. Press it firmly onto your scope tube to seat it. You’ll feel it grip on there. Hell, it’ll probably even hang on the tube without any hardware, defying gravity. Yeah, that’s a problem. I like my scope rings round personally.

This pretty much sums it up.The retards at talley suck so bad at machining, they make nothing but excuses. Square pegs through round holes comes to mind.

Rings are supposed to be round. That’s because a scope tube is round, duh. Talley rings are oval. Unless you lap the hell out of them, you won’t have a stress-free installation, and end up like the OP. Some of their rings are so bad, lapping makes them weak, and they break anyway.

I used to love them for light rifles with low mounted lightweight scopes. They were perfection for such a setup...until the first crack. Replaced the set with the same, which eventually cracked liked the previous.

Perhaps it was my mounting method, perhaps an issue with the receiver holes, perhaps....I don't care. No issue with any other mounting system on any other rifle if it was my mounting method. Burris 2 piece with low pics have held up for longer than both pairs of TLW's on that rifle with no issue if it was the receiver holes.

If I have to use flowing vinyl and greased screws I want nothing to do with it. I want it degreased and with Loctite.

Talley LW's are a viable option provided they have some attention paid to them beforehand. There are literally dozens of sets out there on both my guns and others that I've lapped and bedded with no failures...some are over 15 years in service. No need to post pics as the Search function can find them for those interested.

If someone is looking for a bolt-it-on-and-go set of mounts, I steer them to something else. Leupold's Back Country one piece mounts are very good. And there are others.

FWIW, later Talley's have been redesigned to eliminate the 'pinch point' between the rings halves. They now also have a longitudinal relief in the base section that lets the rings better conform to imperfect receiver dimensions. I just did some for a Mack Bros. Evo II and they turned out very well.

Good shootin' -Al

Your method is the best and most thorough I’ve seen. I do similar and I’ve never had a problem either. Never a crack or an even a slip. But having to make products what they should be right out of the package is quite an annoyance.

From what I can tell the Leupold Backcountry don’t come in a low height. Wish they did.