The lowest and strongest (not the prettiest) ring I am aware off is the original Weaver with the wrap-over steel strap on top, they grip extremely well. I just measured a pair and as close as I can measure the bottom of the scope would be 5/64 of an inch above the base.
I have a pair that is practically like new laying on my loading bench, if you would be interested in them for your project you can have them for $12 shipped - that is just about enough to cover my 15 mile trip to town and postage.
drover
223 Rem, my favorite cartridge - you can't argue with truckloads of dead PD's and gophers.
24hourcampfire.com - The site where there is a problem for every solution.
The lowest and strongest (not the prettiest) ring I am aware off is the original Weaver with the wrap-over steel strap on top, they grip extremely well.
I like them too.
They are also really light, despite their ruggedness, and as well as that you can take them off by hand and when you put them back on, by pushing them firmly to butt up against the front of the slots, the scope will go back pretty close to zero too.
That's the problem. If they raised the price, people would think they are better, which they are.
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice.
Thanks for the replies, drover there is a PM inbound 260 I haven't seen any Warne rings as low as the Weavers, do you have a link or something for them?
Warne Maxima Series steel mounts are excellent bases. They are very low and are of very nice quality. I'd pass on the Weaver bases and get the Warne for sure.
wouldnt bother with any ring/bases but Talley Lightweight alloys on commercial 98 !
why would you stuff around with weavers these days, they certainly dont hold a big kicker and any rings that have sharp edges r screws exposed only end up catchin bush.
With Mauser actions and low mounts and rings you have to be careful about which scopes you mount. Scopes with large oculars may not clear the bolt.
I have mainly Mauser actions and low Warne bases and low Weaver rings set the scope low enough that most oculars won't clear the bolt handle.
Another common issue is the mounting length of the scope tube. Depending on the way the rifle was drilled and tapped, some bases and rings may create mounting problems.
"It is wise, though, to remember above all else: rifle, caliber, scope, and even bullets notwithstanding, the most important feature of successful big game hunting is to put that bullet in the correct place, the first time!" John Jobson
wouldnt bother with any ring/bases but Talley Lightweight alloys on commercial 98 !
why would you stuff around with weavers these days, they certainly dont hold a big kicker and any rings that have sharp edges r screws exposed only end up catchin bush.
Its 2015 not 1985 !
That's funny ...... I've been using Weavers for 30 years on all sorts of rifles w/o any problems at all. Don't recall ever once getting those screws hung up on bush or having sharp edges problems. How is it you have?
Also, tells us you experience with those big kickers certainly not holding with Weavers. I've owned several 375Magnums and 35Whelens over the years with nary a problem, ever. I've taken 375s on two Yukon fly-in hunts and both times used Weaver type mounts. No worries there either.
You're right about one thing ...... It is 2015 and still after all these years, the Weaver system continues to still be popular and is the most copied system out there. They are flat out reliable and do work reasonable well as QD mounts too.
I had a 1.5-6x Bausch & Lomb Balvar on a relatively light .416 Remington Magnum for a while in Weaver rings. Weight of the rifle with scope was 8-1/2 pounds, and the rings held up fine with full-house 400-grain loads at 2400 fps.
Dunno what rings the comment about "rings that have sharp edges r screws exposed only end up catchin bush" refers to, but never have had that trouble with Weavers, and have used rifles with Weaver rings to shoot at least 100 big game animals.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
![[Linked Image]](http://s1197.photobucket.com/user/boxhead61/media/Guns2011058.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v469/2439candace/049.jpg)
