Thinking of getting the Nightforce Light weights or Seekins. I have a light weight rail coming for my Forbes.

Anyone know which rings are lighter? Any other light weight suggestions?

I use the nightforce ultralites. they seem to work pretty good. I just wish the underlug that interfaces with the pic slots was squared instead of rounded off. I think you want more meat in that area.

Murphy precision

Never weighed any but the NF Seekins TPS and even the swfa's have gave no problems so far.

Started out with the Talley picatinny and the lows have broke on every set I'm familiar with. I'd bet a dollar they've fixed the problem but I won't bet 180 dollars they have.

Murphy makes a titanium and a ss model ring, they weigh 3ounces plus or minus and they IMHO are a very sleek ring

+1

Hawkins precision

APA's are pretty light...

APA, Nightforce, or Seekins.....all excellent products!!

Don't overlook Iota

Hawkins

Interesting design for sure. They seem to have gotten them very low while not thinning the ring with the clamp... Found some additional pictures in this review...
APA ring review with pics

Read that when they first came out........really good review!

I've always thought someone could go low like this (sub .250"), simply with a traditional, or common flat-toothed clamp design, by making the body thicker on the clamp side with a longer screw, but haven't seen any designs take that approach for going low. What I'm saying... Picture more material where the clamp closes so the groove where the clamp bites is not cutting into the ring... Just bump that area out maybe .150" and you could drop the 30mm circle down, yet maintain ring thickness. APA did it by ditching most of the tooth on the clamp and having the whole works radiused... Or something to that effect so it'll still functionally clamp...

These low APAs would have been the huckleberry on a couple of Ruger 77s I had fitted with 20 MOA rails. They were just too high with typically available low (.25") 30s.

Go lower by doing something like this with screws and a machined lug...

Funny you should mentinon this, I've been looking at Picatinny rings for a last few weeks, and the exact thing you mention had occurred to me as well... I don't get it.

I used the term flat-toothed for the common clamp style and that was a poor description. The tooth, or maybe call it a wedge, biting into the ring circumference is not a new challenge for lower mounting and is more pronounced, I'm guessing, with larger diameter tubes. These early Warne Premiers ended up too thin compromising integrity. Going to the Weaver base width, would just in itself, allow this basic design to be used at a lower height. This has a double wedge simple clamp, (although not flat), which would not work on the concept I mention. As illustrated above it would take a different clamp design extending the wedge that goes to the base. Using a machined lug like some of the premium rings in this thread opens up some possibilities, cost be dammed. No hijack intended. Lower could be lighter and simple could be more cost effective.

They're gonna have to be aluminum, for the weight factor.

I like the TPS TSR aluminum 30mm rings for AR use; alum integral rail w/alum rings. Very lightweight and Excellent Quality. Leupold also makes an aluminum Mk4 ring. Have owned several steel sets of mk4 rings and they are Excellent.

Best Value is TPS.

Anyone use or know anything about warne mountaineer bases and rings?

Just saw those yesterday. Have a set coming, 30mm low. Will report back on the height and weight. I did not fully delve into the different contact surface with the bases NATO STANAG stuff...They are Weaver compatible too... Stainless hardware. Found for $87 shipped IIRC.



Precision CNC machined from 7075/T6 aluminum for a high strength & lightweight platform
Mil-Spec hardcoat anodized finish for abrasion and corrosion resistance.
Rings feature stainless steel hardware for “Element Proof” protection.
Mil-Spec 65 in/lb., 1/2″ tactical nut attachments for securely clamping to the rail.
Fits Picatinny & Weaver style mounts and are NATO-STANAG compatible.
Available for 1″, 30 and 34mm tube sizes; in Low, Medium, High and MSR ideal height; For maximum compatibility with most scope/firearm combinations.

I like the TPS HRT rings on a sporter.

Wow, I like the looks of those.

I ordered a set of those for a rifle last November. Haven't used them much(less than 50 rounds) but they appeared to be pretty nice when I installed them.

TPS HRT's, mounting a Leupold 2.5-8x36 on a 40 moa Nightforce rail.

Not knocking any of these. Off topic discussion...... Just noticed on the old Warnes, that I posted previously, there's already a crack that illustrated the point I was making! And they're steel. Just saw the crack today.

The common thin spot encountered trying to go low with 30mm, is clearly seen in this model... Everything else is beefy and strong. Then there's this weak spot. On this one, it seems it would have been easy to overcome.



And one additional way it's been addressed (or hidden), with an inset clamp, on this Ebay China ring.

Some interesting applications. But I like Talley LW's overall. One less point of attachment to be a source of a problem.

Slacking on pulling this together but here's a start:

The 30mm rings on hand that aren't mounted:

Warne Mountain Tech Low 30mm 7213M 3.59 oz .267" USA

Leupold PRW 30mm low 170512 4.41 oz .225" USA

Burris XTR Signature 30mm Low 6.59 oz .41" (+20 insert I think) China

Burris XTR 30mm low with round top and 'inset clamp design' incorrectly attributed to Ebay China ring above, sorry, and that piece is called a KEEPER. 4.68 oz .25" China

SWFA 30mm low with flat top 4.49 oz .24" China

Warne Maxima 30mm low 4.48 oz .23" USA vertical split

Warne Maxima with quick release 30mm low 5.03 oz .23" USA vertical split

Warne steel bases 1.16 oz USA

Have, IIRC, three 84M 20MOA rails coming from Nightforce, Talley and EGW.

SWFA Bubble Level 1 oz

Nice looking set up Sam just how much blood spilled in that moment.

Thanks.
I might wind up with Talley Lightweights using the SWFA 3X9 MQ. I bought the Talley 20 moa rail just in case I want to use a lighter scope with less eye relief.

Then again when you add the rail and rings weight the scope would have to be so light that it might not be trustworthy to make up the difference between that set up and the SWFA in Talley LW's. Basically it will come down to fit.

Thanks for the info!

Welcome, welcome...

One more set I've had for awhile. They're aluminum with a titanium crossbolt and high grade hardware. On their site they have Gen2 lightweights at a claimed 2oz. And some burly SS units.

Buckeye Tactical/Optics 30mm low 2.99 oz .25" USA

Got an email back from Nightforce. They said their 30mm X-treme Duty Ultralight rings in low per pair weighed 2.864. That's cutting it pretty fine...:)

I haven't found anything lighter per pair...has anyone else?

APA 30mm ,750 lows = 3 3/4oz per pair!

I just put 34mm hawkins on my 2223ai. I have seekins and I've broke a warne....but there's just nothing not to love about the hawkins.

I went ahead and ordered the Warne Mountain Techs to try them out. What are some good lightweight 2 piece picatinny bases to use?

Burris if they make them for your gun

Where'd you find these for $87 delivered?

Warne, weaver style two piece bases are low and will work with these rings.

Huh? nobody makes picatinny rings for a specific gun?

Murphy's Precision!

Correct me if I'm wrong here, as math is not my strong suit....but I believe that would make the APA rings heavier than the Nightforce by nearly an ounce...:)

I just posted the APA 's weight in case someone needed the info, wasn't comparing them to NF......

But I'll take the extra 3/4 oz for the appearance and height over NF.......

roger

I just put a pair of Warne Mountain Techs on a LAW 280AI (1"), they seem to be holding well. I paid $104 from Midway!

The APA lows at .750" are the best thing going. Expensive, but worth it to get a reasonable height.

These are TPS TSR super low 30mm aluminums:



These are TPS HRT medium 30mm's:



I wish they made the HRT rings in a super low height, you can see the rounded top shaves a bit of weight off of them since the s-low TSR rings are just a smidge heavier than the medium HRT's.

I got the idea to take the HRT caps and put on the S-Low TSR bottoms to see if they'd work. They fit perfectly, they lost .27 oz. and they look better. I can't see any reason why they won't work. I'm gonna try them on my M70 7mm mag.

CrowHunter, regarding super lows, I believe nearly all the rings are offered in the lowest height the designer feels will maintain the integrity of the ring (See MtnBoomer's pics above). The design of the APA is different than most and allows for a lower height while still maintaining the integrity.

Amazon.com

Tks

these are nice:

https://iotaoutdoors.com/store/scope-mounts/triad.html

They look good and are pretty light at 2.6 oz

Man, those look great.. I can see those going on the Mashburn and the 338 Win. Great picture.