Jordan,
While I like the additional 40 MOA with the Burris and 20 MOA Talley option.
1. is it really needed? On the Ballistic software, the 6.5 Creedmoor 140 BTHP American gunner is only 31 MOA/9 MILs adjustment at 1,000 yards. It seems the regular Talley's would work with a 6x or 10x MQ.
2. If you have to add a cheek pad, doesn't that defeat the purpose of having a very lightweight rifle? Or, even with the added weight, is it much less than a similar Montana, etc.?
Or, is that combo more about rugged than about extra elevation?
I like rugged and not having to worry about my scope/mounting system crapping the bed. That's why I swapped out the Talley LW's, and that's what the system is geared toward. I went with the 0 MOA rail on this rifle to try and get the rear of the scope down a little lower, and Talley told me that the difference between the 0 MOA and 20 MOA rail is mainly in the height of the rear of the base. That's what made that decision for me. I'd be happy if there were other, lower options with the ruggedness of a rail, but the selection is currently very limited.
The XTR Sig rings do several things that I like. They grip like the devil, they mitigate mis-aligned rings and having to lap (as sometimes happens with Talley LW's), and they allow me to add enough cant to bottom out the elevation in the erector assembly.
The twist rate, mag box latitude, throating, 5 screw holes for the scope base, and rugged scope/mount setup is the advantage of that rifle. I don't mind stock packs at all, and kind of like them for certain things like storing my DOPE card, an allen key for the turrets, etc.
It's obviously not a perfect setup as is, and if Burris or Warne come out with a low base that's compatible with the 1913 pic-spec rings, I'll be happy to make the switch from the overly tall Talley rail.
