Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Base/Rings Advice

I have sevaral model 70s on which I am upgrading or moving scopes. In taking off the old scopes, I was surprised at the amount of ring marks. All of them use Leupold standard mounts. I noticed the windage screws were loose on one as well. I will be replacing the front base on one long action with an extension base and want to switch out the extension bases on a short action as well. The new scopes will likely stay on the rifles for a long time, but resale is definitely better if you can avoid ring marks.

Recently I mounted a scope on a Marlin 336 using Warne detachable rings and an EGW base. I like the setup and felt it was easy to do a good job with the mounting. Also have used Burris Z rings on a Weaver base on a 10/22 and like that setup as well. It seems to me that the Leupold bases are harder to work with and to get a good result.

I actually kind like the old school look of the Leupold Standard bases, but the Warnes are nice and the Zee rings are fine too. I would use 2 piece bases on the M70s, non-detachable ring

I suspect it will cost about $50/rifle to switch x 4 = $200. What do you think - keep using the Leupolds or switch them out, and with what?

I never cared for the Leupold type standard bases. Sure, I used them on several guns for a while, but eventually did away with all of them. Just another weak link in the system, and the drifting windage can really torque a scope tube, especially if the front dovetail is very tight, which it should be. The screws are difficult to tighten fully without buggering (Brownells does sell special screwdriver tips just for these). There is really no need for the rough windage adjustment (although I did need it on a Win. 70 that had crooked screw holes, but that was the only exception.)

Warne is a good, solid system, in both permanent and detachable. Talley's are excellent, but certainly more pricey.

A lot of people seem to like the Talleys. I have no experience with them - are they much improved from the Warnes?

For windage adjustable and dual dovetail Redfield type mounts:
1. Make sure rings are aligned and coplaner
2. Lap the rings with a lapping bar
3. Touch up lapped surfaces with cold blue
4. Lightly dust the rings with powdered rosin,
5. Torque ring screws gradually alternating as you step up torque to 15-18lb/in.

I started using the Weaver bases/Burris Zee rings about 15 years ago and and use them exclusively since. They have been very straight with none or very little lapping of the rings needed with the exception of the nickel plated rings that were a mile off..........


Casey

Kingston, do you like the Leupold system?

One advantage that Warne / Weaver systems seem to have is that it is pretty easy to take the scope off and then remount it, even if they aren't the QD rings

Vertical split rings systems are my least preferred. That said, IMHO, on traditional styled rifles Talleys are a more attractive option than than Warnes. Functionally, in the quick release variety, Warne is the superior ring. I can't get over the fact that Talley QR rings are made such that they sit off center on the bases and thus will never sit directly over the bore. I've asked Talley numerous times why they chose to do this and have never gotten an answer.

Leupold windage adjustable mounts are a Redfield type system made by Leupold.

That depends.
*****************




alpinecrick's suggestion of Burris Zee Rings with inserts eliminates most of the variables that the steps I outlined above address.

Any particular reason for your dislike of vertical split rings?

Which horizontal split system do you prefer?

Regarding vertical split rings, my preferences are outlined in the passage you cited.


I dislike them in general because they're a PIA to install, especially if you want to get everything right. In this context 'getting it right' means ensuring against ring marks on spendy scope tubes. I prefer TPS weaver compatible Al rings on weaver style bases. Warne recently came out with a weaver compatible horizontal split ring (Mountain Tech). I haven't tried them but SamO on here had positive reports. Leupold PRW and QRW rings suck.

Please educate me - what are "TPS" and "AI"?

I know what PIA is - I'm being one. 😁

TPS is a manufacturer of optics mounts.

Al is atomic number 13 on the periodic table.

An acquaintance recently mentioned he likes his Mountain Tech rings. They sound interesting. Might have to try some........


Casey

Ah, ok, I thought your message meant ai not al. Thank you very much. That should be enough info to keep me busy for a while. Thanks.

Thanks, you guys gave me some good input.

Any issues with durability on the see ring inserts?

As long as you have the legacy windage adjustable mounts on a few rifles, you should go through them, give them a thorough inspection, and see if you can perfect their installation. It would greatly inform your perspective.

Get a quality set of alignment rods and a lapping bar.

I may try that and it would be a worthwhile exercise, but the last time I messed with them is kind of what got me started on the path of changing them out. It is always good to learn, but the Weaver-based system seems easier to get a good result without specialized tools. As I recall, I had some trouble tightening the windage screws without torquing the rings, putting them out of square with the action - perfect way to set up ring marks

Where is powdered rosin available?

Fine powdered rosin: Midway, Brownells, Amazon, Walmart.com. I apply it with an little artist paint brush.

Should you choose the adventurous route, the lapping bar and alignment bars will be useful down the road.

If you want easy, Burris Signature Zee rings or Burris Signature rings, both have polymer inserts.