I recently purchased a Remington 141. It’s in really nice condition: the wood is in fantastic shape and the bluing is very solid. It’s been drilled and tapped for a scope, and that was a selling point with me when I bought it.
Looking up info online said that two Weaver bases, 20A and 27, would fit this gun. Indeed, the holes align as they’re supposed to. However… the front base is thicker than the base for the back. This is a problem because the holes for the front sit on that raised section at the front of the receiver. The rear base – which would seem to me to need to be taller anyway – is far shorter than the front base, which is thicker and sits higher on the receiver due to its location. Does that make sense?
My question to the good folks on here… Do any of you have a similar situation with your 14 or 141? What scope base do you have? Do you have pictures you can share?
Thanks in advance; I’m very much looking forward to using this fine gun.
The front Weaver base was intended to be installed on the barrel, just ahead of the receiver.
Whoever did the d&t work must have used a different brand of bases, maybe Redfield turn-in style, for a template or they used the wrong Weaver base at the front.
Send a PM to rem141r, he is the current resident expert on the old Remington pump guns.
Your situation reads a lot like one that I had last year with an older Winchester M61 .22. The rifle was never drilled and tapped and the Weaver mount was the only one that they listed for that rifle. Like your 141, they recommended a lower mount on the back of the receiver that fit the receiver contour and a taller mount up front that was supposed to go ahead of the receiver and onto the barrel itself. I wasn't about to let my gunsmith drill that barrel so once I determined that the scope turrets would fit, I ordered two of the lower rear mounts and mounted them both on the receiver. Works perfectly and a lot cleaner looking scope mount installation.
My other auto is a .45
The bitterness of poor quality is remembered long after the sweetness of low price has faded from memory
Your situation reads a lot like one that I had last year with an older Winchester M61 .22. The rifle was never drilled and tapped and the Weaver mount was the only one that they listed for that rifle. Like your 141, they recommended a lower mount on the back of the receiver that fit the receiver contour and a taller mount up front that was supposed to go ahead of the receiver and onto the barrel itself. I wasn't about to let my gunsmith drill that barrel so once I determined that the scope turrets would fit, I ordered two of the lower rear mounts and mounted them both on the receiver. Works perfectly and a lot cleaner looking scope mount installation.
The Remington 14/141 receiver has a bit of a rise/hump at the front of the receiver, the contour isn't consistent, so two of the same bases won't work. The way that this 141 was d&t will require a front base that is thinner than the rear base. A 'smith with a mill could probably rework a Weaver base to fit the receiver's contour and be level with the correct Weaver rear base.
My 141 has a single piece Redfield base on it. While all four of the screw holes are located on the receiver, the spacing looks different from the hole spacing you have illustrated. I looked and the base doesn't have a model number on it that I can see. If you are interested, I can get a picture of it tomorrow.
My 141 has a single piece Redfield base on it. While all four of the screw holes are located on the receiver, the spacing looks different from the hole spacing you have illustrated. I looked and the base doesn't have a model number on it that I can see. If you are interested, I can get a picture of it tomorrow.
I too have a Redfield base as Mathsr described and the base accommodates the raised portion on the front of the receiver - also as Mathsr mentioned the spacing doesn’t look right for that particular base - I’ll check too and see to be certain though?
