24hourcampfire.com
24hourcampfire.com
-->
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 177
P
Campfire Member
OP Offline
Campfire Member
P
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 177
I am interested in modifying some Talley LWs to fit a Remington model 7. The idea is to buy some 34mm rings for a Model 700, and shorten the rear ring base if necessary, and drill a new screw hole to fit the Model 7 screw spacing. No direct-fit lightweight 34mm rings are available for a Model 7 and I don't want a heavy rail + picatinny rings.


Is anyone aware of this having been done before, or any reasons that it might not work?

GB1

Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
C
Campfire Regular
Online Content
Campfire Regular
C
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Hopefully you can modify them into something that is not such a piece of scheit. Sorry, just not a fan of them at all.

To answer your question, I don’t see a technical reason why it couldn’t work. Except if there are remnants of the existing screw hole left when you machine it off and this somehow negatively affects creating a new mounting hole.

My biggest concern would be the moment arm you are creating on a small bearing surface on the rear ring. It is obvious there is very little space for the rear ring base to receiver contact on a model 7, and you will be hanging some serious mass above it if you are mounting a 34mm diameter scope. Worst case is an eventual stress crack in the aluminum of the ring. Not the end of the world, you just have to start over.

Good luck with your project, post photos


Welcome to TN - patron state of shootin’ stuff
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,221
S
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
S
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,221
Cotis:

You beat me to it. Read the Intro line to the thread and was going to post something to similar effect. Some have good luck with them, but for myriad reasons, foremost being breakage from recoil alone on a set I had, I'm not a fan.


Recently I weighed a set of Talley LW and then a Leupold aluminum rail with a set of NF LW rings. The difference was pretty small, as in a couple ounces. To me it seems a small price to pay in weight for something that's easier to obtain, much tougher, and allows for optimum ring spacing for scope support.

I figure if you're going to strap the rifle to a 34mm scope, a few extra ounces for the mounting system can't be that much of a game changer.

Last edited by Starbuck; 04/10/21.
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,420
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,420
Be aware that the rear receiver profile on a Model 7 isn't exactly the same as a Model 700. I'd contact Talley directly and see what they can do for you...they've done some non cataloged stuff for me in the past.

Upgrading all the mounting screws from 6-48 to 8-40 should absolutely be done on anything with that much mass hangin' in any mounting system.

Good shootin'. -Al


Forbidden Zoner
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,091
D
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
D
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,091
Speaking of which. Why do we insist on using these stupid 6-48 and 8-40 threads
.
I say go 8-32 and 1/4-28, works on everything else.

Not sure why I would want to put a 34 mm scope on a model 7
I sure wouldn't disturb the footprint on those Talley light weights


NRA Benefactor Member

Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

IC B2

Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 177
P
Campfire Member
OP Offline
Campfire Member
P
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 177
For additional information: Currently using a 3.5-10x40 FFP Leupold Mk4 in 30mm low Talleys. It is a good weight and setup for my 5.5lb .223, however I wouldn't mind a slightly more compact scope with a bit more magnification for assessing trophy quality of animals without carrying a spotting scope. I have a 3-18x44 Leupold Mk6 I'd like to use, but it is 34mm tube. It only weighs 50 grams more than the Mk4 (1.5 oz - 590gm vs 640) however adding a picatinny rail & 34mm picatinny rings probably adds another 100-150 grams on top of that c.f. Talleys. Talley 30mm low = about 70 grams for a pair. Warne Mountain Tech 34mm low rings = ~100gm pair, any rail = 100+ gram.

Adding the extra 50 grams of scope + 100-150 grams of mounting gear would be adding a full half pound to the rifle, I'd prefer not to do that - and might just buy a March 3-24x42 FFP instead as it's a 30mm tube 610gram scope.


Not willing to go for a SFP scope as I simply strongly prefer to use FFP exclusively

Last edited by PathFilmsNZ; 04/11/21.
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,221
S
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
S
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,221
PFNZ:

I just weighed a short action Warne rail: 44g. Pair of Warne Mountain Tech 30mm rings (didn't have a set of unmounted 34mm laying about) : 101g. Set of 30mm Talley LW: 71g.

So, all up you'd take a +/- 74g weight penalty to go with a rail. Maybe there's lighter rings available?

I empathize with your situation. I'm with you on the FFP; unfortunately, there's not a ton of options for lightish weight FFP, and even fewer FFP reticles that are, IME, well suited to hunting throughout their magnification range. So far, my favorite reticle for hunting is the G2H that came in the LRHS's. The Bushnell's have been tough and the adjustments have been right on. But, they are a heavier scope, and I'm always going back and forth on putting one on one of my lighter weight hunting rifles, which currently have SWFA HD 3-9's and NF 3-10 on them. And while those have been awesome scopes, I prefer several aspects of the LRHS's.

The March in reference has been on my radar, so please post back with results if you go that route. Best of luck to you.

Last edited by Starbuck; 04/12/21.
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 177
P
Campfire Member
OP Offline
Campfire Member
P
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 177
That rail is much lighter than those I had on hand!

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,361
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,361
[Linked Image]
I have to modify some Talley rings more than others.


There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. -Ernest Hemingway
The man who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything.-- Edward John Phelps
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 177
P
Campfire Member
OP Offline
Campfire Member
P
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 177
Objective bell clearancing?

IC B3

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,361
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,361
[Linked Image]

I used to have objective bell clearance problems... until scope makers got bigger and bigger with the eyepieces.

Leupold was making rimfire scope with small diameter eyepieces. With adjustable objective, it worked with long range deer hunting.


There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. -Ernest Hemingway
The man who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything.-- Edward John Phelps
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,814
M
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Content
Campfire 'Bwana
M
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,814
You can cut the middle out of a rail.

Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 177
P
Campfire Member
OP Offline
Campfire Member
P
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 177
Originally Posted by Starbuck
PFNZ:

I just weighed a short action Warne rail: 44g. Pair of Warne Mountain Tech 30mm rings (didn't have a set of unmounted 34mm laying about) : 101g. Set of 30mm Talley LW: 71g.

So, all up you'd take a +/- 74g weight penalty to go with a rail. Maybe there's lighter rings available?

I empathize with your situation. I'm with you on the FFP; unfortunately, there's not a ton of options for lightish weight FFP, and even fewer FFP reticles that are, IME, well suited to hunting throughout their magnification range. So far, my favorite reticle for hunting is the G2H that came in the LRHS's. The Bushnell's have been tough and the adjustments have been right on. But, they are a heavier scope, and I'm always going back and forth on putting one on one of my lighter weight hunting rifles, which currently have SWFA HD 3-9's and NF 3-10 on them. And while those have been awesome scopes, I prefer several aspects of the LRHS's.

The March in reference has been on my radar, so please post back with results if you go that route. Best of luck to you.


Well I found a good deal on a used but mint condition March 3-24x42 FFP, so I bought that...

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,638
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,638
I wouldn’t want Talleys holding a 34mm scope. YMMV.


Originally Posted by shrapnel
I probably hit more elk with a pickup than you have with a rifle.


Originally Posted by JohnBurns
I have yet to see anyone claim Leupold has never had to fix an optic. I know I have sent a few back. 2 MK 6s, a VX-6, and 3 VX-111s.

Moderated by  RickBin 

Link Copied to Clipboard
AX24

691 members (10ring1, 10gaugemag, 12344mag, 117LBS, 10gaugeman, 01Foreman400, 73 invisible), 2,836 guests, and 1,160 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums81
Topics1,191,155
Posts18,465,109
Members73,925
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023


 


Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2024 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.



Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.099s Queries: 14 (0.003s) Memory: 0.8533 MB (Peak: 0.9632 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-04-24 02:11:20 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS