Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Scope rings

Got an older fullfield II 3x9x40 I’m going to put on it for the time being. The more Ive read about the vertical split rings the more they seem like a pain to switch scopes in them down the line. The rifle is a close to 8 pound 35 whelen as it sits with no scope now and it’s not too horrible recoil wise. It is a classic gun though and I don’t want to put tactical looking rings on it.

One thing is for fhuqking certain,is that if you are using Burris glass,you'll want something EASY to change,because you are going to NEED to do so. Assuming you actually fhuqking shoot. Hint.

Maxima's are 10x superior to Zee's. As are PRW's. Hint.

Dangle a picture of the Goat Fhuqk,it will be FUNNY! Hint.

Fhuqking LAUGHING!............

I agree with you on that, the dual dovetails would look sharp and haven’t given me any problems on another rifle they are on. They do offer the unaltered base with the windage screws but I can’t see those as being as strong and they’re definitely not as slick looking as the DD’s

The rifle on top is the one getting drilled and tapped now. The bottom rifle is a 1917 eddystone that I inherited from my grandpa after he passed away. I’m still pretty young and can shoot a peep sight pretty well but I’m more confident using a scope for hunting and would like to get the Mauser out in the woods more. The eddystone is due for a rebore or debarrel job but that’s another story.

Sticks stuff "failing" has more to do with him being a ham fisted dumbphuck and throwing his shyt around than anything else.

Leupold dual dovetail.

Those don't fit the mount he has.

There isn't much metal at the Zee Z and I've had them crack there.

I have a couple of rifles from the Boomer Era that still need the standard mounts. I use the Signatures on those because of the inserts. Never had one of the windage bases fail, nor tested them harshly by dropping or otherwise abusing them. They do require some futzing with to get straight and centered.

My bad. Just my go tos.

One piece standard with windage screws maybe? I have some of those that have stayed on through some pickup rides on the floorboard lol.

I've had them on a half dozen rifles for years and thousands of rounds without issue. I don't play musical rings on my rifles so they get mounted once and stay there.

It seems BlackShart "forgot" about her heralded Imaginary Pretend Ignore,which frosts her sheer and utter CLUELESSNESS nicely,with being a Lying Piece Of Fhuqking Schit...the "lucky" kchunt. Hint. Congratulations?!?

Fortunately for her,Imagination and Pretend are free,so even a Brokedick such as she,can "afford" to "contribute". The only thing she "shoots",are her mouth and Imagination. Hint.

Zee's are HILARIOUSLY fhuqking schitty and suit her "abilities" and "Adventures" well. Hint.

Fhuqking LAUGHING!.................

The weaver-style bases are a great system. If you want detachable rings, get QRW's. You have a heavy rifle and a heavy scope; don't save weight on the rings. If a quick detach isn't important, Leupold makes a decent ring and the Maximas are just fine. It doesn't take any more effort to switch a scope in vertically split rings than in an other. GD

I totally agree with you there: The reason I use the Zee rings. They are not blocky and excessively big like a lot of the weaver style rings. A lot of those are too tactical looking for my needs as well. These are not tactical rifles, they are classic hunting rifles. I hate to suggest the leupold standard mounts and rings, but that is what I'm running right now until I fit a set of weavers on my new Mauser rifle:


Running an older American made Burris FFII 3-9x40 with ballistic plex reticle. Great scope for this application as well, as it is fairly lightweight, but it will easily allow you to shoot to 500 yards with that reticle. This older Burris has better glass than my new Zeiss V4 4-16x44.

That is a sharp looking rifle! And what stock is that if you don’t mind me asking?

This^^^

Many popular rings and mounts were not originally developed with the weight, length, and size of scope that a lot of people are using today.

Pretty low.

Thanks buddy. It is actually an H&R model 340 made from 1981-1983. It is a Zastava action, very similar to the Interarms Mark X or FN commercial action. The stock is what H&R put on this rifle. It is very trim and the rifle is pretty light. Lighter than a pre 64 model 70 featherweight. It may be a Bishop stock, but I'm not totally sure..



I just bought the rifle a few days ago and have been working on accurizing it. Glass bedded it, adjusted the trigger down to 2 3/8 pounds, and freefloated the barrel. Shoots very well for a light barreled rifle.

Guys saying your scope choice is heavy are full of it too. Unless 13 oz's is heavy. I'm running the same exact scope on this rifle and it balances very well. I'll develop some loads for this thing and run it out to 400 yards. I'd expect sub 2" groups at that range, even with the lowly 180gr Winchester powerpoint load I showed in another post. Good luck with your rifle. In your picture, you show a m1917. The one I posted a pic of also wears weaver bases and Burris Zee rings. That has been a great choice for my sporterized m1917's. Now, having a little experience with the old mauser actions, some were not drilled and tapped very well, so sometimes you run into issues mounting a scope because the bases are slightly out of alignment. When that happens (and it does), you may need to look at some rings that are windage adjustable. I've had to use the Millet angle loc windage adjustable rings. They work, and help to align the scope axis with the bore axis. Also, I've seen a few where the bases needed to be bedded because of ring alignment issues. Hopefully you won't have any problems like that, but it's always a good idea to check for those issues with scope alignment bars.

It’s a sharp looking rifle for sure. Hopefully I won’t have any problems with the Mauser scope base alignment, its at a reputable local smith so everything should be good to go when I get it back. My grandpa’s 1917 is a different story, it’s an eddystone with a roached out bore and I’ve thought about rebarrling back to 30-06 or reboring it to 35 whelen as well. I’ve read they had silverback gorillas tightening the barrels for eddystone back in the day and the receivers are prone to cracking and I’d hate to ruin a family heirloom. I’ll probably wind up sending it to JES and having it rebored eventually. The other issue with that rifle is the swimming pool where the rear sight base used to sit would have to be filled and welded. I’m not sure if it would be worth all that trouble to get a scope on it so I will probably leave the peep on it