Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Express Rifles and Big Bores Only Winchester Classic Classic Stainless 375 H&H

About ready to mount a Leupold 1.5-5 on my 375.

Planned to go with Leupold DD & Low Rings - Bases arrived today and I'm not sure if I'm crazy about the looks. I have another front base that isn't extended, but not sure about the position of it on the ocular once it's mounted.

Didn't really want to spend another 150-170 on Talley Steel bases, but what are some other fairly attractive options or any pics with Leupold DD's installed?

Thanks for any recommendations

I like Warne Maximas. Similar look to Talley.

Here is my Win Classic Stainless 338

Cone Trol is an old skool super clean mounting system.

Honestly though, the Leopoldo Back Country or Talley Light Weight ring/base combo is my preference if you don’t need QD function.

Wouldn't mind trying the Backcountry mounts, as they're a little heavier built than the Talleys but I don't believe the make the correct one for the rear screw spacing.

That's a classic look to me. ^^^

DD's always look good, I don't know what the OP's issues is, without pics.

When I'm not using DD's, I'll use the weaver style cross slot mounts for my heavier kickers. I'll also use steel over aluminum in those instances. Warne and Leupold both make some good mounts/bases. Then I prefer Burris Zee rings, or the Leupold PRW's for more heft on the magnums like the 375 H&H.


Op needs to post a picture, so he can show us exactly what he doesn't like about them.

i have talleys on mine. Only way I would go different would be warne bases and warne QR rings

Another consideration!

The Leupold QD base/rings. This opens up the opportunity to use your iron sights, hopefully never, if necessary. We’ve (wife and I) have been using these on our Model 70’s since the mid ‘90’s, she on her SS push feed .338 WM and I on my .375AI. We have back-up scopes mounted and zero’d in rings.

I tested mine for their repeatability, a couple times by swapping scopes. They came back to their respective zero’s.

I hope to not need them, but they’re there for emergency use, and I have confidence in them! My opinion on them for what it’s worth! memtb

I'll take some pics in the next day or so, when I'm able.

Good suggestion. Some say the oldstyle Leupold QD's are not very strong. The ones I'd use (and have experience with) are the QRW/PRW base, that has the cross slots like the weaver bases, only they are made from steel. Another good thing to use on the heavy kickers. As I stated in an earlier post. However, if the op does not like the location of the DD's, for whatever reason, he's not going to like the oldstyle QD's either. Again, need to see pictures, to know exactly what he's talking about. Then maybe we can offer some acceptable alternatives..

For me the attraction of QD mounts are the ability to have a backup scope along already zeroed. I have them on my Super Express but not for iron sight use, I can’t get my face low enough to use them.

I have the same issue with the irons, but as I mentioned, hopefully the irons are “never” needed. memtb

Good suggestion. Maybe even having the ability to switch to a higher powered variable would be useful. Like memtb said though, it's nice to have irons as well, but I bet the OP's doesn't.. My pre 64 375 H&H's did, but that's not a classic stainless. The op also needs to make sure he orders the correct bases. The ones for the post 64 express models. He probably already knows that though.

That's where the pre 64's shine. The ability to use both, and the factory montecarlo stock is very forgiving.

One thing I found with the Leupold QR mounts (the ones with the stud on the ring bottom) is the rings may need to be lapped to release easily. I have a set that work fine until you torque the scope into the rings, then it's difficult to remove the scope/rings from the rifle. Everything has to be square and parallel for those studs to slide in and out of their respective hole in the base. No, KY doesn't help.

I thought that the Classic SS Model 70’s in .375 H&H came in this configuration! However, I’ve been wrong before. memtb

Good point about that set up. You'd think the receiver would have to be close to perfect too. Some aren't, as you know. I have a set, for an H&H receiver, but have never used them. Decided to go a different direction. The OP is getting some good info here.

QD's are nice if you want back up irons.

This one was too barrel heavy, chopped it to 21" got it fluted which helped the balance and handling.

DF

I handled one quite a few years ago…..yes they were incredibly heavy!

Yours looks good……and I suspect handles even better. For timber/brush work it should be an awesome package! Out of couriosity what does it weigh - scoped, loaded, and slung? memtb

Can’t remember. Will weigh it and post results when I get home from the office.

DF