Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles What do you think of ..........

Tactical style scope bases/rails/mounts for hunting application. If you have tried or currently are using this method, I would like some input. I thought about putting this on my next custom build and wanted some input. I guess for the most part the rails that handle Weaver style rings is the base in question.

Thanks,
Kevin

It'll be heavy.

Not much !

Like pal said, they are heavy especially if you go with a mil spec 1913 steel rail (such as the one I have on my FN PBR XP). Even the beefy aluminum tactical rings like burris makes are going to be bulky and heavy (but they look better than the weaver steel rings IMHO). It all boils down to what you like and what suits your needs. Here's a pic of my set-up (pretty typical), it's what I used a few month ago to take my "long range" deer kill with:



For a regular hunting rifle, I'd say no it's not needed but if you enjoy long range shooting/hunting then a 20 moa base helps (I'm assuming that's why you want the rail). It's certainly not needed if you are limiting your shots to around 700 yards or so with most "long range" type cartridges. Hope that helps a bit.... Let me just add, I'd much rather be using talley lows on this thing but I don't know if they make them for this application (not the same mounting pattern as a winchester model 70 and it also takes the larger 8-40 screws so I'm kind of stuck with this arrangement )

I guess weight was one of the things I was wondering about. I'm going to be putting it on a long range rig , but it wont be on ranges past 700 yds. Thanks BSA1917hunter for your insight. It most likely be on a 700 action and a medium weight sporter rifle.

Kev

Not necessarily.... check out the alloy offerings by both Badger and Seekins.... lightweight and STOUT !

I think they're big, bulky, ugly as sin and wouldn't have them on a hunting rifle.

I've got a rail on my M700 '06. Due to Remington's recent outstanding QC, there's a slight misalignment in the ring screw holes, and subsequently, there is a slight binding when I screwed it together. It shoots OK groups, but it throws different bullet weights in radically different spots - generally horizontal dispersion. I think the rail will be going away for some Leupy DD rings and bases. I'd go Talley LW, but this rifle has a Minox on it, and I have interference with the power ring if I mount it too low (I'm a tall, long-necked stock crawler).

Plus, the scope sits really, really high.

I pretty much agree with everything, except the last part. If they worked OK, I'd keep running them. But, at least on this setup, they really don't work very well.

KDK, IF there is even a slight mis-alignment with your base screw holes then the talleys won't work well either (I know you already know that). The DD'S are probably your best bet since there will be some adjustment available with them. I agree about the rail though, if I could take the one off my fn pbr and replace it with a good set of talleys I'd be all over it!!! The rifle is a tack driver set up the way it is right now so that is another reason I leave it alone

picitanny bases are kinda nice if weight isn't an issue. you can swap scopes without loosening the rings from the scope, and getting 20 moa of elevation is a plus.

BUT, picatinny bases and Weaver are not made to directly interchange. the bases are not quite the same dimentions. also, it is hard to get the scope low enough in most cases.


that said, there are other ways to get elevation. Burris signature rings with the offset inserts is one way, and Leupold makes (made?) a long range base with 15 moa built in. it is a windage adjustable, one piece base though.

Toad,

I was just saying in the way they attach (Weaver Style). I personally would use Burris if I were to go that way.

Kev