On moderate recoil rifles 243 and smaller, are there any big advantages or disadvantages between vertical and horizontal split scope rings?
Thanks

I would use only horizontal rings.

I have a bunch of Warne vertical's, and never a problem.....

The only vertical split rings I've used worked OK but if I had to remove the scope, the scope became loose in the rings.

I’ve never had any trouble with any quality ring of either design. Buy a quality mount that you like, and be happy.

Six of a dozen and half of the other one.

X2, not a problem if the scope never leaves the rifle. The vertical splits are more work to rezero when you have to remove the scope to do a proper cleaning like the A17 with low rings. Leveling the crosshairs can be more difficult in vertical rings. Vertical rings have less screws making less potential failure points. They are more streamlined for less hangup points.

Google it. In some cases the vert obscures the windage turret and in almost all cases the horizontal split obscures the elevation turrets if that is critical to you. Vertical seem to torque the scope less during the final tightening, but this could be my technique.

For some reason projection-less and then vertical split seem more aesthetically appealing to me, but that is a matter of taste and personal experience.

Get ya some Conetrol

I'm not a fan of the little cap.

Its a machining marvel...

Control. I've used them on everything from Magnums to my Varmint rifles. Never an issue it's like the scope is welded to the rifle I don't switch scopes back and fourth all the time on my rifles like some dumb fuqks. Scope's a sight not a toy. Mounting a Nightforce NXS 3.5-15 X 50 on my new Sako 85 Varmint Laminate Stainless 243. I have the Control Fluted Dual Tapered Dovetail Bases Fitted and driven on. Now getting ready to install the scope with rings. When I'm finished, this rig is going to be slicker than a 20 dollar whore...

90% of my rings are these.

horizontal are easier to work with for me.

Ed

Warne Vertical's used to be my go-to but I am moving towards Ken Farrell Weaver/Picatinny bases on my go-to rifles.

I replaced the Warne's with Ken Farrell's horizontal rings and in my estimation after trying every brand out there, these are the king of bulletproof and excellent zero-hold when removing the scope and putting it back on. They also make the lowest rings in the market.

https://www.kenfarrell.com

I use Leupold standards on almost all of my 700s.

I also bought a roll of very thin lead tape from McMaster-Carr years ago. With an exacto knife I cut a tiny little sliver of lead tape and mount it in my rings. Actually I use two slivers front and back top and bottom of each ring.

An older gunsmith friend of mine told me about lead string years ago and this is the best I have been able to find or use.

In my opinion it really helps.

I like the horizontal split type if for no other reason than if the scope has to come off it can go back on usually with little or no change in zero. Verticle splits pretty much require a full re-zero. Conetrols I believe the same.
Ocassions to remove scopes are when you need to confirm a scope or a rifle as having any issues. A known good component lets you verify the other half.

The horizontal rings with the large windage screws at the rear base are a failure waiting to happen. These large windage screws a prone to cracking if over tighten just slightly and many times you wont even know their damaged cause the heads are stuck or kept in place by the recess in the rear base. When you groups open up or you loose your zero then you might figure it out. No I like the Conetrol's their rock solid. if I had to pick something else it would be the Talley rings and bases. On AR's or any other rifles with a Picatinny rail there are a lot of good options as far as horizontal split rings. No weak link as in windage screws.

Vertical split rings can work well, and I have a couple of sets in use, but I generally prefer horizontal split rings. They are easier to mount and remount scopes on and it's easier to retain your zero after removing and remounting a scope.

I am in complete agreement and got tired of messing with them last year. I can't believe I kept messing with them for all those years. Replacing them with Weaver style bases and horizontal split rings from KF.

Horizontal split for me. I prefer the Talley lightweight two piece.

I am in complete agreement and got tired of messing with them last year. I can't believe I kept messing with them for all those years. Replacing them with Weaver style bases and horizontal split rings from KF.

Vertically split rings can cause problems with scope that need to be dialed a lot. Most of these compress the rube asymmetrically, so with many scope models they can cause problems.

In set and forget applications that is less of an issue.

ILya

I use only Burris Signature rings with the plastic inserts. Either double dovetail or Weaver style Signature Zee Rings. I do have some other rings on rifles whose scopes have not been moved in years. If a scope is removed for any reason, Burris rings are installed. Happy Trails

+1 and the top of the ring is a rain collector. I will never use Talley Vertical rings again either fixed or removable.l

Verticals look nicer (to some). Horizontals tend to be easier to use (for some).

Which is better for set it and forget it? I see a lot of responses about “remounting” scopes… once it’s on my gun. It ain’t coming off

Horizontal. No contest..

Formi has mentioned this as well. And I believe that Vortex doesn't recommend them for their scopes.

I have used Warne vertical split rings a bunch and never had any issues with SWFA scopes. No issues with zero retention or tracking.

I saw this addressed in a lengthy thread on another forum a few years back. I just go with horizontals to minimize any potential issues, regardless of those who say verticals work for them. The geometry of some of them always seemed a bit strange to me anyway.

Vertical split rings?
REALLY??
That is what causes riots in prison.

Horizontals are definately easier to install but I have a couple of Warne rings on Brno 600s and they work fine. I tend to leave scopes alone when they are mounted.

Sometimes you have to go with what’s available. I used a set of vertical Warnes to mount a 56mm on a Hawkeye yesterday. PITA dealing with all the loose stuff, but very solid once you get them on. Nicely finished too, with no sharp edges. I wanted the detachables, but they’re nowhere to be found now, just like a lot of stuff.

I’m moving away from the Zee rings as they’re a dog to remove and re-install, plus heavier than necessary. Going to use the Weaver Sure Grips on the Marlin 39A headed here for the vintage look and light weight, but no hook to deal with. They’re actually pretty nice, cheap, and made here if you can believe it!

I use both. Neither are probably really better than the other. But I prefer vertically split because they are less obtrusive. And I've never lapped vertically split rings and never felt I had to. I've never had a scope slip in vertically split rings but I have in horizontally split rings. For instance, a failure to lap Ruger rings supplied with a Ruger gun is an accident waiting to happen. Great guns, horrible rings.

As far as being a rain collector: non-issue. Water can get get under both.

As far as the scope coming loose when you detach: that's an issue with Talley fixed permanent attach rings because they are literally two halves held together by two screws. (But they are marketed as "fixed" rings, so detaching them will require reinstallation.) But its a non-issue with Warnes, and a non-issue with Talley QD and QD screw lock because they are two-halves that attach around the scope first, and which has a third piece that clamps to the base. I've found Warne QDs and Talley QDs to return to zero very well.

I use a pencil to mark the tube at the splits (when I remember) to make re-mounting easier.

I have both. Never any issues with either but I prefer the look of the horizontal.

I try to only use horizontal split rings.

I prefer horizontal. I have experienced more issues trying to keep the reticle level while tightening vertical split rings, same with the original Weavers w/AL bottom, steel-strap hook/screw tops. Hard to keep those old school Weavers level while final tightening too.

I like and use both. My favorite are the Talley QDs, mounted without the levers. They return to zero reliably, and on more remote hunts I take an extra scope in rings already zero’ed as backup.

This is my experience as well. I’ve used the old Buehler vertical split rings for years and never an issue with slipping or tube marks. They take a bit more care to set up, but I prefer the cleaner look of vertical rings.
JMHO

I like Talley bases and split rings, but use Burris Signature Zee rings on 99’s. Either work well.

Once I start swapping scopes on my TC Icons I begin to appreciate the horizontal splits more......transitioned from talleys to warne maxima for that reason.

Talley verticals are good rings but I have to mess with stuff.

I used multiples of horizontal and vertical split rings. Never had a problem out of any of them as long as I didn't use a cheater bar to tighten them up.

I use both and don't think there is much functional difference. I find the horizontals a bit easier to mount scopes on but the difference is not large.

Never found the allure of vertical rings. I've only tried one set of Warnes - I'm one-n-done with the "concept".

The only vertically split ring I would use are the ARC rings, and they are not a true vertically split ring, more of a hybrid. They are absolutely outstanding and I prefer them over all other rings I’ve tried.

John

https://www.americanrifle.com/shop/product/m10-scope-rings-7

Same here.

$179 !!!! YGTBFKM !!!

Vertical split rings suck plain a and simple

Yep. And they are a bargain at that.

John

Hey! If you want to dance, you must pay the piper.

What makes the ARC rings so good? To me, those two hinges just look like extra complication?

YUP...No twisting of scope during installation

Vertical split ring (2) screws tighten on the tube and the Weaver base at the same time.... not a good design.

On top the bad concept, they are usually made so the screws bind on the side of their clearance holes... more bad design.

Me trying to use v split rings reminds me of Donald Duck changing a flat tire.

https://video.disney.com/watch/donald-s-tire-trouble-4bb39f2cdff29a8833003b15

Me trying to use v split rings reminds me of Donald Duck changing a flat tire.

https://video.disney.com/watch/donald-s-tire-trouble-4bb39f2cdff29a8833003b15[/quote]

Whenever I'm doing finesse work like scoping a rifle I like to set the mood by playing similar cartoon soundtracks.....for 2 reasons, first it's pretty dam appropriate and second, playing it really loud masks my profanity laced outbursts.

I like Talleys and Warne Maxima vertical split rings on my higher-end rifles. I'm not a turret spinner and don't change scopes, and I like the looks on a fine rifle.

PS: I have 2 sets of gloss Conetrol 1" rings in my shop, if anyone is interested.

Agreed. That's the biggest pain about using horizontal. I've had a bunch of God damnit moments. Square your reticle, start tightening, and look again and the reticle is canted.

Agreed. I don't like that design either. I like Warnes and Talley QDs that mount around the tube first, then mount to the rail.

Warne top, Talley bottom. Both QD, but the Talley is using the screw lock option instead of the lever.



---

As far verticals obstructing the turret, I don't see it. They aren't that tall. They aren't really any taller than the ocular bell or power ring.

I also prefer Warnes to Talleys if my rifle has open sights I might want to use. Their bases are lower.

They align well, making for no stress on the scope tube.
They have plenty of surface area for a secure hold.
The reticle does not change angle as you tighten the top bolt. This is huge to me. Saves me from much frustration.
They are precise and repeatable. I have removed and reinstalled my scope on its base with virtually no change in POI.
They don’t appear to have any of the negatives of the vertically split rings that are split all the way through, which makes them the only vertically split ring I will use for now.

All that said, there are much less expensive rings that work very well, but the ARCs are my current favorite.

John