A thread below got my wheels turning and it brought me to a question. When mounting a heavy scope to a heavy recoiling rifle, should you use a steel rail and rings rather than aluminum or is 7075-T6 strong enough?

Has anyone actually seen a 7075-T6 rail or rings deform or fail due to recoil?

The weak link will still be the mount screws. I prefer aluminum but I have steel too.

Yep.

One of the best features of the late, lamented Fieldcrafts is the five-hole 8-40 mounting scheme. I think Kimber uses the big ones now as well, maybe others.

Nope epoxy fixes that

How so?

Seekins aluminum if I'm trying to save weight, Nightforce steel if it don't matter.

And both have the built it recoil lug that butts up to the front of the action, taking the stress forces off the screws.

Doesn’t much matter, IME. Get one with a recoil lug, though.

Seekins is exactly what I was looking at. They're backordered, so I sent an email asking for a lead-time, hopefully it won't be too long.

The recoil lug should eliminate the need to upgrade to 8x40 screws; should it not?

or Titanium, just to be different : - )

the FN-H A3-G Special Police Rifle came with a titanium rail to make the FBI weight spec, and I have that rail on a few rifles. Not sure any real world benefit to me, but I like them

Aluminum has less stress cycles than steel--that's why the aircraft industry keeps close track of the lifespan of various aircraft parts. Aluminum is also softer and "peens" or "coins" easier. I have had that happen to me with aluminum weaver style mounts.

Guys who shoot a lot with heavy scopes seem to be the ones with failures of rings or mounts. Back when scopes were heavy most of us used steel mounts and rings, when scopes became lighter, aluminum mounts/rings became the norm. Now that we have gone full circle there is an argument for steel.

I've looked at a titanium rail from Murphy Precision. I'd have to look at it again to determine if it has a recoil lug.

Picatinny through bolts are wider than Weaver, so match the slots to the type of rings. Upgrading the mounting screws to 8-40 is worthwhile too.

I agree with this but many of the newer picatinny rails are hard anodized and it makes a big difference, if it's not anodized I'll go steel

That is true, good point.

Does anyone know of a maker of a steel Picatinny rail for a Mauser 98 with an integral recoil lug like the Seekins and Nightforce?

So when you install a rail, do most of you bed it, or just screw it on to recommended torque and call it good?

Bed it.

I'm familiar with Badger Ordnance rails and how/where their recoil lug butts-up against the receiver, but forgive my ignorance, as I've never used a Seekins rail. How does their recoil lug work on the receiver? Explain the slot/cutout ahead of the ejection-port cutout. I'm assuming the recoil lug drops down into the ejection port to interface with the receiver......

That’s correct.

Don’t know what model rifle you’re buying for, but I just this morning ordered an Area 419 rail for my R700

tag

RARELY does the recoil lug line up well enough to take the load off the screws. Too much variation in receivers for this to work on a production basis

I kept quiet but this was on my mind. Maybe make the lugs file to fit.

The variation in receivers also causes a varied fit of the rail to the top surfaces of the receiver. The only way to obtain a perfect fit of rail, including the recoil lug, to receiver, is to properly epoxy bed the rail to the receiver and preferably without release agent. RJ

I've read this, but have no experience. Thanks for speaking up.

I will say this: I was turned-on to the Badger Ordnance Rails and I just received two rails for a LA and SA M700. The integral recoil lug mates up perfectly to the receivers. I have zero complaints.

So I placed an order for a Mountain tactical receiver length rail with a recoil lug and plan to bed it using Devcon on my Tikka T3X. I've bedded stocks before, so no big deal there. However, with the rail, should I try to also bed the recoil lug? Obviously use liberal amounts of shoe polish for release. Seems like a bit of risk of a lock up with such a small lug and hole. However, I agree with others that unless there was good contact of the lug, then it's not keeping the load off the screws.

Toldjaso.

Hint......................(grin)






gsg',

The Mountain Tactical rail,uses index pins,to interface the top of the receiver,to act as a recoil stop. It is both a good idea and very well executed by them. There is nothing to truly bed,as the mating surfaces are largely piss flat and tough for even Teeker to fhuqk up. Hint.








What scope? What application? Keep MAX ring spacing in mind,along with inclination...if only because EVERYTHING below Zero,is 100% fhuqking useless.

Hint.....................

They fit like a glove, no way the recoil lug won’t engage the receiver.

Need to head to the smith within the next week or so to upgrade the fasteners.

Good call, I appreciate it.

Marty and the crew don't miss much.

Happy to help..............

The only real reason to bed a rail is so it mates flat to the receiver. On a rifle like a Remington, the front mounting surface might not be level with the rear, which can turn the rail into a banana when you tighten it down, so you bed the gap side. I wouldn't bed a Tikka.

LarryO!!! Marty says you mount scopes like the dummy JeffO!! Just sayin... 😂