Bases and rings?

[Chief]

I have seen a couple threads lately asking about which rings and which bases to use and did not want to hijack their thread.

What do you look for or what features are deciding factors on what brand and which design you choose.

Example: I just recently purchased a nightforce NXS scope for a new rifle, I went with the nightforce 20 moa, one piece steel base, and the nightforce x-high rings. My decision was based solely on keeping it all the same brand, and that I have the same rings and base on another nightforce SHV scope.

Is one set of rings really that much better then the other, and same question regarding the bases.

What is the benefit or downfall over a one piece base vs a 2 piece base. Is it just preference?

[KHoes203]

I will go ahead and throw what little knowledge I have out there on the table others will have more.
Bases: Steel vs. Aluminum, Recoil lug vs. no recoil lug, 1 piece vs. 2 piece. Personally if you are shooting large caliber your .300 win mags or .338 yes a steel 1 piece base with a recoil lug will be your best bet. For your .308s an aluminum with the recoil lug would be your best bet. Some people will argue with that but unless your going to be doing some serious stuff like crawling and dragging your gun across the ground to enable you to get to your sniper position then its not a huge deal (which I promise 99.95% of people that say you are required to have steel on every gun could never do that to their gun anyways). I prefer a 1 piece because it is your standard weaver or pica tinny rail so more options. Also it is all one unit and moves together and not separate. Leupold makes some good 2 piece bases that are not pica tinny.
Rings: Again same deal Steel vs. Aluminum, 2 screws vs. 4 screws vs. 6 screws. quick release vs. screw on. Again just like the bases the rings are the same way. If your going to be switching the scope between rifles quick reseals are nice. Other than that the same all applies.

Nightforce and all them make great products I just personally don't see a need for all the extra money for bases and rings. Also one of the arguments between the metals is the heating and cooling of it and how it effects the gun. Let me tell you if your putting your gun in warm enough environments to heat the aluminum to the point where it becomes pliable and moves that much you have other worries besides that. Also the receiver of the gun does not get hot, the barrel will though but your base is not mounted on there.

Personally on my recent 308 build I have 6 screw aluminum's on an aluminum base with recoil lug and have zero complaints. So basically it all comes down to your caliber, your gun, and what the intended use is.

[dclifton]

I'm pretty much feel the same except I don't buy any aluminum if I can keep from it.
That being said i do have some aluminum. About the cheapest I go anymore is warne, leupold or Burris.

And prefer to go with something better on bigger guns like egw, seekins, badger, larue etc..

[bboswell]

I have learned to shy away from any base / ring with adjustable windage on back ring (like most Leopold products I grew up with)

I went with Tally mounts for my 280AI Build and couldn't be happier.

My 300 RUM Build got Nightforce 20 MOA rail and NF Lite weight rings. I am wanting to change this to Tally mounts, in the real world I don't need the 20 MOA, I could shave some weight and lower my scope creating an easier cheek weld without pads.

[Keg]

My thoughts are....It depends on what type gun it is....Most of my rifles are old school....I mainly go with steel one piece bases and steel rings on those type rifles(I cringe when I see a cheap Weaver base and rings..especially if they are see thru rings)....On an AR platform rifle..U might use aluminum....A newer more modern type bolt rifle..either steel or aluminum....

[Avezorak]

Ive had good luck with Leupold rings and bases. But Im starting to move my stuff toward picatinny.

I like the EGW bases, Ive used them Alum and never had an issue, but for larger calibers, Ill be using steel.

I like Seekins rings a lot. NF and Leupold MK 4 are good as well. Ive found that the MK 4 rings usually need to be lapped where Seekins and NF are good to go.

[Mike D]

Ive had good luck with Leupold rings and bases. But Im starting to move my stuff toward picatinny.

I like the EGW bases, Ive used them Alum and never had an issue, but for larger calibers, Ill be using steel.

I like Seekins rings a lot. NF and Leupold MK 4 are good as well. Ive found that the MK 4 rings usually need to be lapped where Seekins and NF are good to go.

I agree here.

On my "tactical" rifles I use Larue 20MOA bases and Seekins rings. On my hunting rigs I use Talley 1 piece light weight.

I do have 1 hunting rig set up with a base and Seekins ring setup but that's because it would be a long range hunting rig and I wanted the 20MOA base.

Just a question for you though, why did you get extra high rings, especially if using a base?

You will not be able to get proper cheek weld and will put extra stress on the rings from recoil with a heavy scope like a NF. The goal should to be to have the scope as low as possible and still allow a little (1/8" or so) clearance at the objective end and the barrel. Just for example I have a 20 MOA base with e VX-6 with a 52mm objective mounted in Seekins medium rings and have plenty of clearance.

[Chief]

Just a question for you though, why did you get extra high rings, especially if using a base?
You will not be able to get proper cheek weld and will put extra stress on the rings from recoil with a heavy scope like a NF. The goal should to be to have the scope as low as possible and still allow a little (1/8" or so) clearance at the objective end and the barrel. Just for example I have a 20 MOA base with e VX-6 with a 52mm objective mounted in Seekins medium rings and have plenty of clearance.

I actually went to mount the scope this afternoon and noticed that myself so will be taking those back and getting some shorter ones