Talk to me about scope mounts/bases

[txfireguy2003]

The wife and I stopped off at the range on the way to the lease Friday and find that her .243 was shooting 8"+ to the right at 100 yards, and I was unable to get it to zero. It was dead on a few months ago shooting 1/2" groups. When we got home this evening, I started checking it over and found that the rear base wasn't holding the rear ring securely. It's the "Leupold Standard" style with the two flat head screws that clamp onto the bottom of the rear base, and those screws had somehow loosened up....a lot, but not enough to notice right away. Now, I prefer a 1913 type rail, but all my rifles are tactical styled, hers is more pretty, but I still don't like the bases it has.

So, I'm looking for new 1" rings and bases for her rifle. I would prefer a one piece base (Remington 700SA), as low as possible (she's only running a 40mm class scope, and with the cheek piece on her gun, low fits well for eye position. I would prefer one that will accept the same 1913 rings that all my rifles use because I just trust them. So what 1913 compatible, one piece bases are out there, that will look appropriate (non-tactical, maybe only has slots at front and rear, smooth or even thinned down in the middle) on a sporter styled, thumb home laminate stocked hunting rifle?

I'm looking for something like this (this is a picture of a Leupold Mk-4 base that doesn't actually exist according to reviewers on Optics planet).

[westtexducks]

I am running the leupold dual dovetail rings and bases on my model 70 currently and they are very solid and still look "traditional". Or you could look into the one piece rings/bases like these talleys. http://www.midwayusa.com/product/178...700-howa-matte

[txfireguy2003]

I may have to go with the Tally mount, or some other brand with similar design. I was just trying to get a base that I could use the same rings all my other rifles use, so I could swap scopes around if I decided to.

[Daniel75]

I may have to go with the Tally mount, or some other brand with similar design. I was just trying to get a base that I could use the same rings all my other rifles use, so I could swap scopes around if I decided to.

I was gonna say, if you want good looking and reliable, go with Talley.

[Lungbustr]

I like quality steel bases and rings. Ken Farrell is my choice. I won't ever buy another Talley product after having a ring break and ruin my nephews hunt.

[cmh2007]

I used to shoot precision competetion with my built gun. Take it from me, spend on your rings and base. I use all seekins

[bboswell]

Tally for me

[Lethal Injection]

I had the same thing happen this year with the Leupold base on a Sendero, I replaced it with a one piece DNZ Game Reaper. Time will tell but it is back to shooting tight groups and being one piece I'm not sure much can go wrong.

[kumathebear]

Rings and bases are so many times overlooked in their importance. I've tried many and really don't have a "hands down favorite." Following....

[Mac]

I haven't seen those bases in a short action and think they discontinued the long actions as well. Not sure if your dead set on a one piece, but you will have the same flexibility with the two piece mk4 bases.

[Txdeerhunter243]

Talley Lightweights or Leupolds that are dual dovetail instead of the windage screw rear base.

[fulmer34]

tagged

[M16]

The windage screw base is the worst design to ever hit the market. Most of the time it's not the scope that knocked off zero it's the mounts. I'd be more concerned with function over looks. A picatinny rail looks beautiful to me.

[txfireguy2003]

I agree M16, that windage screw design is stupid, and I always thought it looked unreliable, but they are popular for some reason. I love my NF Steel picatinny rail, but it looks "tactical" to me, although, I suppose a regular weaver rail isn't much different really. I may just go ahead and buy another NF base and some super low rings and be done with it.

I'm a one piece guy, mainly because I'm a tinkerer and a perfectionist. I've now put together 5 or 6 Remington 700's with one piece Picatinny rails, and not one action has been true. While I'm 99.9 percent sure that screwing the rail down tight and mounting a scope will be fine, that 0.1 percent makes me worry about the stress and torque that is put on the rail, screws, rings, scope, action etc when everything doesn't line up perfectly. So, I choose high quality one piece bases, test fit them, and so far, I've bedded the rear of all of them. I'm sure it probably doesn't make a lick of difference, but I like doing it, and it hasn't hurt anything. I can say, going from an EGW rail that was just screwed down and Vortex rings, to a bedded NF rail and Warne rings, brought my 308's groups from clover leafs to basically one hole. It was dang accurate with the EGW, until I removed everything to have done barrel work done, and the accuracy never came back when I reinstalled it all....come to find out, that rail had bent to fit the action over time and when I put it back on, something didn't line up just right, and no matter what I did, I couldn't get it to shoot again. So I swapped mounting systems to the NF and Warne, and it's now more accurate than ever before.

[bboswell]

I'm a one piece guy, mainly because I'm a tinkerer and a perfectionist. I've now put together 5 or 6 Remington 700's with one piece Picatinny rails, and not one action has been true. While I'm 99.9 percent sure that screwing the rail down tight and mounting a scope will be fine, that 0.1 percent makes me worry about the stress and torque that is put on the rail, screws, rings, scope, action etc when everything doesn't line up perfectly. .

2 piece base and Lap your rings. Problem solved.

But I bed them as well.......because I'm a tinkerer and a perfectionist