PDA

View Full Version : Model 11 Lightweight Hunter base suggestions?



impuwat
11-16-2011, 04:59 PM
Model 11 Lightweight Hunter ordered in the 6.5 Creedmoor.

Jeff at gunblast.com had one set up nicely with Leupold Rifleman vertical split rings. I'm wanting to mount the Redfield 4-12x40. Leupold customer service first told me I couldn't put those rings on the Lightweight Hunter. When I told them others had they then gave me the runaround on what bases to use for the Rifleman vert. split rings.

Any suggestions out there on good ring/base options for the short action Lightweight Hunter?

janizary
11-16-2011, 06:37 PM
DNZ game reaper single-piece base/ring(s).

jpdown
11-16-2011, 10:51 PM
I went with the Talley LW rings (low) on my Savage LWH in 260. The medium height rings were too high for a good cheek weld. Good choice with a Leupold VX-3 2.5-8x36 scope if minimum weight is the objective. Next best choice IMO are the Burris Xtreme Tactical bases and Burris Signature Zee rings. They will give you flexible mounting with today's short tubed compact scopes. Or, any other brand you prefer if they will fit a Savage SA with round rear and you are mounting a longer tubed scope.

impuwat
11-17-2011, 12:55 AM
Thanks! I will do a little research on your suggestions.

Sundo
12-01-2011, 03:09 AM
In the spirit of light weight, you really should consider getting the lightest weight base/ring/scope possible. I suggest Talley integrated 2 piece aluminum mounts (separate front and rear pieces -- each piece mounts a ring directly to the receiver). The Redfield 4-12x40 is pretty light but the Redfield 2-7x33 is even lighter. With the 6.5 Creedmore, I understand why you'd want more magnification, but a featherlight barrel profile cuts down some of the effective range.

r29l20
12-11-2011, 10:47 PM
Cuts down on range? ???

Sundo
12-12-2011, 03:32 AM
The 20 inch lightweight contour barrel of the 11 LWH will produce lower muzzle velocity and more flex than a 22 inch sporter profile. To achieve the same accuracy, you'd have to limit the range with the LWH.

What I'm suggesting is that you wouldn't use a short (20 inch) lightweight barrel to shoot to an extreme range. So, you don't lose much, practically, by going from a 9x power scope to a 7x power. If you're buying the LWH for its light weight, you might as well get a lightweight scope as well.

Having said that, the Redfield 3-9x40 is only a couple ounces heavier than the 2-7x33, so it's really not a big deal. Whichever scope you get I'm sure you'll enjoy it.

bowhunter42
12-13-2011, 11:35 AM
+1 on the Talley rings, I won't put any other ring's and base's on any rifle Im putting together. They are WELL made and I love the one piece design.

helotaxi
12-14-2011, 04:15 AM
The 20 inch lightweight contour barrel of the 11 LWH will produce lower muzzle velocity and more flex than a 22 inch sporter profile. To achieve the same accuracy, you'd have to limit the range with the LWH.

The difference in velocity isn't going to be extreme and will depend on cartridge. At reasonable hunting ranges it is going to be completely irrelevant. Plenty of tactical shooters shoot to 1k yds with a 20" barrel.

For a hunting rifle, all you care about is the cold bore shot. Barrel contour plays essentially no part in consistency for that. The contour will really only come into play once several shots have been fired and the barrel starts to heat up. Not an issue with a game rifle. Don't know about you, but I've never shot a group on the vitals of a deer.

Schekrn
06-07-2013, 02:01 PM
Today I mounted a Leupold VX32.5x8x36 on my LWH .260. In the one piece lightweight alloy mount, Talley recommended the low. When I mounted this combination there was no room to adjust the eye relief AND the power adjustment ring was up against the mount. A failure. Talley's solution is to send me the extended mount in a medium height. This will probably make a proper cheek weld impossible without further modifications. Any ideas are welcome.

thomae
06-07-2013, 04:07 PM
I would suggest either a Weaver or EGW rail. Of the two, the EGW raises your scope higher than the weaver. I'd go with Burris Signature Zee rings (low). With that sized objective, you should have no problems clearing the rifle or the rail. The burris web site has the actual height of the rings, so you can double check there.

The advantage of this type of setup is that you can move the scope as far back or forward as you need to in order to get good eye relief while still maintaining a good natural cheek weld.

Schekrn
06-07-2013, 04:13 PM
Thanks for the idea. Is this a relatively lightweight set-up? I have experience with the Burris dovetail style signature rings and liked them very much.

thomae
06-07-2013, 05:00 PM
Weaver would be lighter than EGW, but they are both aluminumm so neither weighs much.


Weaver 48338:
http://opticsforsport.net/images/wevrpic48338.jpg
EGW (advertiser on this forum) 0moa rail (model 41000) (photo from their website):
http://www.egwguns.com/images/products/41000-41102.jpg
EGW currently has some 20 moa rails for short action Savages on sale.

jpdown
06-07-2013, 09:18 PM
I have a Savage LWH. I tried the Tally lightweight low rings with a Leupold VX-3 2.5-8x36 and ran into the same problem already mentioned. The power ring contacted the rear integrated base. I had to file down the rear of the base and repaint to make it work.

Another issue with 2 piece bases is that I have had several Savage actions where the receiver holes were not perfectly aligned. This can cause scope tube stress and leave ring marks on a high dollar scope if you don't lap the rings.

The easiest solution if you want to go with 2 piece bases is to use Burris Signature Zee rings with posi-lign inserts and either Weaver Grand Slam steel bases (S46; S402), or Burris Extreme Tactical steel bases. Of the 2 piece base options, they will give you the most mounting flexibility with short tubed compact scopes and a Savage SA.

The following picture shows my Savage LWH .260 with Weaver Grand Slam steel bases, Burris medium Signature Zee rings and a Leupold VX-2 2-7x32 CDS Scope. The newer Leupold VX-2 scope has much better glass than the older Leupold VX-II scope. This scope has nearly 4" of eye relief and a good eye-box. Other scopes I've tried on this Savage LWH include the Leupold VX-R 2-7x32 and VX-3 2.5-8x36 and Vortex Viper 2-7x32. They all look good and did not look oversized for the compact Savage LWH.

I really like Leupold's CDS dial system and now have one calibrated for my 120 gr Nosler BT and one for my 130 gr Accubond .260 hunting loads. I tried low Leupold rings, but they were too low IMO. The medium Burris Signature Zee rings also allow me to use and easily remove scope caps or scope covers. I also use Burris Signature Zee rings and Weaver GS bases on all my Savage rifles, so I can easily swap scopes if my old eyes need more power for load development.

I've changed the Savage LWH plastic trigger gaurd to metal and the 20" featherweight barrel to a 22" Savage factory sporter barrel. So the combined scope and rifle weight is now 7.5 lbs vs. about 7 lbs with the original 20" barrel. I just finished breaking down this rifle and applying satin black Gun-Kote, installed a SSS competition recoil lug and rebedded. Sighted in the scope tonight using the 260 120 gr BT loads. The groups were tight (<.75"@100), so life is good.

http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/ii276/jpdown/PICT0036_zps33479f2f.jpg (http://s266.photobucket.com/user/jpdown/media/PICT0036_zps33479f2f.jpg.html)

Schekrn
06-07-2013, 10:26 PM
jpdown, the picture you posted doesn't look like the Talleys. What set up is that? Looks like Burris signatures.... What is the two piece mount?

Sorry, for some reason your whole post didn't show the first time I viewed it. Thanks for the info.

Schekrn
06-10-2013, 10:00 PM
Currently have a DNZ one piece low mount on the way. Have these on two other guns and have been satisfied. Received the Talley medium height extended rings today. Will compare them side by side this weekend.

If these don't work, I've been thinking about Talley two piece bases with their low steel rings (permanents most likely). These bases come in extended and double extended for this rifle. Any experience with these? I'm probably giving back something in weight, but I think I'm ok with that.

devildogandboy
06-13-2013, 11:19 PM
I always use the EGW's. never had any problems with them.

chukarmandoo
06-16-2013, 11:44 AM
I have had a LWH in a 260 Rem for a little over a year now and the more I use it the more I like it. When I first got it I put a big scope on it, then I soon realized I was not putting this rifle together for its intended purpose. I have it setup now with everything "light". Cheapo Weaver two piece mount, cheapo old Savage vertical split rings, and a Leupold scope ( ultralight vx ll 3-9x33 w/LR reticle) 8.8 ozs. Rifle and scope weighs just over 6 lbs. Kinda like carrying a 10/22.