Scope issues with Savage 11 and 111

[Westcliffe01]

I will say that the best way is always to use a one piece picatinny rail. There will be no confusion whether or not it fits right, because if you try to fit a pre-accutrigger rail onto a accutrigger action (cylindrical front and back) it will be really obvious that it does not fit. And it is without a doubt better aligned to the action and your scope should need less tweaking to get it on target (assuming you take it out the box with the adjustments centered). Yes, a one piece rail is slightly more expensive than a 2 piece base, but in my opinion it is worth it. The only gun I do not have a one piece base on is my 220 slug gun and that is because the rail can get in the way of ejecting those big shotgun shells.

If you are cash strapped, EABCO.com will probably be the lowest charge on bases and they have several that they have contract made that are 1/3 of the cost of for example a Warne rail. Here is a link http://www.eabco.com/store/riflescopes-sights-optics/riflescope-mounts/

[Roger SS]

I will say that the best way is always to use a one piece picatinny rail. There will be no confusion whether or not it fits right, because if you try to fit a pre-accutrigger rail onto a accutrigger action (cylindrical front and back) it will be really obvious that it does not fit. And it is without a doubt better aligned to the action and your scope should need less tweaking to get it on target (assuming you take it out the box with the adjustments centered). Yes, a one piece rail is slightly more expensive than a 2 piece base, but in my opinion it is worth it. The only gun I do not have a one piece base on is my 220 slug gun and that is because the rail can get in the way of ejecting those big shotgun shells.

If you are cash strapped, EABCO.com will probably be the lowest charge on bases and they have several that they have contract made that are 1/3 of the cost of for example a Warne rail. Here is a link http://www.eabco.com/store/riflescopes-sights-optics/riflescope-mounts/

More great info. for us beginners. Thanks! I just placed my order for EGW 1-Piece Picatinny-Style Base Savage 10 Through 16 Round Rear Short Action Matte from Midway USA. Also ordered the Leupold 1'' Detachable Rifleman Rings Weaver Style Medium Matte. I want to get a Savage 11 FCNS. Just haven't decided yet between .308 or 7mm-08.

[kevin_stevens]

I like using one-piece bases, but don't agree that a Picatinny rail is always the best choice. There are one-piece simple bases, one-piece mounts with integral rings, and one-piece rails.

KeS

[Westcliffe01]

Roger, seriously look at the Warne Maxima permanent rings. The dividing line is vertical, not horizontal. They are more compact than the leupold type rings and they are made from steel. I believe they are about $45 for a pair and they are available for 1" and 30mm tubes. I personally will not buy another aluminum ring or rail till the day I die. EGW is typically aluminum. Rails are often the weak point because they carry the weight of the scope + rings and there are often just 4 tiny screws holding it in place. I personally apply blue loctite to the receiver and rail and to the rail screws when I mount them. Once that loctite sets up, you can remove the rail screws and it will still hold the scope in place. The rings by comparison have 4 screws each and being steel, there is no way you will ever strip those threads with either the wrench you get with the rings or a crew driver type handle.

[Roger SS]

Roger, seriously look at the Warne Maxima permanent rings. The dividing line is vertical, not horizontal. They are more compact than the leupold type rings and they are made from steel. I believe they are about $45 for a pair and they are available for 1" and 30mm tubes. I personally will not buy another aluminum ring or rail till the day I die. EGW is typically aluminum. Rails are often the weak point because they carry the weight of the scope + rings and there are often just 4 tiny screws holding it in place. I personally apply blue loctite to the receiver and rail and to the rail screws when I mount them. Once that loctite sets up, you can remove the rail screws and it will still hold the scope in place. The rings by comparison have 4 screws each and being steel, there is no way you will ever strip those threads with either the wrench you get with the rings or a crew driver type handle.


Would you also recommend these rings for my Marlin XL7 which came with a stock Picatinny rail already in place? Or should I replace it with a Warne base?

[Westcliffe01]

This page has the Warne steel one piece base (pick Accutrigger SA or LA as appropriate) at $81 it is a LOT cheaper than most other sellers ($125 is normal)
http://www.eabco.com/store/riflescopes-sights-optics/warne-tactical-scope-mounting-bases-picatinny-style/

This page has the Warne Maxima 1" rings (sold in pairs for less than $30.
http://www.eabco.com/store/riflescopes-sights-optics/warne-maxima-fixed-rings-black-all-heights-to-fit-1-tube/

They have their own brand one piece rail, but it does not state the material. I would call to confirm the material before buying
http://www.eabco.com/Savage_Scope_Mount.htm They have it in black and silver.

if you look at the menu on the left side of the screen (on the home page) , there is a main item riflescopes, sights optics. All the rails and rings are in sub menus. You can also search by name. If you are not sure, call them. They know the differences between the savage actions what what will and won't work.

[Westcliffe01]

As far as rings, I think once you have tried the Warne Maxima Rings you will understand. Whether you need to replace existing rails you have, that is something you need to decide for yourself if you think it is working for you. The harder the rifle recoils, the sooner you may have issues with aluminum rails and rings. I left that decision up to my gunsmith on my first 2 rifles and he fitted the cheapest chinese made stuff and I ended up throwing it away after 6 months. I found that it was very easy to strip the threads in aluminum rings and the rail would get marked up in pretty short order and didn't feel nearly as rigid as the steel rail. Some of the aluminum rails are cut really thin, particularly where the fastener holes are countersunk. Often enough if you look at them, there is less than 0.040" of material that the screws are actually holding against.

[Roger SS]

As far as rings, I think once you have tried the Warne Maxima Rings you will understand. Whether you need to replace existing rails you have, that is something you need to decide for yourself if you think it is working for you. The harder the rifle recoils, the sooner you may have issues with aluminum rails and rings. I left that decision up to my gunsmith on my first 2 rifles and he fitted the cheapest chinese made stuff and I ended up throwing it away after 6 months. I found that it was very easy to strip the threads in aluminum rings and the rail would get marked up in pretty short order and didn't feel nearly as rigid as the steel rail. Some of the aluminum rails are cut really thin, particularly where the fastener holes are countersunk. Often enough if you look at them, there is less than 0.040" of material that the screws are actually holding against.

Wow. Thanks so much Westcliffe! Extremely helpful. You're setting me in the right direction when I basically had no direction. Hit or miss. Now, hopefully I'll have all hits pretty soon! (pun intended) Have a good evening!

[Westcliffe01]

If you decide to loctite the base to the action, just be sure to check it fits first and then use 1 screw to get it aligned in the axial direction. I once waited a bit too long and the loctite "bit" as soon as I touched the rail to the receiver and I couldn't move it to get it aligned with the fastener holes. I ended up having to use a small propane torch to heat it and soften the loctite to get it off, then had to remove the loctite on both parts and start over. You will be amazed how strong that stuff is when there is a bit of surface area involved.

[Roger SS]

If you decide to loctite the base to the action, just be sure to check it fits first and then use 1 screw to get it aligned in the axial direction. I once waited a bit too long and the loctite "bit" as soon as I touched the rail to the receiver and I couldn't move it to get it aligned with the fastener holes. I ended up having to use a small propane torch to heat it and soften the loctite to get it off, then had to remove the loctite on both parts and start over. You will be amazed how strong that stuff is when there is a bit of surface area involved.

You think I'll be good to go if I don't loctite? BTW, just ordered a Nikon 4x12-40mm BDC reticle from Optics Planet with Black Friday Week coupon and free shipping. Do rings and mounts work their way loose if not? Does constantly having to tighen effect your zero?

[Westcliffe01]

Roger, the steel Warne Rings with 4 screws each is never going to come loose unless you bolt it on a canon. So I don't bother to use loctite on the rings. But remember, the base has to hold itself in place, both rings and your scope, and typically the 4 screws holding the base onto the action are smaller than the screws holding one ring together. So in my opinion, the attachment of the base to the action is often the weak link. By applying loctite between those relatively large surfaces, which are held in close contact by the screws, the retention of the base is drastically improved.

I have not mentioned it, but any good ring has a key in the bottom to engage the slot in the rail. You have to be sure that you push the ring forward on the rail until the key (or screw) is touching the rail with no backlash and hold it in this position while clamping it onto the rail. This preloads the ring against the recoil forces and helps prevent it moving when you fire the gun.

Basically what I am saying is that once you loctite a steel base to your action, you are done. That part of the system is never going to give you a problem again. I never want to do anything twice and there is nothing more frustrating than having any part of your optical system that is insecure and getting point of impact shift for unknown reasons.

[Roger SS]

Roger, the steel Warne Rings with 4 screws each is never going to come loose unless you bolt it on a canon. So I don't bother to use loctite on the rings. But remember, the base has to hold itself in place, both rings and your scope, and typically the 4 screws holding the base onto the action are smaller than the screws holding one ring together. So in my opinion, the attachment of the base to the action is often the weak link. By applying loctite between those relatively large surfaces, which are held in close contact by the screws, the retention of the base is drastically improved.

I have not mentioned it, but any good ring has a key in the bottom to engage the slot in the rail. You have to be sure that you push the ring forward on the rail until the key (or screw) is touching the rail with no backlash and hold it in this position while clamping it onto the rail. This preloads the ring against the recoil forces and helps prevent it moving when you fire the gun.

Basically what I am saying is that once you loctite a steel base to your action, you are done. That part of the system is never going to give you a problem again. I never want to do anything twice and there is nothing more frustrating than having any part of your optical system that is insecure and getting point of impact shift for unknown reasons.

My first time ever firing a .30-06 on Saturday felt like a cannon compared to what I'm used to. lol
Your very generous in sharing your knowledge and tips. Most appreciated.
Do you live in SW Florida by chance? Ammo's on me if so...
Oh, and I heard I should take a cylindrical object and wrap fine sandpaper around it and rough up the inner surfaces of the rings so they "adhere" better to the scope. Is this true?

[Roger SS]

Think I will loctite the base then. I see the Arthur Brown site also has that high quality base for the Marlin XL7 Long Action. I might get that too considering I now know how important the base is.
Listen, I went a little nuts and also ordered a Ruger American in .30-06
Couldn't help it after hearing great reviews, hammer forged barrel, sweet trigger, etc... and outstanding price.
It comes with two piece Weaver style mounts already in place.
Any recommended replacements for them? I didn't see anything on the eabco.com for Ruger American bases.

[Westcliffe01]

Roger, watch this video on how the Warne maxima rings are installed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2kmlIgYKAQ
Then you will understand why the maxima rings do not get lapped (what you are referring to).

There are applications where it may be considered desirable to lap scope rings but that is usually for special long range shooting where they routinely shoot 1000 yards or more. When you are in that league, everything matters. It does not sound like you and I are there yet.... Also the need for lapping is reduced when using a one piece rail in the first place.

It sounds like a Warne M902-902M steel base can be used, but it is a 2 piece design. See this thread http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/archive/index.php/t-580551.html Eabco sells them here http://www.eabco.com/store/riflescopes-sights-optics/warne-maxima-scope-mounting-bases-for-all-rifles/ just pick that part number in the pull down menu. Looks like $20. Since this mount is compatible with the Savage accutrigger actions, I would check the screw spacing to see if a one piece base for an accutrigger action will fit. If the bolt pitch is all that is off, that is indeed a simple matter for your gunsmith to correct. Guessing this is a long action, try the steel rail for a savage accutrigger LA which you can find here http://www.eabco.com/store/riflescopes-sights-optics/warne-tactical-scope-mounting-bases-picatinny-style/ for $81.

[Westcliffe01]

If you want to see how the guys at Gunwerks handle scope mounting on their custom rifles (the prices may make your jaw drop) they have a scope mounting video here http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=3NqmiQD3QCU

These guys are pros. No doubt about it. Bear in mind, all of their scopes are $1500+ and the rifles range from around $4k on up (without the scope). I'm sure they make reliable long range machines, but only a few have such deep pockets.

[Roger SS]

If you want to see how the guys at Gunwerks handle scope mounting on their custom rifles (the prices may make your jaw drop) they have a scope mounting video here http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=3NqmiQD3QCU

These guys are pros. No doubt about it. Bear in mind, all of their scopes are $1500+ and the rifles range from around $4k on up (without the scope). I'm sure they make reliable long range machines, but only a few have such deep pockets.

Awesome! Video time...lemme grab some popcorn and start taking notes. Thanks again for your great help.

[Westcliffe01]

Sorry, I am in Southern MI. It has not been that long since I got my green card and was finally allowed to own arms in the US. I have been out of things for over 10 years (3 spent in Germany). The first rifle I bought was a Savage 24 (222 + 20 ga combo). The next was an AR15 in 7.62x39. The first bolt gun I got was a Remington 700 "Classic" in 8mm Mauser. I have to say that every Remington I bought shot like crap when I got it. They just have issues. On the classic, i replaced the trigger ultimately with a Shilen trigger (great trigger btw) and also replaced the stock with a laminated thumbhole stock because the original action was inlet so bad that I couldn't improve it. It was a fancy wood stock and I didn't want to do my first bedding job in 15 years on that piece, so I got the thumbhole stock and that worked much better from the beginning.

What I am trying to say, is that it can be really disheartening when you spend $700 on a brand new shiny gun and then another $125 for the rail and another $45 on rings and another $700 on the scope and the best it will do is about a 5" group at 100 yards.... But I had this experience twice with Remington rifles and universally the trigger and stock/bedding was the issue. But a newby generally is not going to believe that the gun manufacturers ship guns out the door that can't shoot properly. So we imagine that we must have done something wrong, or that we just plain can't shoot and need to get in a whole lot more practice making shotgun patterns. Until through process of elimination, one reaches the conclusion that things are not as they should be and starts addressing the deficiencies of the crap that gets sold to the public.

Remember that AR-15 I told you about ? It was a DPMS. Since it was chambered in 7.62x39, the magazines were specially made by C-Products. When I took it to the range the first time, the rifle could not chamber a round from a single one of the magazines I had received with it. Not only that, but the feed lips shaved brass off every cartridge that it tried to feed. The inside of the receiver was covered in brass flakes and to shoot it I ended up single loading shells so that I could determine if it grouped. Well, it could not do that either. Awful trigger. HEAVY, tons of creep. I was pretty disappointed and pretty angry, since if I had not gone to the range and had just set the rifle aside in case I needed it, I would be dead when the time came. I was really angry that this kind of JUNK would get sold to an unsuspecting public.

I am an engineer and design product in my daily life. I have 3 awarded patents and several more applications at the USPTO. I know what the public thinks of engineers when they are on the receiving end of this kind of crap or buy some of the cars and trucks on the market today... I am just fortunate to have the skills to get to the bottom of problems that will leave a lot of other people baffled.

After my Remington experience, I was pretty perplexed since I couldn't understand why they should still be the most popular rifle brand by a massive margin. So i did the most logical thing and went over to the competition, which is Savage. That is why you find me on this forum. Every Savage I have bought has worked really well from the time I took it out the box. The 220 slug gun I bought has a stock on it that really shouldn't be put on a gun with that amount of recoil, but even that is shooting 1.5MOA which even a few years ago was considered impossible for a slug gun. A bedding job or a $100 Stockys laminated stock will probably take care of that.

My contribution here is to help some of you avoid the issues I went through. A lot of people would give up and take up a different hobby or sell the gun and get hosed and try a different one without actually knowing what was behind the issue they experienced.

[Roger SS]

I kinda sensed you weren't just an average Joe. Your technical and firearms knowledge is only surpassed by your generosity and admirable desire to help others. I tip my hat to you.

[Roger SS]

Sorry, I am in Southern MI. It has not been that long since I got my green card and was finally allowed to own arms in the US. I have been out of things for over 10 years (3 spent in Germany). The first rifle I bought was a Savage 24 (222 + 20 ga combo). The next was an AR15 in 7.62x39. The first bolt gun I got was a Remington 700 "Classic" in 8mm Mauser. I have to say that every Remington I bought shot like crap when I got it. They just have issues. On the classic, i replaced the trigger ultimately with a Shilen trigger (great trigger btw) and also replaced the stock with a laminated thumbhole stock because the original action was inlet so bad that I couldn't improve it. It was a fancy wood stock and I didn't want to do my first bedding job in 15 years on that piece, so I got the thumbhole stock and that worked much better from the beginning.

What I am trying to say, is that it can be really disheartening when you spend $700 on a brand new shiny gun and then another $125 for the rail and another $45 on rings and another $700 on the scope and the best it will do is about a 5" group at 100 yards.... But I had this experience twice with Remington rifles and universally the trigger and stock/bedding was the issue. But a newby generally is not going to believe that the gun manufacturers ship guns out the door that can't shoot properly. So we imagine that we must have done something wrong, or that we just plain can't shoot and need to get in a whole lot more practice making shotgun patterns. Until through process of elimination, one reaches the conclusion that things are not as they should be and starts addressing the deficiencies of the crap that gets sold to the public.

Remember that AR-15 I told you about ? It was a DPMS. Since it was chambered in 7.62x39, the magazines were specially made by C-Products. When I took it to the range the first time, the rifle could not chamber a round from a single one of the magazines I had received with it. Not only that, but the feed lips shaved brass off every cartridge that it tried to feed. The inside of the receiver was covered in brass flakes and to shoot it I ended up single loading shells so that I could determine if it grouped. Well, it could not do that either. Awful trigger. HEAVY, tons of creep. I was pretty disappointed and pretty angry, since if I had not gone to the range and had just set the rifle aside in case I needed it, I would be dead when the time came. I was really angry that this kind of JUNK would get sold to an unsuspecting public.

I am an engineer and design product in my daily life. I have 3 awarded patents and several more applications at the USPTO. I know what the public thinks of engineers when they are on the receiving end of this kind of crap or buy some of the cars and trucks on the market today... I am just fortunate to have the skills to get to the bottom of problems that will leave a lot of other people baffled.

After my Remington experience, I was pretty perplexed since I couldn't understand why they should still be the most popular rifle brand by a massive margin. So i did the most logical thing and went over to the competition, which is Savage. That is why you find me on this forum. Every Savage I have bought has worked really well from the time I took it out the box. The 220 slug gun I bought has a stock on it that really shouldn't be put on a gun with that amount of recoil, but even that is shooting 1.5MOA which even a few years ago was considered impossible for a slug gun. A bedding job or a $100 Stockys laminated stock will probably take care of that.

My contribution here is to help some of you avoid the issues I went through. A lot of people would give up and take up a different hobby or sell the gun and get hosed and try a different one without actually knowing what was behind the issue they experienced.I've heard from many that Remington's quality has really gone down the tubes. My concern, as you may know, is that Remington bought Marlin and is now making Marlin X7 rifles. My XL7 .30-06 was made in CT and my XS7 7mm-08 was made in KY
Alot of Marlin guys cherish their "true" Marlin guns before Remington took over. I suspect both of mine are "Remlins" with Remington barrels. Once i get scopes properly mounted, boresighted and zeroed...hope i don't have similar kind of problems. Although most who own Marlin X7s say they're tack drivers.

[Westcliffe01]

The second Remington I had was a SPS Varmint in 223. It had a really excellent barrel on it, only problem was it was a 1:12 so I was maxed out at 55gr bullets and they are no good when shooting over 250 yards (lots of wind drift and reduced energy). So i sold it and switched to my Model 10PC which has a 1:9.25 twist and I am now shooting 75gr match ammo. The barrel on the classic was not so good. Much more copper fouling and it was too light and thus very sensitive to changes in the powder load.

Why the 2 barrels should be so different I don't know. Savage is pretty good on average for their barrel quality. All of the custom barrel makers do better and hold a higher consistent standard, but their products are definitely more expensive. It would be nice though if you could order your Savage from the factory with a known barrel on it without waiting 4, 6 or 9 months for it...