Bases and rings help

[Newguyjosh]

Just received my new mark ii btvs in .22lr and tried installing a set if weaver quad lock rings to mount a scope but they were loose in the factory installed base. Would move back and forth when tightened. Did I get a bad set of rings or are these nit weaver bases? What kind of rings do I need if the bases aren't weaver?

[Shmudda]

Had the very same thing happen to me with a Stevens 310 17 HMR. Took the back to Wally World and picked up the Grand model. They were 20 bucks or so, bit fit like a glove and actually looked better

Craig

[JCalhoun]

They are Weaver style rings but very low budget. I doubt they are actual Weavers.

[waltt7420]

Do yourself a favor and replace the factory bases with Weaver #16 bases. I've found on the two Savages I have (MKIIBV, 93BTVSS) the factory bases were less than stellar.
The Quad lock rings are OK, but can be a pain keeping the scope level when torquing them, the Grand Slams are much better.
When I finally finished the rifles, I ended up using DIP rail mounts and Burris Signature ZEE rings...much more expensive, but a top notch mounting system.
http://i999.photobucket.com/albums/af120/Radar-1/010-9.jpg (http://s999.photobucket.com/user/Radar-1/media/010-9.jpg.html)

[rdowdell]

I had the same issue with my 93 FV SS. The Weaver quadlocks (or whatever they're called) didn't work with the factory bases. I bought a cheap pair of NCStar rings and they fit perfectly. I think there is an issue with the Weavers not being made to spec.

[TC6969]

I put some Quadlocks on my Mark II TRR-SR, and I they fit like they were made for the gun.

I couldn't be happier with them!

I like how easy it is to set up the scope with them.

http://i42.tinypic.com/sl40ex.jpg