Stevens 200 Scope Bases?!?!

[classic.rocker978]

I need scope bases for my long action Steven 200 in .270. The end of the receiver is round. I have no idea whats good or bad I'm looking at either a Vortex 6x40 or Weaver K4. Do I need extended bases... One piece or Two piece?!

Can you guys just give me links to something that will work... Im so confused as to whats good or what will even work. I want it mounted as low as possible. Well... Within reason. Bolt needs to be able to cycle.

[classic.rocker978]

I want good quality base/bases and rings but not "The Best" cuz I'm only going to have a 6x40 Vortex Crossfire on this rifle. Gonna be my new budget deer rifle. Retiring the old 30-06.

[Wildboarem]

I am in the process of a Stevens build. It was a .270 now holding a CBI .260 rem barrel. Having prior issues with two piece bases I went with a one piece picatinny base. It's a Weaver and it cost $40. I then went with the Burris XTR rings. The simplicity and the fact that everything is tight and won't loosen up even if I remove scope is why I went with the one piece base. EGW also makes reasonably priced bases.

[classic.rocker978]

Is this base considered junk?

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/default.aspx?productNumber=632224

I think I would prefer the a 2 piece but I've heard one pieces are a lot less hassle to do properly. I've also heard they help from torquing your scope due to elevation differences in the receiver and I really don't feel like bedding the base unless absolutely necessary.

[classic.rocker978]

Would this be a decent setup...

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/default.aspx?productNumber=632224
and
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/default.aspx?productNumber=701259

Either that or something like this

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/default.aspx?productNumber=829187
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/default.aspx?productNumber=253330

I really need help with this... You guys have wayy more experience than I do with this.

[KRP]

The problem with a lot of new scopes is the tube is too short to fit a long action with standard bases. Scope manufacturers bought the BS about the downfall of the long action. This means you need multi-slot one piece or extended two piece bases to work. I like the one piece option. Weaver "tactical" base with Burris Zee rings would be inexpensive and should work well. Signature Zee rings would be my choice, I hate ring marks, but cost a bit more.

[classic.rocker978]

So would that ironsighter base work? It says for long actions... I like the price and look better than the picatinny bases. I would use those burris rings on it.

Or do I need to get one of these... (Hate the tactical look)

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/default.aspx?productNumber=532016
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/default.aspx?productNumber=577595


I'm thinking I want a one piece over the two piece for stability. I think the one piece will deal with any inconsistencies in the height of the receiver better. I dont wanna bed the bases... (As far as I know there are no inconsistencies, but better safe than sorry)

My friend has the Leupold base on his 110 but it looks too short and only uses 3 of the 4 holes....

[GaCop]

I use the Evolution Gun Works (EGW) bases on all my builds. It has enough slots to be able to set your scope at a correct distance to your eye. I use either Millett or Weaver windage adjustable rings to save my internal adjustments.