Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Finlander
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajlandis
+1, almost. I agree with the burris base(s) (one or two-piece would be fine), and burris rings, although I love the signature rings. If you have any warp in your action, the two piece base would mount more solidly, and the inserts in the rings would allow true alignment for your scope tube. With a one-piece, you may have to bed the base to provide a solid mount if you have any action warp. No big deal, just something else to mess with.
#1: The two piece bases are not fine because with low mount rings some scope dial rings make contact with the rear base reducing eye relief. #2: The one piece base uses only one rear retaining screw allowing for more vertical & horizontal clearance in the rear for shorter scopes.
#3: If you have warpage in your action the one piece is still better because it provides positive alignment for the scope #4: as apposed to the two pieces matching the action which puts the scope in a bind. #5: Most actions are true so you will likely never see this issue.
#6: If the action is true the two piece bases offer a wider bight on the scope which is beneficial with longer high powered scopes but this usually conflicts with the average 3-9 hunting scope.
#1: If it's an issue of the power ring hitting the base, turn the base around.
Doesn't solve the problem if the base is using both screw mounts.
The rings are darn near one edge of a two-piece base.
You can rotate the rear base 180 degrees but I've always mounted the rear base with the windage screws forward in order to maximize eye relief .
#2: I'm assuming you're saying that they use the screw hole that is the more forward of the two in the rear of the action. I went to the safe but the only one piece standard bases I could find were leupolds on short actions. They use the rear hole. But since we've mentioned burris, and I can't see for myself, I'll take your word for it.
Yes, Look at the picture at the top of the first link.
#3: Putting a one-piece base on a warped action won't straighten the action.
Of course it wont, never said it would nor have I ever experienced it.
So you'd either have to bed it, or make the base flex to meet the action as it's torqued down.
If the action is so flexible that you can force it to go I would be inclined to not use it.
Or if it's not tightened enough to flex the base, then it will spend it's time not completely seated to the action. If it's tightened enough to conform to a warped action, then your scope would be in a bind in a set of regular rings. The rear windage bore alignment allows you to shift the scope accordingly to offset any negative alignment.
If it is so bad you can see it or the bases will not mount then I would send the action or gun back for a replacement.
#4: Hence, the mention of signature rings. Fully seated bases, and stress-free scope ring alignment.
Yes and no, The rear windage screws should relieve any horizontal pressure but not vertical and the inserts are available with offsets to correct the vertical.
#5: Are we still talking savages? I wish I had your luck/optimism.
I have owned several different Savages over 30 years along with many other non Savage rifles and still have two of them which never exhibited any of your experiences.
#6: I disagree. I believe the two-piece options allow much more flexibility on how/where to mount any scope.
They provide for less forward or back eye relief adjustment so how does that make em more flexible? Scopes have been getting shorter for years making it more difficult to mount them without some sort of length issue.