Printable View
Just bought a Vortex PST II 5x25x50 30mm tube for the 6.5 whenever it arrives....I tried a search here but I didn't locate an answer. I'm planning on using signature rings. Tried Vortex and Burris and received two different answers. I want to keep it as low as possible. If you've mounted a 30mm tube on a 12FV, what height did you use ?
Thanks
Why not go for Talley mounts? This is a 30mm SWFA that is 12x42. Looks like I got the .4" high mounts and still have .15" gap in the front, but only .1" left in the rear...so I just kept it where it is.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1J1i...ew?usp=sharing
I have Talley's on my .300. They're a good set up. I like the inserts on the Burris and I wanted to experiment with the 20 moa insert.
Great looking rig. If the 6.5 proves to be a shooter, I plan to go with a stock like yours.
Thanks
Per Vortex's website:
Objective O.D.: 2.3"
Main Tube O.D.: 30mm or 1.181"
Half the Objective O.D. would be 1.15" and half the main tube O.D. would be 0.590"
The Action O.D. is 1.350" while the shank of the barrel just ahead of the nut will be 1.120" at the most (large shank). So right there you already have just shy of a 1/4" gap for the objective bell so no need to add a gap distance into your calculations.
So now you know you need the centerline of the scope rings to be a minimum of 1.15" above the top of the action.
Subtract the height of your base above the action from that 1.15" figure and that will tell you how high the rings need to be (to the centerline of the rings).
If the ring manufacturer gives the height dimension to the bottom of the ring saddle, simply subtract 0.590" (1/2 of 30mm main tube diameter) from yoru height figure from above to get the height to the bottom of the saddle.
Lou,
For what it is worth, I have a 8.5-25X50 Leupold VX-3 on my Savage 10...30mm tube. Until I put it in a chassis requiring medium rings, I used Warne Maxima low rings to mount it to a Warne 20 MOA rail. Clearance was not an issue. Specs for the Warne rings are .250 height. The Burris rings in Medium are .220 height. .03 difference, which is not that much. I think the mediums will work based on my experience. The only other 50mm scope I have is a Leupold 4.5-14X50 VX-3 on my 22-250 12 FV, but it is a 1" tube. I used Leupold PRW low rings for it on a Warne 0 MOA base.
What you say is all good information. However, when shopping for rings, it's not always as simple as your guide implies even though what you say is correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFurious
First of all, it's not always easy getting a height reference for a particular scope ring. Some manufacturers make "low", "medium", "high", and sometimes "extra high". Finding actual numbers is often much more difficult than you might hope. And sadly one brand of "medium" might be higher than another brand's "high".
Some, as you point out, give height to the bottom of the saddle and some to the center of the scope. Use caution here.
And where is the other end of that height dimension. For those rings which go on a Picatinny Rail you have to ask yourself, is the bottom reference to the top of the rail or the edge where the ring grips the rail. Unless you can find a drawing, that information is hard to find. And how high is that pesky picatinny rail anyhow? Some are thick and some are thinner.
The objective O.D. that is important is NOT the size of the glass. Size of glass is an important performance data point when shopping for scopes because it has to do with how much light the scope can gather. The size of the glass is easy to find and is included in the model name in almost every case. But when fitting the scope to the barrel, you need to know the OD of the housing. In some scopes that's not much more than the size of the glass while in others the difference is significant. If your scope uses a front lens cap which slips OVER the scope, you need to include that factor into your clearance calculations or possibly switch to a different type of lens cap.
Finally how about bases and barrel contour? When you fit a 20mm base you're effectively tilting your scope down in the front. That reduces the clearance between the front part of the scope and the barrel. Remember your high school trig? If so, you can do the math.
Those with a bull barrel will have less clearance than those with a hunting profile. Both the base tilt and barrel profile may require some real digging to get good answers for those trying to get the absolute minimum clearance between barrel and scope.
When you start down this path, especially if you're goal is minimum clearance, be sure to stock up on plenty of cheap whiskey. You're gonna' need it.
+1^^^^^^^^
I have nothing but Talley mounts on all my rifles and even with that supposed simplicity I have bought too many of the wrong thing. There are no spec drawings showing the actual length, height and measurements for frigging anything. Then you learn about the extended mount, and the double extended mounts....arrgghhh. You almost need a damn box full of parts to mix and match for the perfect setup...
Actually, it really is just that easy if you're willing to do some legwork.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mozella
1. Getting the required information is as easy as calling or emailing the manufacturer if they don't have it on their website or if it's not clearly defined on their website. Your argument doesn't hold water.
2. As for "medium" or any other height being different between different brands or even different styles from one brand - That's why you need to do some RESEARCH. The internet and telephone are your friends if you'd just use them effectively. Again, this argument doesn't hold water.
3. Caution with Saddle Height v. Centerline Height - That's why I pointed out the difference between the two in my previous post.
4. Where is the end of that height dimension? How high is the rail? Again - the internet and phone are your friends - you just have to use them effectively.
5. Objective O.D. - If you had actually looked at Vortex's website you would see that the measurement I gave (2.3") was for the O.D. of the objective bell (that's the housing) - NOT the lens. 50mm is 1.9685" in diameter.
6. Lens Caps - Apparently you missed where I pointed out the +/- 1/4" difference (0.230" for a large shank; 0.300" for a small shank) between the diameter of the action (1.350") and the max possible diameter of the barrel shank (1.120") where the threads and nut end. There's your needed gap for any kind of cap you want to run. That's why I pointed it out in my first post - you don't need to factor it in because it's essentially built in with the action/barrel diameter difference. Even with a full bull shouldered barrel you'd still have 0.100" clearance with a typical 1.250" diameter barrel blank which nobody does.
for what its worth: I have a Sightron SIII 6-24x50 mounted on my 260 Rem (varmint CBI barrel). I run the BlackHawk 20 MOA rail and rings.... and Medium rings get the job done... I might have a 1/4" between the objective lens housing and the barrel. Just enough room to slide the really nice neoprene scope cover on...
Yep, But not as easy as having someone else do it for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFurious
You completely missed the point of my post.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFurious
It's obvious your idea of "easy" and mine are different. I have a life and spending time on the telephone, (after holding for "the next available agent" for ten minutes) talking to some young lady who doesn't have a clue about the product in question is not my idea of "easy". Emailing and waiting for a reply, which often doesn't ever come, isn't my idea of "easy" either.
Of course, you do what you have to do when there is no choice. When I shop scope rings I do plenty of legwork, but not because I enjoy wasting my valuable time. I do it because there are no standards for this aspect of our sport coupled with the fact manufacturers have wildly different policies regarding publishing specifications. Some are OK and some guard their specifications as though they are national secrets.
Let me see if I can clarify my earlier post.
In an ideal world, you could log on to a web site and find a specification sheet listing the OD of the objective end of the housing of a scope along with length, weight, and all the other things you might need to know for this or some other bit of research. Then, with another few clicks, you could find the OD of your action. Your barrel manufacturer would publish the barrel profile too; not just list "heavy varmint" and leave you guessing. And if would be wonderful is ALL the ring manufacturers would include a detailed drawing showing the specifications of all their hardware. Then, as icing on the cake, some clever forum cowboy could publish a chart showing how much clearance is lost with a 20 or 30 MOA rail.
In fact, you can't do the required research with a few clicks. And a few clicks is all it would require if this task were truly as "easy" as you claim, unless of course you like spending time on the telephone or prefer to wait for an Email reply which may or may not ever arrive. I don't.
Depending on the various brands in question, you have to dig deep to find the truth, especially if you're looking for the smallest possible gap between the barrel and scope. But it need not be this way if manufacturers gave a little more thought to how their customers use their products.
I mounted my first scope almost sixty years ago and it was indeed easy because I had only one choice back in the day. Part of the problem these days is that we're spoiled for choice. There are countless combinations and that's why specifications and drawings are so desirable.
I stand by my previous post and I maintain that there are some very real and largely unnecessary frustrations when shopping for scope rings. Yeah, the answer can be found, but "easy" is not an appropriate description of the process.
Heaven forbid you're inconvenienced in the slightest or actually have to exert some effort to get the information you want. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mozella
I think MR F was talking about how to measure not calling everyone to get them to tell you the right size ring.. The internet has all the information you need. The scope ring height issue is based on diameter of the objective, the action, barrel and height of the mount. From there you look on ring manufacturer web page and find the mount they make that fits. There is no standard.
What Mozella is getting at is there are a lot of manufacturers who don't have that info on their sites (even EGW doesn't list the height or thickness of their bases, though it is listed in their FAQ's). I get that argument, but it's easy to invalidate that argument (and his others) by doing one simple thing: Don't buy products from manufactures who don't make that info readily available. Easy-Peasy! Not only does it eliminate the frustration of having to try and get that info, but it also greatly narrows down your list of potential options.
Here's my other free nugget of wisdom for those perplexed up by this conundrum:
BUY YOUR SCOPE BASE AND HAVE IT ON HAND BEFORE YOU ORDER YOUR RINGS
I know, I know....this slows down the process and will prevent you from being able to run out and shoot your new toy the day you bring it home from the dealer, but trust me...it will save you a lot of headaches.
It's all about eliminating the number of variables you have to deal with.
Most people already know what scope they're going to be mounting on a rifle before they start looking for bases and rings. It's the major purchase they spend the bulk of their time mulling over. As such they will know what the O.D. of the objective bell will be (most manufactures have dimensional drawings or tables on their websites - if they don't, see first paragraph above). As such we've just eliminated that variable from the equation.
As already discussed, Savage actions and barrels are pretty much a fixed size: 1.350" for the action and either 1.050" or 1.120" on the max barrel diameter.
By selecting a base in advance we eliminate that height as a variable, so the only variable we have left that we need to figure out is that of the ring height.
Basic freshman algebra folks (probably 5th grade algebra these days). It's much easier to solve a problem with only one variable than it is one with multiple variables.
Work smarter, not harder.
I agree and I get it also. but this statement is an absolute for me and solves many problems. " Don't buy products from manufactures who don't make that info readily available. Easy-Peasy! Not only does it eliminate the frustration of having to try and get that info, but it also greatly narrows down your list of potential options."
By default, this seems to be the method I am using! So far I can tell you that a Savage 12FV with Nightforce base and Burris "High" XTR Signature rings which I believe is 1.2" ( they come in Med, High, Extra High...have not found small) mounting a SWFA 12 x 42 is a tad too high, but not as much as you would think. I got them as I read somewhere that when the stock was switched to a MDT stock they needed more height, and this is what I intend to do. If this doesnt prove to be the case, then my box just grew. Too high rings are not a bad thing for me right now as I also have AR15 rifles that can use them.Quote:
Originally Posted by celltech
Meanwhile back at the ranch, the scope ring box grows, along with the holster box, Bipod box, scope and red dot box, etc.
Russellc
And to that I would add, get the scope before the rings as well. That's what started my extra scope ring box....Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFurious
Russellc
Thank you for the replies . Especially Mr. Furious who spent a lot of time on this .
LT.
Lou....the Burris signature LOW rings will work. I installed some today on a 12FV action, 30mm scope body, 50mm objective and bull barrel. Plenty of clearance.
But with what base? How tall is it (the base)?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratbuster
Ratbuster . Thank you. I'd love to see a pic if you have time.