Hello all,
This is my first attempt at LR (precision) shooting. I'm an Infantryman with the big 82nd and currently deployed. I'm well versed with the M249 and the M240, but it's time to refine my shot groups. I purchased a Savage model 10 fcp-k in 308 and a Zeiss Conquest HD5 5-25x50 optic, but I'm having a difficult time finding good info on a specific base and rings. The tube is 1", and the true od of the objective bell is 60mm. I also want to use Butler Creek lens caps.
I don't plan on any further mods until I can grow into the weapon. That being said, I'm not afraid to pay for quality. I originally wanted to do a Seekins 20MOA base and rings, but it looks like the .76" rings may be too short. After contacting Seekins, this was their response:
"Thanks or contacting us. We only make one set of rings that are for a 1" tube. Please check with Savage to see if your action is a Round Back Accutrigger with the same hole spacing as a Savage 10FP regarding our Savage 10FP 20 MOA Base".
I read the PDF manual for my weapon, and I'm not sure if this is true or not.
Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated. I've been following for a while, but this is my first post.
~Patrick
Using the formula found here, http://www.opticstalk.com/how-to-det...topic5946.html, it looks like all I will have to do is select a base that fits and subtract the base height from 1.3" (60mm true obj bell / 2 and add 3mm for lens the cap converted to inches and slightly rounded up)to find the ideal ring height (assuming a 3mm thickness for the Butler Creek lens caps. I'd like to stay with an all steel base like Seekins, Badger or a similar company.
First, thank you for your service to our country and I hope you come home safe and soon.
If you bought your rifle new recently, it's a round back, as they stopped making flat backs more than ten years ago. Also since your rifle is a Model 10 variant (as opposed to a 110), it is a short action. So you should shop for bases for a short action, round back receiver.
Many around here favor EGW picatinny rails, myself included, although lately I've read a few gripes about the quality of their mounting screws, but I've had no problems with them. I also favor Burris Extreme six-hole aluminum rings, as they are a very good combination of quality, strength, and value, although they are not steel as you requested and neither is the EGW. But I seriously doubt you'd be disappointed with them. Medium height would probably work in concert with the rail.
http://www.midwayusa.com/product/113...t-action-matte
http://www.midwayusa.com/product/154...le-rings-matte
If you'd prefer the extra weight, expense, and durability (that's debatable) of steel, the only ones I have experience with and can discuss are the Nightforce products. Unfortunately, i just now discovered that Nightforce doesn't offer 1" rings, so i guess this won't help you as far as rings. They are very well made and essentially indestructible, but very expensive, and heavy. A Savage 20moa rail and a pair of medium steel rings weighs a full pound.
http://www.midwayusa.com/product/257...und-rear-matte
Hope that gives you something to consider. I intended to recommend the Nightforce setup for you, but as I said I just found out that 1" is not an option with them.
Here is another steel base...I've heard good things and will be getting one at some point.
http://www.eabco.com/Savage_Scope_Mount.htm
Thanks for your service...Semper Fi
If you use a one piece picatinny style rail, medium height rings should be fine for anything but a monster scope. For a 3-12x42 Nikon low rings were OK.
I personally like Warne Maxima steel rings and if available I get a steel 1 piece 20MOA picatinny rail. I have several Warne rails and 1 Nightforce. I am not an EGW fan, for me they are a product of last resort.
Awesome info! Thx guys. I'm waiting to hear back from Seekins on the thickness of their base. If the calculations come out reasonable, I'll go with them. I've heard of many guys going with "medium" or "high" rings between companies and not getting what they expected, so I'm going to try to stay with hard numbers as far as ring height. I got a good price on the Zeiss, and now I'm finding out why lol 1" rings are few and far between on the higher end stuff.
Leupold makes some pretty nice rings for the picatinny rails...
Originally Posted by keeki
Guess it doesn't really matter. If ya cant afford $15, you won't be buying much anyways
How important is it to match the brand of rings to the brand of optic mount? I can find many high quality bases, but none of them offer 1" rings.
It's of no consequence whatsoever. However, the slot for "weaver" style bases are not wide enough for "picatinney" style rings. Other wise, they are similar in design principal. Matching brands is not necessary, though.Originally Posted by Technophat
Check out the Burris Extreme Tactical 1" rings.
I recently came across some of the MagPul videos, specifically the Precision Shooter series, and the instructor at Accuracy First spoke about the weaknesses of having a sub-par mount and ring set-up, so I'm leaning toward Near Manufacturing http://www.nearmfg.com/ for both. They want $278 for the rings and $175 for the base, but if I want to eventually hit a 16" plate an a mile out, I'm going to have to build it right. These videos are outstanding. Highly recommended!
The Warne steel picatinny style one piece base is around $100 and a pair of the steel Maxima rings is about $45. You might pay more, but you are not going to get a stronger base and rings. I have never had any issue with the machining tolerances on them either, while I do hear of many issues with EGW. But I am assuming that EGW sell 100 bases for every 1 steel base that Warne sells.
1+ on the Burris bases and the zee rings.
Members who have read this thread in the last 1 days: 0
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks