Reply With QuoteBuy you an EGW one piece rail (0 MOA), then mount your scope. May need a set of low rings. The Savage 116 is a long action and that is why you need either a longer scope or a one piece.
I bought my 116 and VX-2 at Cabelas. They guy who mounted the scope, said Savages are a problem for mounting Leopold scopes. The base cantalevers over where you have to load, blind magazine too. The rear ring is not over the receiver, but where you load.
Is there going to be stiffness problems? At firsts I thought maybe the guy had the wrong bases, but since the rear is so far forward the bases don't matter.
So can you mount a Leopold on a Savage without this morphidite setup? 5 1/4 between bells. So I am not seeing how. Front ring is right against bell, and rear rings is about 1/4 from dial. Was there something different about 116s?
I must not have enough post to put up pictures, since the attachment button is not available to me.
Buy you an EGW one piece rail (0 MOA), then mount your scope. May need a set of low rings. The Savage 116 is a long action and that is why you need either a longer scope or a one piece.
Should I be concerned about accuracy with the way the base is cantilevered?
I went thru that very issue with my Stevens 200. Its the same as the 110 series - just comes out of a different door at the factory. I don't recall the brand of scope bases but they did hang over the receiver port by approx. 3/8" or so. No problem with it being rigid or solid. It worked fine with my old 30.06 and a Leupold scope.
And tell the guy at Cabela's its not a "problem". Its just the way things are. It works fine.
If you go with a rail remember: It makes it a little tricky to shove the rounds down into the magazine because the rail covers the port.
PS: If you're that concerned about it, go to a different brand of scope. Make note of the distance between the scope bells and get one that's a little longer or has longer eye relief.
(Notice how I don't care how I spend your money...)
'Scuse me while I whip this out...!
Yea, Savage is somewhat of a pita if you prefer a 2-piece base set. I've found the Burris Xtreme Tactical or Weaver Grand Slam (S46S, S402) 2-piece bases give you the most flexibility on a Savage LA. Burris Signature Zee rings resolve any other scope mounting issues that would impact accuracy. The picture below shows a Leupold VX-3 3.5-10x40 with WGS base which only have 1 cross-slot vs multiple cross-slots on the Burris XT bases. I have also used a Leupold VX-2 2-7x33 on a Savage LA. The eye relief and eye box on a Leupold is pretty foregiving when compared to other brands IMO.
Last edited by jpdown; 02-13-2015 at 12:34 PM.
Hey JP,
Is that a round back or a flat back?
'Scuse me while I whip this out...!
The scope bases I mentioned are for a round back Savage. The picture is of a round back Savage 111 Light Weight Hunter with 23" 280AI barrel.
Thanks.
I'm still looking for a decent pair of flat back bases before I take a Dremel to the rail I have and make into a 2 piece base set.
I have the old set around here somewhere.
Finding them is another story.
'Scuse me while I whip this out...!
With a blind magazine it is not ideal, for loading. Also scope can't forward much more
Last edited by Berserker; 02-13-2015 at 12:34 PM. Reason: zerk
For my rebuild from 338 to 270, I'm nixing the savage 2 pc. rail mounts and rings and getting the EGW 1pc rail @ 0MOA. My scope was so restricted in positions in which it could be mounted, I notice that from recoil, the rear base is a bit peened from the rear ocular that sat so close. I'm pretty excited about the 1 pc. and for the price, it can't be beat, it seems. Nice to have a flat back older LA 116 for this purpose, the EGW 1 pc. is cheaper than for the newer models. As fgw_in_fl notes, you could just dremel out the center of the 1 pc. and convert it to a 2 pc., but that sort of defeats the purpose of the 1 pc. base, as it contributes to accuracy; but it might not matter much depending on your scenario, i.e. range of your shots. Good luck.
I pulled mine all off
+1. Finally got the EGW one piece for my Savage LA flat back....don't know why I waited so long.I'm nixing the savage 2 pc. rail mounts and rings and getting the EGW 1pc rail
What is the leopold wrench for? I haven't used it. Only $15 on their website, so I wondered if it was some great time saver or such. I was looking at a VX-3 for my next purchase, it is 5.25 between bells, same as my other ones.
The one piece may be a little less restrictive over the magazine, then the two piece. Seems the blind magazine on mine is kinda sensitive to loading just right. I am only sighted in at 75 yards, though I can only shoot less then 50. But I wanted to start working on 30-06 loads this summer. Need to find a place where I can shoot farther. I haven't done rifles before.
The wrench is for the turn in rings
my model 12 short action that i got new in 2014 has a lupy and DNZ mount , worked great
I have always just used the Weaver bases. Never a problem.
(Actually, I learned the hard way the Leupold mounts hung over and looked weird so I got the Weaver bases and never looked back.)
New to this Savage stuff but a one piece scope base sounds like it would help. I bought one with a cut out or notch that matched the port. It is a Valdada 1pc heavy duty Picatinny base #1988469. Not sure if they make one for a long action or flat. Another trick I learned from an 18 year old private back in the 80's was he would cut out patterns of the scope (poster board) and play with mounting location before he ever touched metal to metal. Like someone said, we are good at spending someone else's money, get a bigger scope. It sounds like you do not need much more tube length to get it to work. Good luck!
Well Franks a nicer guy than me. That guy needs a transfer to another department.
Maybe gathering up shopping carts in the parking lot. The vx2 is a short scope and needs an offset front ring setup,
or as has been mentioned a picitinny base. The solid base will hamper to a degree the loading process. But would be
best overall in my opinion due to the flexibility in scope placement.
I have a DNZ one piece on a hunting setup with blind mag and have zero issue with loading as the rail that connects the two is slightly offset to give plenty of room. Have an EGW rail on a single shot with no ejector (so I'm reaching in twice for every round) and have zero issues with clearance on it as well. Both setups provide a lot of room for scope placement and have be rock solid and problem free.
For a hunter get the DNZ. For a target rifle get the EGW.
I have a couple of each. Loading is not an issue. I must say that 2 of mine have detachable mags, but I do load from the top sometimes with no issues.
That is the most correct answer. The rear base, while it will work like it is, sounds to be installed backwards. An extended ring (Leupy makes them) should have been used one the front instead. That would have given you the clearance to slide the scope without being against the bell and possibly allowed the rear to be turned around so it is not as close to the adjustment knobs. Now sometimes even with using the correct setup the scope is just too short to span the rings properly, a Picatinny rail is then your friend.Originally Posted by yobuck
More shooting, less typing.
You might want to consider bedding it too!
Yes you should. Much like a tall building will fall with a poor foundation. That is a poor foundation. You have basically two choices for mounting that (and this ISNT a Leupold problem as ANY "short" scope will have this issue) scope to that action:
Off set rings front and rear mounted to bases that are attached to the receiver using BOTH screws in EACH base or......
As mentioned, a one piece base (piccatinney rail) that will give your NON OFFSET rings of choice more places to mount to.
But, with a blind mag, that can be a pain loading. I have seen it done. Using bases that are milled out underneath to allow a little more loading AND case ejecting room.
Good luck,
Snipe
Members who have read this thread in the last 1 days: 0
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks