Are Seekins Scope Rings Really Worth the $$$?

[darkker]

As to your original question:
"Are Seekins scope rings really worth the money?" That question = "Is this girl the right one for me?" No one but you can answer that question. "Worth it, or Best" are specific to an individual only.

Being obsessed with accuracy and on a budget are most definitely NOT mutually exclusive, I've more than proven that for many decades. Fixing problems that don't yet exist, and being on a budget are mutually exclusive however.

My $40 Primary Arms rings hold the cheap stuff, AND they hold my $1k scope. The truth is, of my two rifles that I shoot to a mile with; the one that gets used the most has the PA scope on it, not the expensive glass.

I'm glad you spent enough money on what you wanted to make yourself happy though.

Cheers

[yobuck]

Take a look at the old Weaver 2 pc aluminum bases that have been in use for decades.
And the old Weaver rings also. I guess we had problems we never realized we had.
The deer apperently didnt realize it either. Also look at the Unertle scope mounting system.
It would be hard to think up something more flimsy that that.
I used that system for about 30 years on a 30x378 and so did lots of others.
I also have been using the 6 screw Weaver rings on several of my large rifles including
a 30x378 with a non Weaver base. If ive got problems, again i dont realize it.
I also have on 1 gun, a Nightforce scope with Nightforce rings and base. Which i cant shoot any better
than my other guns having leupolds and cheaper ring/base setups.
Are the Nightforce rings/base better? Id say no doubt they are, but is all that necessary?
I guess you can never go wrong owning the best of everything.

[BigDave]

As to your original question:


I'm glad you spent enough money on what you wanted to make yourself happy though.

Cheers

I always try to spend the least amount of money to make me happy/satisfied. I am very happy with my $800 Savage. A $4,500 AICS or GA Precision rifle would not make me proportionally happier.

Would my Weaver rings have done the job? IDK. They did NOT install any degree of confidence. I would always wonder about them. I try to buy things that someone obviously took some pride in designing and making. That is MY nature. Is is practical. IDK. Maybe yes,maybe no.
That is why it is a hobby. I get to choose the things that make me pleased with in reason. A rifle costing almost 4k is not with in my line of reasoning. Precision made rings by someone that I know fairly well by reputation (Mr Seekins) that I could well afford is my choice and the choice of many others. So are cheaper Weaver rings for so many buyers.

Sorry to apologize. I had issues with MY (not yours, mind you. I can not comment you YOUR rings) out spec sloppy fit of the Weaver rings. The cross bolt on both sets I bought (medium and Low) were quite undersized for a Picatinny Rail resulting in excessive slop. Had that not been the case I would have kept them.

I am happy that something far less expensive than what I bought makes all you happy. Honestly, I was expecting that to be the case for me. It was not even close. Lucky I can do a very easy return via Amazon.

I admit..in the end, I did pretty well buying things on a budget for this project. I am talking about a wide variety of purchases from .30 caliber Dewey rods, Parker Hale Jags, rifle case (NC Star of all companies..simply awesome made in China case...very well made!) and shooting mat, bipod, stock pack and more (from Triad Tactical).

I had over 95% instant satisfaction with my first choices. I ended up returning and upgrading only two items, my optics and my rings.

1)Falcon Menace (tracking issues) returned and upgraded to a Bushnell (awesome scope!)
2)Weaver rings (sloppy fit my EGW rail, low quality low torque steel cross bolt) returned and upgraded to Seekins rings( value far beyond what I paid). IMO, of course. I would never in a million years be able to even comment about these rings unless I had actually held them in my hand and mounted them. Just sayin.

[Russmerle]

I paid $175 for steel Leopold Mark IV rings and lapped them in on my SIG with Trijicon Accupoint... I then paid $40 for aluminum weaver six hole lows and slapped them on my savage 10P with Primary Arms 4-14x for a budget hunting rifle... The weavers do their job well as both rifles are repeatable sub MOA shooters. I guess if I were throwing myself off cliffs like Navy SEALS, I'd want the Leupys... But the slop was found in both sets (more in Weavers I concur) but both instructions tell you to press rings forward when torquing them down. I was surprised I liked the Weavers but at that price point, they are tough rings.

The Seekens look very nice. They look just like my Leupys actually. I'm glad you went high end because there is no question in your choices when you buy the best. But taking a chance every now and then can pay off... Then again, I've been burnt too...

[BigDave]

I paid $175 for steel Leopold Mark IV rings and lapped them in on my SIG with Trijicon Accupoint... I then paid $40 for aluminum weaver six hole lows and slapped them on my savage 10P with Primary Arms 4-14x for a budget hunting rifle... The weavers do their job well as both rifles are repeatable sub MOA shooters. I guess if I were throwing myself off cliffs like Navy SEALS, I'd want the Leupys... But the slop was found in both sets (more in Weavers I concur) but both instructions tell you to press rings forward when torquing them down. I was surprised I liked the Weavers but at that price point, they are tough rings.

The Seekens look very nice. They look just like my Leupys actually. I'm glad you went high end because there is no question in your choices when you buy the best. But taking a chance every now and then can pay off... Then again, I've been burnt too...

A tumble of a gun off a table can break things. I really loved the video on the EXTREME torture test (almost to total destruction) of my model Bushnell scope...freezing/water dunk both for 24hrs. Drop on grass mounted. Drop on very hard concrete (not macadam) several times. It was dented badly, scratched and still worked just fine. I believe Bushnell is #1 for LEO purchases(price vs function vs ruggedness)...also Bushy scopes are really catching on now in the Military.

I really really like the idea that if i drop something, not only will it not break, it will hold zero and nothing will shift internally. You don't have to do a Lone Survivor fall down a cliff to break or damage something.

I tried to go budget on everything. I only had to return two items out of probably 25 things that I ordered. The Falcon scope (I may get burned if SWFA does not reimburse my shipping). I had to return my Weaver rings. Amazon will not charge me any penalty or return shipping.
The scope "burn" was well worth it. I had a totally defective sub standard scope with crappy Chinese internals. My Bushnell is flawless. it better be for $940!
There is saying "Buy quality and cry only once" or "buy cheap (and loose) and cry twice". We ALL think we can beat the system. And very often we do. Every now and then we have to cry twice. It happens to all of us. Anyone who doesn't admit it is just embarrassed. No need to be. It happens.

BTW, anyone who has any Primary Arms gear is smart. I an a huge fan of their gear and price point/value. I didnt think to look for their rings. If my eyes were younger I would have bought their 4-14 power mil mil FFP scope which IMO is the best buy in tactical scopes.

I own a micro red dot of theirs for my AR-15. Its no Aimpoint but it costs what? 80usd I think.... I quite like my new Gen micro red dot. Only the red dot is a star since my mild astigmatism is coming back after lasix 10 years ago.

There is budget stuff out there that is awesome. Some of the low price stuff works for me. Some items do not and I feel the need to upgrade. My upgrades are not taken lightly or based on an emotional response.

Congratulations for being in the 1% of gun owners that pronounces LOOP-hold correctly. LEOpold was a famous International Symphony Conductor born in Poland....parodied by Bugs Bunny in Long-Haired Hare.

I think of Looney Tunes every time I hear a WELL seasoned "experts" say LEO-pold.
Call Leupold and Stevens on the phone. Watch their company videos. Its a German name.".LOOP-hold" and Stevens
check it out: link to LEO-POLD.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gt1V61SPI_w
its a hoot!

[Russmerle]

The darnedest thing in my pursuit for precision;

First precision rifle I bought (SSG3000) I mounted a Nikon ProStaff MilDot 3-12X40 because that was all I had. Knowing it held zero was a comfort and it performed very well... Sub MOA all day and held a very strong zero. Several months later I ran into a Leupold Mark4 4-14X40 MilDot for $550 (+/-) and it performed very well. I then built a sub MOA upper for my AR and mounted the Leupy on the upper and picked up the Trijicon AccuPoint 5-20X50 for the SSG... I assembled a budget precision Savage .308 w/ the PA FFP 4-14 and have been extremely pleased because it was even cheaper than the Nikon. When it is all said and done the Nikon performed as well accuracy wise and clarity was still good but my eyes couldn't discern the difference since I didn't have the Nikon anymore. The higher end scopes definitely have better clarity and are more rugged.

All in all, I've been very fortunate with my purchases. In my pursuit for precision, I've learned that several peer reviews are important, budget isn't always bad, and sometimes the best is necessary... I don't picture myself getting rid of either three of my rigs. They are extremely accurate and I love shooting them.

I'm still looking forward to seeing pictures of your rig!

[BigDave]

The darnedest thing in my pursuit for precision;

First precision rifle I bought (SSG3000) I mounted a Nikon ProStaff MilDot 3-12X40 because that was all I had. Knowing it held zero was a comfort and it performed very well... Sub MOA all day and held a very strong zero. Several months later I ran into a Leupold Mark4 4-14X40 MilDot for $550 (+/-) and it performed very well. I then built a sub MOA upper for my AR and mounted the Leupy on the upper and picked up the Trijicon AccuPoint 5-20X50 for the SSG... I assembled a budget precision Savage .308 w/ the PA FFP 4-14 and have been extremely pleased because it was even cheaper than the Nikon. When it is all said and done the Nikon performed as well accuracy wise and clarity was still good but my eyes couldn't discern the difference since I didn't have the Nikon anymore. The higher end scopes definitely have better clarity and are more rugged.

All in all, I've been very fortunate with my purchases. In my pursuit for precision, I've learned that several peer reviews are important, budget isn't always bad, and sometimes the best is necessary... I don't picture myself getting rid of either three of my rigs. They are extremely accurate and I love shooting them.

I'm still looking forward to seeing pictures of your rig!

Always interested in stories like yours. Very cool. I better go out to the workbench and get that EGW rail trimmed and the Bushnell mounted.
I will do a light lapping to check the ring alignment. Even if the Seekins rings are perfect, there are other things in play. It doesnt hurt to check. Besides I bought the whole Wheeler mounting kit. I will be darned if I dont use it!
I like the kit so far.

But Whia (German) torx magnetic driver and bits is incredible for almost no money. T10, T15, T20, T25, T30 and T40 torx bits.
I need to pass this product along to everyone. I highly recommend it as an alternative to a complete set of drivers. It is hard to use the Fat Wrench for anything other than a final tightening torque wrench.

Check this out:
http://www.amazon.com/Wiha-Multi-Bit...ic+torx+driver

Normally I do not like a single driver with multiple bits becasue the bits get lost/seperated eventually. But this driver has a very clever bit holder in the handle that I have never seen before. I really like this tool. You can take it with you to the range since it is so compact. The magnet is strong. The bits are precision and hardened.

Edit: Seekins Rings mounted. Bushnell 6-24x50mm mounted. Hollland anti cant bubble mounted..very cool. The Vortex bubble is too chunky for my low mount clearance. The Holland is much slimmer.
The Seekins rings needed extensive lapping becasue the Bushnell tube was quite a bit larger than 30mm. I dont know if the lapping had much to do with accuracy. The rings were 100% true. I just did not want huge scope "bite marks" in my Bushnell scope.

The Wheeler lapping bar was so perfect. It mike'd at precisely 30mm. The Bushnell was 30.08mm which is quite a bit too large if you dont want ring bite marks. The scope would not slide with out marring the sides of the scope.

I eventually had to use the drill attachment on the lapping bar. I finally (checked 4 times) achieved a contour that allowed the scope to slide in the bottom ring shells with out catching/marring. Even after the healthy lapping, the Seekins rings showed a good sized even gap on both sides when torqued to 20 inch lbs.

I was able to dial in 3 inch lbs ( on the Fat wrench)to maintain a precise even torque on all eight cap screws will lapping. Yes, the Fat Wrench is infinitely adjustable. You have to feel the gradations in between the 5 inch lb increment hash marks.

The lapping was a huge success. The Bushnell might mar a bit but it will not be gouged by the rings at this point. A precise 30mm tube is plenty big to get clamped super tight by my rings. Why does Bushnell make its tubes out of spec like that? On purpose? I took plenty photos. Will post later. No bad things about Bushnell. The image is stunning, even in twilight. I needed it on a steady rest like my rifle to be able to see out if it properly. I have to say I am extremely pleased. I am hard to please when it comes to optics...so.

This just goes to show you...no matter how much confidence you have in your rings, there might be something else out of spec. So always lap. I started with a test lap to see what was what. You can tell what is going on by observation, "feel" and a Micrometer. I could feel the Bushnell scope being gouged when I slid it. I could see the marks. Mike'ing the scope tube told me it was the scope that was out of spec, not the rings.

So I fit the rings to the scope. The job was long but turned out particularly well. There is 100% EVEN surface clamping now. The scope is like a rock in those rings now.

I did take plenty pix. I am exhausted. Too tired to transfer and publish. Will do later.

[darkker]

The cross bolt on both sets I bought (medium and Low) were quite undersized for a Picatinny Rail resulting in excessive slop. Had that not been the case I would have kept them.

This just jumped out at me. You know there is a difference between Picatinney, and Weaver "Spec", right? If you mismatched rail and rings that explains the slop.