I guess I will find out. I am returning my Weaver Picatinny Six Hole 30mm Low Rings. I not only bought Seekins rings, but I had Primary Arms overnight them (another $25) to me. I am sick and tired of waiting. Yes, yes. I am the poster child this month for Buy Twice, Cry Twice. You think I would know better.
Being precision obsessed (like me) and being on a budget are mutually exclusive. Oh, well.
Why did I return my Weaver Rings? My very personal lack of confidence. I am not mounting my $1K scope with 40 dollar rings and constantly wondering about their quality when I shoot. I do not need that distraction. That is important to me.
My Weaver Scope Company rings are made specifically for a MIL STD Picatinny rail. I went on their website to make sure of that. Note: ALL of their Their rings labeled "Tactical-Style" are made for old fashioned, discontinued Weaver Rail System from the year 1930.
We will be discussing only MIL STD Picatinny rails and scope rings here.
My Savage OEM 0 MOA EGW rail is Mil Spec perfect at .206" lug width. That is awesome.
The Weaver Picatinny rings cross bolt is grossly undersized at .188". Heck, it's close to fitting an out of spec Weaver Rail System that has .180" between the lugs.
What do all these fine measurements mean in the real world? SLOP! A lot of it. You can feel a "ton" of slop and a very loose fit on the Weaver Picatinny rings to my Mil Spec Picatinny rail. I would have to force the rings FORWARD against the lug while tightening. Even TPS (great rings...sort of) cuts their cross bolts thin so there is slop on a Mil Spec rail.
I called Seekins. In two minutes the rep checked with a Tech and had my answer. Seekins cross bolts are machined to have a .008" interference fit on a Mil Spec/STD Picatinny rail. Weaver was several hundreds interference fit. Way too much slop for me.
OCD much? I guess so. Maybe the same for me and all the others that buy Seekins and Badger rings. I think we are in a minority.
Would my Weaver rings have worked out OK? Oh, most likely. But I cant abide by such lack of precision. PLUS, Weaver used an inferior weak steel for their cross bolts. You can NOT torque them to the typical 65 inch lbs. They are 35 inch lbs max.
I made a personal judgement call. Will my scope mounted in Seekins rings be "better" than the same scope mounted in Weaver rings? IDK. Will I every WORRY about my Seekins rings. The answer is no.
Oh, I am sure their are rings costing less that do as well as Seekins. I simply ran out of time and patience trying to save a dime. I made an executive decision late today and ordered the Seekins Low alloy four hole rings to be here Wed. My scope will arrive Tuesday. A day before the rings.
What is the deal with Seekins 6 hole rear ring and 4 hole front ring? They were more money and harder to find. Discontinued some websites said. They looked kind of funky in truth. I just bought the four hole ring set.
About the Seekins Four Hole Alloy Rings:
"This integral, flat recoil lug is far superior to cross bolt lug designs and fits precisely into Picatinny slots with minimal clearance. For maximum torque and strength, Grade 8 T-25 Torx® fasteners are used that will not strip out while being tightened to the appropriate specification."
or here:
http://www.seekinsprecision.com/scop...30mm-tube.html
"
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks