Your looking at $80 on up for a set of good rings that go on a Picatinny/Weaver rail. Badger, IOR, Leupy MArk IV, Nightforce...
(a few dollars more than the Burris Signatures)
I went through this fiasco about one or two weeks ago and a choice was made after a little research. I bought a set of Barrett adjustable rings, $180 or cheaper if you know a dealer... These rings have a 2 degree adjustment each, so a pair has 4 degree's total adjustment. This can help give you more scope adjustment depending on what distance you want to shoot. As far as I know these rings are all steel, and look pretty heavy duty. These rings are going on a 15 minute base for a 338 lapua, 26" barrel rifle. I was looking for a "tactical" type of Burris signature ring with a spherical insert, bigger, longer, heavier, but couldn't find them.
S1.. "..Which ones do the job w/o "doing" my wallet.? I'm not looking for cheap just a good value.."
Websters: Cheap= inexpensive (How in hell $130+ scope rings can be referred to with this term is beyond my comprehension.)
Value= a fair return or equivalent in money,goods or services for something exchanged..
.. OK bubba.. How did my original post get misconstrued into I want CHEAP rings.?? [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif[/img] Despite popular belief there is a cut-off point for value for almost any product.. A point where noone can explain what makes the $200 rings better than the $150 rings.. (At this point,many popular scope rivalries come to mind..) I am prepared to invest in a nice set of rings but I'm pretty sure I don't need a barrel vise mounted on top of the action.. And if you insist on calling me cheap I'll havta say something about you and yer buddy sounding like a coupla old women fighting over who's got the biggest,baddest,longest,loudest,most expensivest shot/rifle/scope/kill/hit/talley-whacker thing-a-ma-bobber.. [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/tongue.gif[/img] JiNC
PS- Could someone please explain to me what is it that defines something as "tactical".??
BTW- I'm talking with Ken about a set of his rings.. 'Real nice fella to deal with.. That's important..
I am no where near the class or intellegence of Ian or S1 but I can speak from experience.
my .02 = Badgers, and don't look back.
I did a little experiment a while back with my badgers mounted on 2 piece NF bases.. I took the scope off and then put back on between shots at 100 yards. I shot a .9" group. Not bad for rings that arn't advertised as detatchable...
Just make sure you lap them real good and everything is squared up to the reciever. If you have an inch lb. wrench make sure you mount to 65 inch. lbs. and use 15 inch lbs. on the screws.
One word of caution on the Ken Farrel bases. Although they are good, I have heard that the screws he is using are snapping under recoil with the mag. calibers. Talk to him and make sure you get the new screws!
and you thought the GGVG board would make you spend money... [img]images/icons/shocked.gif[/img]
S1...Awww Mannn.. What fun are buddies if'n I can't talk trash about'em.? Heck, ya don't know any good "dirt" on total strangers.!! [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]
Wyo... Neat experiment.! Sounds like positive results.. I tried something similar with a couple of BR rifles that had the dovetail type rails along the top and they repeated very well, too.. It was a valuable lesson in the craftsmanship of a custom setup.. Thanks for the input..
Speedbump... Thanks for the solid input.. Sounds like you have something very similar to what I'll eventually end up with..
I haven't used or even seen the Smith Ent. rings but would warn you that sometimes a person can get so low with low rings and big objectives that you can't use any lens covers like Butler Creek or Scopecoats. Pain in the butt when you can't get anything between the barrel and the bottom of the scope, can't even get an oily cloth under some setups.