Originally Posted by Tikkamike
Stupid? 80% weaker? You are wrong on Both accounts. I prefer use of the intrigal mount also but its not stupid not to. Also near makes an awesome mount for tikka. I have heard good things about the egw bases. I think the talleys might be great in this situation.
Let's make sure we are all on the same page. My personal gun experience is an amalgamated mesh of 17 years as a Navy Armorer, and a lifetime as a gun nut.
When I say ring mount I am referring to a system like the Optilocks wherein the ring/base utilizes the rifles action grooves to lock down. Similar to the 1913 rail and Weaver system on AR15s or on the New Surgeon. As in small little 6x40 or 8x40 screws are not holding down your scope. I beleive Burris, Leupold, and Warne all make Sako/Tikka ring mounts.
When I say saddle mount I am referring to a 2 or 3 ring ONE PIECE mount that does the same as above. Like the TRG and Spuhr mount system.
A rings and bases bolt on system, LIKE THE TALLEY is weaker. Epoxying on the bases helps, but no amount of epoxy will match the strength of a properly put together saddle mount on a integral base receiver.
Please do the math, 3 or 4 6x40 screws or less than .20 of retention versus almost 1.0 to 5.0 inches of combined retention with saddle mount or ring mount.
If you epoxy the 1913 rail down, you increase strength but you will never have the strength provided by a saddle mount. A quality saddle mount utilizing the integral receiver could be as much as 2000% percent stronger than the 4 screws are.
And regardless of how much of a hold a pair of Ultralight Talleys have on the scope, they have only 4 6x40 screws worth of hold on the action.