Re: Scope rail vs Leopold mounts
I agree with BH in that you don't have to break the bank on converting. I do however believe that the one piece Weaver setup is superior in design and strength. Bedding a Weaver rail eliminates induced stress on the optics and mounting system, and yes, it will also let you swap scopes with like rails or remove/re-install with good repeatability. "My" main focus is on eliminating movement from the base and rings short of welding it all together, which certainly has crossed my mind. Harold Vaughn examines this in his book "Rifle Accuracy Facts". Like others I know also feel, the windage adjustable rings are simply the root of all evil, twist in rings offer no more comfort and will loosen and flex, and can shear off. When you consider that every .0001" movement on a ring can translate to .1" at 100 yards, or 1" at 1000 yards, you can quickly see that ZERO flex or shift is manditory to top accuracy. This is the same reason why so much importance is placed on a tight, straight and square, well machined barrel and receiver threads, and sometimes the type of thread used... point of impact shift.
I would certainly upgrade the rings and bases before rebarreling. Also, if it's a Farrell base I'd opt for the G-Force model. My preferance for rings are the Leupold MK4.