Did Burris screw up the Eliminator iii mount?

[TikkTokk]

Super excited that I finally scored the new Eliminator iii. However, when I went to mount it on my 300 win mag it appears they made a serious error on the scope mount. The body has been stretched and it looks like the forward land got stretched with it. Making it completely miss the standard 2-piece picatinny rail system they recommend in the user manual. Not shown in the pic is the eyepiece is already a little further to the rear than I'd like (past the grip). I was able to get a pretty good fit by wrapping some 5mil copper shim stock around the mounting bolt so the scope is actually resting on that for the forward mount. The mounting bolt is square so it is a pretty decent surface but it's dimensions don't match the height set by the rear mount (hence the need for shim stock). Hard to believe this is how they expect us to mount it. Am I missing something?

 

[SBruce]

Certainly looks like it's not right, but it appears Ernie has his mounted the same way. Might PM him for details, he shimmed his but he's got a 30MOA base.?

My dad has one on a Weatherby Vangaurd 243, I don't recall it looking that way, but maybe it does.

 

[Steel City Archer]

Super excited that I finally scored the new Eliminator iii. However, when I went to mount it on my 300 win mag it appears they made a serious error on the scope mount. The body has been stretched and it looks like the forward land got stretched with it. Making it completely miss the standard 2-piece picatinny rail system they recommend in the user manual. Not shown in the pic is the eyepiece is already a little further to the rear than I'd like (past the grip). I was able to get a pretty good fit by wrapping some 5mil copper shim stock around the mounting bolt so the scope is actually resting on that for the forward mount. The mounting bolt is square so it is a pretty decent surface but it's dimensions don't match the height set by the rear mount (hence the need for shim stock). Hard to believe this is how they expect us to mount it. Am I missing something?

TTT

 

[RonS]

Super excited that I finally scored the new Eliminator iii. However, when I went to mount it on my 300 win mag it appears they made a serious error on the scope mount. The body has been stretched and it looks like the forward land got stretched with it. Making it completely miss the standard 2-piece picatinny rail system they recommend in the user manual. Not shown in the pic is the eyepiece is already a little further to the rear than I'd like (past the grip). I was able to get a pretty good fit by wrapping some 5mil copper shim stock around the mounting bolt so the scope is actually resting on that for the forward mount. The mounting bolt is square so it is a pretty decent surface but it's dimensions don't match the height set by the rear mount (hence the need for shim stock). Hard to believe this is how they expect us to mount it. Am I missing something?

There should be a little shim piece that comes with the scope and fits in the front rail section so you can mount it on a shorter rail or split rail. You'd need a long rail to fit the whole bottom section of the Eliminator. The piece will be squareish and blued with a channel to fit the clamp and shim the scope for mounting on a shorter rail system.

 

[Laelkhunter]

You said that the eyepiece extends too far back, past the grip. How is the eye relief affected by it being that far back? Do you get a full view in the scope when you have a proper cheekweld? If you do, then it might be correct?
I'm not familiar at all with that scope, but have seen some reviews on it, all positive. I have never seen anything about the mount though, until you posted this. Maybe someone else with one can post photos of theirs to see how it compares.