Rings and bases for $100

[Sully2]

Unless the fit is really bad, we're only talking about gaps under the rail of ~10 or maybe 20 mils - not enough to make a significant height difference. If you remove material from the rear you are tilting the back of the rail down, which decreases elevation adjustment range. I would not remove any material from the base.

There is no need to hold the base rigid while the epoxy sets. The process I use works very well - even for poorly fitting bases. I prep the receiver in the normal way. I mask around the base area to prevent an epoxy mess. Then I apply clear wax to the receiver and silicone spray to the screw holes.

I scuff up the bottom of the base using emery cloth and then clean it with lacquer thinner. I apply JB Weld sparingly to the base mounting surfaces. Less is better. I leave a gap around the holes. I figure I can always repeat the process if there are large voids (rarely happens).

I position the base on the receiver, apply silicone to the screws and insert them. At this point I usually check alignment of the base to the barrel using an 18" steel ruler.

Here is the important part. The purpose of bedding is to maximize surface contact and minimize stress in the base. I gently tighten the base screws just enough to squeeze epoxy out of the gap and get the high points on the base to contact the receiver. "Gently" means less than 3 in-lbs of torque.

I go back and forth between screws, gently tightening each screw until I'm convinced the base is contacting the receiver somewhere on the front and back. Then I back off each screw 1/8 -1/4 turn to insure there is no stress in the base. This is critical. Some folks tighten the base screws at this point, which imparts stress and usually bends the base. Keeping the screws a bit loose during epoxy set allows the epoxy the fill the gaps while the base has no stress. Then I clean up excess epoxy using Q-tips.

I let the epoxy set overnight, pry it loose the next day, clean up the receiver, and remove excess epoxy from the corners of the base using a razor blade. Then I install the base, apply blue thread locker to the screws and torque the screws properly (20 in-lbs for #6 screws).

The bedding process takes about an hour. Works great every time.

Id think if you checked you would find the receiver to be "true" and the RAIL you intend on installing top be bent or somehow twisted or ?? so that it doesnt match up just perfectly. And a mismatch of .010 to .020 IS a big screwup. The contour is cut and checked on machinery that wont let it vary that much....but then again this goes hand in hand with the reciever holes not being aligned...( Yeah...right!)

Individual bases are another story!

 

[MudRunner2005]

After going with the rail setup, I've never even thought about going back to Leupold rings and bases (other than their PRW rings for my Marlin 917 .17HMR).

 

[Sully2]

After going with the rail setup, I've never even thought about going back to Leupold rings and bases (other than their PRW rings for my Marlin 917 .17HMR).

Ive been using the Leupold QD rings ( with that flip over lever) on EGW rails for almost 1 1/2 years now. Ive also been following EGW's rule on that..."If you arent shooting more than 600 yards...you dont even need a rail"!!....but i get their 15 MOA model as my mount anyway.....

 

[SidecarFlip]

I have used "Kentucky Torquage" all my life. I have made mistakes, but 99.9% of the time, everything is good to go.

Recently purchased a Wheeler FAT Wrench, and have since been using it. Working great so far.

For $50.00...I highly recommend it.

To err is human. Only the Lord and Obama make no mistakes.

I'm sure we all have (in the past), I know I did but it's not the right way. I have a Wheeler too. Nice tool. I also have an inch pound Snap-On dial wrench. Also a nice tool but expensive like everything Snap-On. The Wheeler is as good as for our intent.

 

[Welderboy250]

I still didn't get out my feeler gauges but if the rear 2 screws are tightened and the front ones omitted ther is a gap under the front section that is by my eye between .010 and .020 inch. This is not a tapering gap either, mind you, it is parallel. If the amount of the gap wre precisely removed from the rear section where it contacts the reciever it would not need any bedding to fit properly and it would not be canted one way or the other. The rail is supposed to be a 20 moa. If I were to use the bedding methods described here I would wind up with 30 or 40 moa and/or the rail being pulled into a slight S shape. I did tighten it down just to see what it would do to the rings. It was some serious whack ado. Don't worry it don't hurt anything as soon as the front 2 screws were loosened it sprung right back straight but if I hadn't payed attention and decided to lap the rings instead of fix the base it would have defeated the whole purpose of a picatinny rail and being able to move the scope fore and aft or even easily switch between guns and have everything line up just right. With the rail tightened down it doesn't even line up as well as the two piece weaver bases I have on another gun. That's sad EGW. I could understand having to rework a $10 base but when u spend $65 the manufacture should at least warn u it may not fit properly if there is that big of issue with that brand of receiver.

 

[MudRunner2005]

To err is human. Only the Lord and Obama make no mistakes.

I'm sure we all have (in the past), I know I did but it's not the right way. I have a Wheeler too. Nice tool. I also have an inch pound Snap-On dial wrench. Also a nice tool but expensive like everything Snap-On. The Wheeler is as good as for our intent.

Yeah, the Snap-On and MAC units are nice, but as you said, a bit pricey for just mounting up scopes and torquing action screws.

 

[Sully2]

I still didn't get out my feeler gauges but if the rear 2 screws are tightened and the front ones omitted ther is a gap under the front section that is by my eye between .010 and .020 inch. This is not a tapering gap either, mind you, it is parallel. If the amount of the gap wre precisely removed from the rear section where it contacts the reciever it would not need any bedding to fit properly and it would not be canted one way or the other. The rail is supposed to be a 20 moa. If I were to use the bedding methods described here I would wind up with 30 or 40 moa and/or the rail being pulled into a slight S shape. I did tighten it down just to see what it would do to the rings. It was some serious whack ado. Don't worry it don't hurt anything as soon as the front 2 screws were loosened it sprung right back straight but if I hadn't payed attention and decided to lap the rings instead of fix the base it would have defeated the whole purpose of a picatinny rail and being able to move the scope fore and aft or even easily switch between guns and have everything line up just right. With the rail tightened down it doesn't even line up as well as the two piece weaver bases I have on another gun. That's sad EGW. I could understand having to rework a $10 base but when u spend $65 the manufacture should at least warn u it may not fit properly if there is that big of issue with that brand of receiver.

What reciever were you trying to mount the EGW rail onto??

 

[bruce_ventura]

I still didn't get out my feeler gauges but if the rear 2 screws are tightened and the front ones omitted ther is a gap under the front section that is by my eye between .010 and .020 inch. This is not a tapering gap either, mind you, it is parallel. If the amount of the gap wre precisely removed from the rear section where it contacts the reciever it would not need any bedding to fit properly and it would not be canted one way or the other. The rail is supposed to be a 20 moa. If I were to use the bedding methods described here I would wind up with 30 or 40 moa and/or the rail being pulled into a slight S shape.

Agreed the base does not fit the receiver well. You could exchange it or switch to another brand, which cost time and/or money. You take a small gamble either way. Or you could bed the base you have and move on. Then you certainly will have a perfectly fitting base.

Based on your last post, you could bed just the front of the base, filling the 10-20 mil gap. In this case you would tighten the rear screws to 20 in-lbs during epoxy set, but not the front ones. FYI, I use a lower torque value than others because I've seen EGW screw heads strip before.

If you have an even gap under the front base, I think you will end up with a 20 MOA cant on the base if you bed the front. The cant angle is relative to the receiver surface. If the base is attached flat to the receiver, you should still have a 20 MOA cant. A parallel gap under the front (or back for that matter) should not alter the cant angle.

 

[Welderboy250]

This rail is for a magnum caliber weatherby mark v. And again to the naysayers I'm not going to bed a .020" gap under a scope rail. That would look hideous on a beautiful wood stocked gun. It may not be worth as much as some of your custom rigs but it's mine and I want to be happy with it or I may as well sell the whole mess and get something I do like. So back to what I'm going to do with this thing. I think withsome careful measuring and filing and measuring, ect. I can get this thing into an appropriate configuration that it can be bedded and still have no noticeable gap at either end. That being said, what would you recommend I use to bed this thing to take up a gap ranging from 0 to a couple thousandths.

By the way Bruce, I seem to have struck a nerve or upset u and I apologize I didn't mean it that way. Also again I don't mean to be critical but in my understanding mills and thousandths are drastically different measurements. Just to avoid confusion, the measurements I am talking about here are in thousandths of an inch, not mills.

 

[bruce_ventura]

This rail is for a magnum caliber weatherby mark v. And again to the naysayers I'm not going to bed a .020" gap under a scope rail. That would look hideous on a beautiful wood stocked gun. It may not be worth as much as some of your custom rigs but it's mine and I want to be happy with it or I may as well sell the whole mess and get something I do like. So back to what I'm going to do with this thing. I think withsome careful measuring and filing and measuring, ect. I can get this thing into an appropriate configuration that it can be bedded and still have no noticeable gap at either end. That being said, what would you recommend I use to bed this thing to take up a gap ranging from 0 to a couple thousandths.

By the way Bruce, I seem to have struck a nerve or upset u and I apologize I didn't mean it that way. Also again I don't mean to be critical but in my understanding mills and thousandths are drastically different measurements. Just to avoid confusion, the measurements I am talking about here are in thousandths of an inch, not mills.

Sorry for the bad communication on my part. To me, 0.001" = 1 mil. If that's an obsolete term, I apologize for the confusion. Also, I'm not upset at all. I tend to post in a concise style that's efficient for me. I guess I should be more casual and folksy. Honestly, if I were offended I simply would not respond at all.

Back to your questions. I always use JB Weld to bed bases. I would not hesitate to bed a 0.020" gap under a scope mount. I'm reworking a Czech VZ-24 and had to fill a 0.050" gap under the rear scope mount. If the gap is thicker than about 0.020", I will stick a piece of brass shim in there as a space filler, but's probably not needed because JB Weld already has so much filler in it.

Your sense of aesthetics is different than mine. I'm more of a "six foot" type of guy - if It looks good from six feet away, I'm usually satisfied. I'm more concerned with function and reliability. To me, firearms are tools rather than works of art.

If I wanted the scope mount to look good, I would not modify it with a file. I would use my mill instead. I would probably cut the rear mount using a boring bar (because I have one), but there are much better machinists on this site from which to get advice.

 

[SidecarFlip]

"I would probably cut the rear mount using a boring bar (because I have one),"

Not to be a SA, but I'd like to see that.

 

[Welderboy250]

I was considering putting it on my mill and prob would have if it were a 0 moa base. As it is a 20 moa it seemed it would take me a lot of setup work to get it dialed in so I just did it by hand. Turned out remarkably well. Lots of careful measuring and ingenuity. Wound up sticking a psa disc to a piece of 4" exhaust pipe to match the curvature of the receiver top. It didn't even match that we'll from the factory. Rather proud of myself. I may still take it back of and cut just a whisker more and then bed it but it really fits well already. Thanks for all the suggestions and thought provoking comments so far. It has been much appreciated. As of now I have achieved my price goal, or close enough. The rail was 62.99 and the rings 19/piece for a grand total of 100.99 with the free shipping. If I can zero it without much trouble and it tracks at progressive ranges ill be ecstatic. Somehow I suspect it won't be that simple. Happy shooting gun)

 

[Sully2]

Why not just buy the correct mount for whatever receiver your working on......lots simpler???

 

[bruce_ventura]

...Thanks for all the suggestions and thought provoking comments so far. It has been much appreciated. As of now I have achieved my price goal, or close enough. The rail was 62.99 and the rings 19/piece for a grand total of 100.99 with the free shipping. If I can zero it without much trouble and it tracks at progressive ranges ill be ecstatic. Somehow I suspect it won't be that simple. Happy shooting gun)

Good job using what's available to get 'er done. Once you bed it, the base will fit perfectly.