Best scope rings

SEEKINS............Stronger than any scope on the planet, precise fit, multiple height options, light enough and moderately priced. Double base attachment screws are also a plus.
CANNOT GO WRONG.
 

Attachments

  • 8FBDCF82-4338-4D78-AED1-B9BA6E0F33C8.jpeg
    8FBDCF82-4338-4D78-AED1-B9BA6E0F33C8.jpeg
    2.3 MB · Views: 78
The Seekins are aluminum how well do they work with a steel rail? Are you better off with the Night Force rings for a steel rail?
 
The Seekins are aluminum how well do they work with a steel rail? Are you better off with the Night Force rings for a steel rail?
I used Seekins alloy rings on steel Badger Ordinance rails for years with a 6.5SLR, .25-06AI and .300RUM. Both showed zero signs of wear or had a single issue.
 
SEEKINS, Lighter than steel, don't rust, don't need lapping and if you damage one it will be the least of your worries because if it is damaged your scope will be destroyed from the mishap. In fact I would be willing to bet you could destroy the strongest of scopes and STILL be able to reuse the Seekins rings. Steel is "old school" and unnecessary.
Think about this, 99% of scopes today are made out of thin aluminum in comparison to the thick aluminum rings. If the rings and base are stronger than the scope construction material why use heavy corrodable steel?
 
I usually run the NF ultralites but have owned many different brands, seekins, badger and they are all good. I recently bought the ARC M-10 because they are one of the few that make 40mm tube.
 
While "best" generally needs to be qualified for use, cost, design, etc., I have found for use with my hunting rifles where weight is a factor, the Nightforce Extreme Duty, lightweight rings are well made and quite secure regardless of scope weight and recoil level. For a lower cost option, I have used the one piece Tally's with excellent success, however, unlike the NF rings, lapping is usually required for a +70% bearing surface to the scope tube, and I will epoxy bed them to the receiver.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top