Leupold QRW's Broke, but....

[Brent]

Leupold QRW\'s Broke, but....

Here's what happened to some new style QRW's with the recoil lug on them when mixed with the Nightforce base that has a slot running down the middle of it. It only lets the lug contact on the outer edges, this is why the things broke... I'd recommend using Badgers, MK4's or NF rings with a full length recoil lug in the rings, or use a base that has no slt running lengthwise in it.... these two don't mix well.

Here's the target he was zeroing it in on before the Goat hunt. He installed the QRW's he bought when the Badger Max 50's he ordered ended up being to short. This is the second set of QRW's he's broke, the others were the old style and used on the 50 BMG, these were on the 338/378Wby. The rifle weighs 17 lbs and has a Holland Quick Discharge muzzle brake on it and recoil is very little, about like a 308 win... maybe, if that. Not enough lug contact is what really caused them to bust.

I'm not sure if you can read on the target the order the shots were taken in, but I'd say after the scope was brought down a couple clicks and finally zeroed on the 5th shot, the rings broke. This gun is real accurate and should hold 1/2" groups with the 300gr SMK no trouble. The 6th shot was already climbing upward and when he shot the 7th he said what the hell! After the 8th and 9th shot he was really going what the __ck!! The scope was almost off the end of the rail at that point! He had looked after the 5th shot and the scope wasn't moving in the rings, after the 9th he looked and seen the rings had broke.

 

[Sheldon]

Attention Admins: Please Delete

Attention Admins: Please Delete

 

[dwm]

Re: Leupold QRW\'s Broke, but....

So do you guys think the Leupold PRW rings have the same problems as the QRW? I have 5 sets of PRWs on everything from a .223 to 7mm RUM with no problems so far.

Now you have me wondering if I am going to see failures like this also.

Doug

 

[Mark_in_utah]

Re: Leupold QRW\'s Broke, but....

When I got my .338 RUM I used the dual dovetail system to mount the scope. While being able to easily remove the scope is a big plus, for me once the scope is mounted I don't ever plan on taking it off again. My next big gun will have an even heavier and permanent mounting system. I've got too many other things to worry about to have to worry about my scope getting rattled loose. Too bad such a mounting system costs so much, there really isn't that much more in the heavier mounts....

I'd have to seriously question the QRW's for usability on rifles with considerable recoil after seeing your experience.

Mark in Utah

 

[Brent]

Re: Leupold QRW\'s Broke, but....

Like I said, the problem with this setup was the slot down the length of the rail not suited for this specific rings lug design, I'm not familiar with the PRW so I couldn't say. In this situation the old style QRW that just used the cross bolt as the lug, which I gave him to use are working fine until he gets the taller Badgers. Like Sheldon said, I don't recommend them in any case, they just ain't tuffff like the others mentioned. Dovetails have their major drawbacks so I don't use them either. Just thought I'd warn you all about this potentially bad combination before it bit one of you too.

Ken Farrell has released what he calls the G-Force base, it now has a recoil lug that drops over the front edge of the ejection port like the Badger and NF have had.

Ken also seems to have changed his cross slot spacing to the same as Badger and NF too. They used to be .5" and now are .4" roughly. They started with rounds slots which look like they worked great for the old style QRW's, but now are made with square slots like those from BO and NF. They all should be interchangable now, we'll see though.

Note: I didn't see the G-Force base of Kens with a 20 MOA slope... yet. I think it was in Graffs I seen them. Sinclair had a test model, but don't have any of the new G-Force design in stock.

 

[speedbump]

Re: Leupold QRW\'s Broke, but....

I had a lever shear off a set of QRWs last year. I installed a set of Badgers & haven't regretted it since. The QRW's cross bolt is a little dinky for my taste!

 

[Ian M]

Re: Leupold QRW\'s Broke, but....

Brent very clearly illustrated a problem with that scope ring design and he hit it on the head, there has been some lugs breaking.

I understand that the current production has a much larger and stronger recoil lug. The current production lugs go full width, much better and definitely should not break like the one in the images. Significantly harder steel in the lug also.

This is an example of a manufacturer improving his product when it need some improvement. Most of the older rings will not have a problem because of the reduced recoil forces from smaller calibers and lighter scopes. Unfortunately the new, bigger lugs will not fit into the older scopes since the slot is too small for them. I have used these rings for some time, and continue to do so with confidence, just nice to know that they are even better now.

These are still very good rings for the money.

 

[Brent]

Re: Leupold QRW\'s Broke, but....

I'm a little perplexed by this but, the new Sinclair catalog shows a pic of the Nightforce bases my brother was using BUT, they don't have the slot running lengthwise down them as his do, which is the only reason these failed in my opinion????

Thanks for the update Ian!

 

[chris matthews]

Re: Leupold QRW\'s Broke, but....

That's pretty much why Marty at Badger won't make a QWR, the don't return to zero and they break!

 

[dbhostler]

Re: Leupold QRW\'s Broke, but....

Just an update on QRW/PRW lug failure. I have noticed that the latest lug is larger and stronger as Ian M has mentioned and the square lug will NOT fit all the way down into a rounded slot base. This mismatch may be the reason some have failed. So it would pay to match the ring recoil lug to the slot on the style of base you are using. I have used both QRWs and PRWs on everything including an Ultra with no problems. I do think the PRWs afix to the rail stronger than the QRWs.
Good Shooting,
db