I currently have the regular old standard Leupold rings and base on a 338 Edge with a Leupold 6.5-20x50 LR. I know there are nicer(stronger) mounts on the market but my question is has anybody ever changed out to one of the stronger mounts and it showed up on the target and longer ranges. The rifle has a 4 port brake but, as some of you know, it still has a fair amount of recoil. Bottom line is... will I benefit from switching to a beefier mount
The recoil which affects a rifles cope is very different from the recoil you feel on your shoulder.
For your shoulder the total momentum and energy of the rifle (including the scope) is what you have to control. because. The typical rifle only moves about 1/10 of an inch while the bullet traverses the barrel (in 1 to 2 milliseconds).Most of the crushing of flesh against your shoulder and your body moving back with recoil takes place later. The effect of a muzzle brake only begins after the bullet exits the bore. Then the mass times velocity of the propellant gasses which normally would provide more rearward acceleration of the rifle are reversed or at least deflected and reduce. The net result is the rifle accelerates less or even decelerates some in the millisecond after the bullet exits the bore. That reduces felt recoil.
The scope however is firmly attached to the receiver. As the bullet accelerates down the bore it is pulled along with the rifle rearward. The peak acceleration of the scope occurs at the same time as the peak acceleration of the bullet which is at the time of peak chamber pressure. That typically occurs under a millisecond after the time of ignition. (several milliseconds after sear release) . If the rifle has a brake there will be a second acceleration of the scope immediately after the bullet clears the crown. With an efficient brake that will be in the opposite direction of the initial acceleration and delayed by typically two milliseconds.
So what does all that mean. Not much, except that a brake doesn't reduce the stress on a scope, rings, and scope base and may make it worse.
Will "better" rings and bases improve accuracy? Aiming is completed at the point where combustion starts. A human has no ability process anything they see though a scope and correct for it in the two milliseconds the bullet is in the bore after ignition, so vibration of the scope under recoil makes no difference. Poor quality rings only make difference if something changes mechanically under the stress of firing and remains changed for the next shot. That change could be slipping between receiver and base, base and rings or base and scope. All of those components change temperature and all of the temperatures change with each shot. Aluminum has 2-3 time more expansion with temperature than steel. The "normal" two mount arrangement is fairly insensitive to changing alignmet with temperature if the heat flow is equal to both rings and if the surfaces fit well and don't tilt with temperarure or force. Of couse if the rings or base or scope tube bends enough to permanently deform all bets are off. But if a set of cheap rings are good enough to NOT move or deform then fancier or more expensive components probably won't make a detectable difference in accuracy.
Scope problems are more easily detected by shooting at short ranges. The only reason for long range to show up scope problems more is that higher recoil rifles are commonly used. Again, it's peak acceleration which damages scopes and their mounts, not the total recoil momentum or energy. Also being dropped a couple of feet on a hard surface produces higher peak acceleration than firing any cartridge, including a 50 BMG.
