Tikka Warne scope mounts

[JMack]

Anyone ever used these mounts I like the idea of the recoil "pin" that "locks" into the receiver on the front ring. This is on a magnum cartridge rifle. The Warnes are a few ounces heavier but I would rather sacrifice a few ounces for something a little stronger.

Or any other recommendations?

 

[Csafisher]

I have a set of warnes for a picatinny mount. They are solid. No issues. Also have a set for my cz455. They are solid as well. Good as nightforce or other $200 rings sets? Prolly not. But I think they will hold up great

 

[jreagle]

I have the warne tikka mounts on my T3 30-06. They are solid so far after a few hundred rounds through the rifle at the range.
I like to keep things simple, the fewer parts and screws the better. The warne rings checked the box for me.

 

[just country]

Morning, I use warne STEEL rings and mounts for years. have never
had a problem. very strong. I have several pair of the quick change
on certain rifles!!! justme gbot tum

 

[jaybo]

I've had problems with the factory rings on Tikka and Sako. I replace all of mine with the light weight Talley and have been happy with them.

 

[JMack]

I'm using the Talley's now. Was just wanting something a little more robust that utilizes the recoil pin into the receiver. Was also thinking about maybe a rail, never had one on a bolt action rifle....are there advantages to it vs standard ring base system?

 

[jaybo]

I use the light weight aluminum rings that use screws to anchor them to the rail. I was having issues with one of my Sakos using the factory rings and a gunsmith told me he has seen quite a few issues with the factory rings and recommended the Tally mounts. He did use different ones that I use now but the ones he put on my 308 Sako Finnlight are still on it. The Sakos have a tapered rail and he used base mounts and then the rings attached to the base. I use the base and ring combined which screws into the existing holes of the Tikka. This is what I use on a Tikka T3 300WM shooting 200 grain bullets that kick like a mule. No issues so far with about 250 rounds.

 

[archp625]

Ten years ago I after I graduated college I starting buying my own guns. I went to Cabelas and picked up some Warne Maxima bases because that's about all they had at the time. It was for a Tikka T3 .270 Win. Since then I have purchased 3 other sets of there rings and haven't looked back. They are really nice and solid. Like someone said. They might be a little bit heavier than others but I can deal with a few extra oz.

 

[JMack]

Ten years ago I after I graduated college I starting buying my own guns. I went to Cabelas and picked up some Warne Maxima bases because that's about all they had at the time. It was for a Tikka T3 .270 Win. Since then I have purchased 3 other sets of there rings and haven't looked back. They are really nice and solid. Like someone said. They might be a little bit heavier than others but I can deal with a few extra oz.

I agree. I can deal with 3 more oz they look rock solid.

 

[Hand Skills]

I really like the rings Warne designed for the Tikka platform. I do not like the Maxima (vertically split) design. I think vertically split rings are dumb because I have to install a separate base. If I'm going through that trouble, I want rings I can remove from the mounts without having to take the scope out of the rings.... I'd rather run weaver!!

I have a few sets of Talleys (the 'one piece', not vertically split) for my tikka, the only problem I've had is with low 25mm rings - depending on the scope, the ocular housing may not clear the 'base'. Leupolds all seem to fit though.

The Warne design for tikka eliminates this possibility. I chose to scallop the talley base to resolve the issue, but if I were starting fresh I'd go with the Warne one piece (not maxima) for this reason.

It's problematic that Warne and Tikka both have multiple current designs, some very similar.

On open receivers (like a model 70 or 700) I have developed a preference for rails, or true one piece mounts (near alphahunter or DNZ). They guarantee alignment and simplify bedding (sometimes required to maintain that alignment under torque). However on a milled, flat top receiver like the Tikka (T3 I assume), I don't see a point. In that context I want the most direct, fewest parts connection between receiver and scope. Love some of the new receivers that are coming out with the integral rail.

Picatinny rails have been useful to me when sharing an optic between rifles, but it only works if all the rifles have rails..! Really nice for swapping optics in and out. I have used various styles - picatinny, weaver, proprietary 'QR' quick release. Levers, thumb screws, hexagonal bolts... By far my favorite rings of this type are made by Seekins. Vortex repackages them and markets the same product as 'vortex precision matched'. Great rings. Not only are they the lowest profile, Seekins (or perhaps NEAR) are manufactured to the tightest tolerances which makes them the most repeatable and reliable.

The other advantages are, you can pin a rail into the receiver (some come drilled, or you can drill yourself) and you can retorque it without taking the scope out of the rings. While most of the ring failures I have encountered have been rings themselves coming loose (Either the scope tube in a ring, or the ring to base connection), i wouldn't discount this type of maintenance under hard use.

Rails can also be of benifet if a canted base is required for shooting really far, or if you have a secondary/backup/supplemental optic.

 

[cheechin]

Tikka will come with scope mounts. Also it has an integral dovetail on the receiver to install them. Rememeber you don't have to be a gorilla grip to install rings and mounts. That is where most mount or scope damage/failure comes from - too much over tightening. Some guys don't like the Tikka rings but I have mine on my 30-06 for a few years now on a Burris Fullfield scope and have no problems with them.