[FL_Hunter]

Hello all
I just got a Rem 700 (used) and it came with the Leupold one piece base like the pic, also the 700 has iron sites.

I would like to put on the scope and have a few Q's about rings and their +vs-:

a- standard rings on the one piece base; (+ favored by many), (- no iron sights)
b- remove the 1 piece base and get the see thru rings, (+ ability to see iron sights), (- is I think it is too high.)
c- is there some kind of cushion to go between the rings and the scope to prevent marring the scope?

I know you experienced guys give great advice.

Thanks in advance

[cal74]

Forget about the see through mounts, they SUCK and there's such a slim chance of your scope failing anymore (if you have a quality scope)

The one peace base is pretty decent in the pic, some people do not like the windage adjustable part in the back though, personally I've never had one loosen up though.

I've been switching over to Leupold Dual Dovetail bases myself and have recently started using the Burris Signature Rings. They come with plastic inserts that theoretically you can zero your scope with, or gain some elevation for longer range rigs. Added benefit that they do not mar the scope.

If I'm not using Signature rings I lap my rings to give them more baring surface on the scope and it also helps eliminate any marks. Before mounting I apply a fine layer of rubber cement to the rings, which not only helps grip them a little bit but also also helps prevent ring marks.


I've never had a scope slip and any ring marks I've ever had are very very minor. Another things is to NOT over tighten the rings down. Don't use the long leverage part of the allen wrench on the scope rings, you want something like 15 ft/lbs (not very much)

[FL_Hunter]

Thanks for your advice cal74. My scope is a Leupold Rifleman.
I like the plastic rings but does it fit under the standard rings?
Also can you recommend a good rubber cement that will be less pain to remove should the need arise.

[batex]

I would recommend that you do not use the see thru mounts. You will likely never need to use iron sights if you buy a good quality scope and use a good quality mounting system. Also, the see thru's will surely raise the scope higher than it should be. The old rule of thumb is to spend on the scope at least what you spent on the gun.

[Uncle Mike]

Pretty sound advice so far, ditch the see-thrus and NEVER entertain that nightmare! hehehe

And the rubber cement...uh, NO! Not needed.

That standard, one piece base you picture will work just fine, use quality rings, and the dents in your scopes tube will be minimal to nonexistent!

Burris has their Signature rings that utilize polymer inserts, they do work, however they are a real pain to index just right, but it can be done with some fuss. I have a thing about plastic bushings holding my scope during rapid and extreme temperature changes....I don't like it! Burris says there is no problem, and I have never seen any problem with the Signature rings, but....

[FL_Hunter]

see thru = out the window.

Looking at the Leupold Standard rings pictured, good reviews on Midway for those...

Or should I look at the quick release model ?

[dakotasin]

those are the ones you want.

if you have a shop locally, take it in there and get the proper ring fit - i like to use the lowest rings i can possibly use. if you just want/have to order from midway, you need 1" mediums.

[FL_Hunter]

you mention mediums, would the low ones clear the iron sites?

[dakotasin]

well, if the irons are directly under the scope, then no. if they are out in front of the bell, probably - but you may get interference from the bell on the barrel.

i usually remove iron sights from my rifles if i'm going to scope them, so i can't tell you off the top of my head for sure. i can tell you i have iron sights on a ruger 77 and its sights are out in front of the scope, so i do not have clearance problems there.

[OYE]

Well, the base you have is great. I prefer the same style in a 2 piece base as Leupold
offers reversible bases as an option. I prefer the scope mounted back farther than most
people and that model will allow that even with the smaller 2 x 7 variable scopes.
As far as mounting procedure, I locktite the base screws and use a tiny bit of rosin on the inside of the rings (lapped if needed). Have carried this setup with Leupold scopes on horseback
for longer than I care to think and they have never shifted. I do check the ring screws each year. I must say that I also carried a 2.5 power Lyman Alaskan with Griffin and Howe side mounts (with the quick release levers) for a few years without problems as well, and occasionally still do. Leupold does offer something similar in quick release in 2 different models ( I would tend to avoid the model offered in the Weaver style base). They may interfere with open sights. I have no personal experience with that model, and I would discuss that with Leupold and do quite a bit of research before using it. Griffin and Howe is still in business and still offers the quick release side mounts. A very expensive option to be sure. There aren't
many options if you wish to retain use of your iron sights. You are definitely on the right track with the style base you have. The dual dovetails may be better, but I'm reluctant
to give up a system that has never failed in my usage.

Leupold has another mounting system called LX that may be worth looking into. I do use see thru mounts on one .22 rimfire as I like to use open sights often on that gun. I'm not sure how well the see thru rings are made, either . I would certainly discuss that issue with Leupold, if you don't find the height objectionable. Best

[OYE]

I was curious about these mounts as well, so I talked to Leupold today. The LX system was discontinued about a year ago. The tech guy said the see thru mounts are not as strong as the STD mounts and are about 3/4 in. taller than STD mounts with high rings.
The QR mounts are about 1/4 inch thick with the scope and rings removed. They may or may not allow use of iron sights. Depends on how high the iron sights are, and whether the iron sights interfered with the scope mounting (size of scope bell, etc...)

As far as strength, they rate them :

1) Dual dovetail

2) QR System

3) STD mounts

[FL_Hunter]

Thanks all for the great info and advice.

I went out and got the Low mounts and the plan is to remove the iron sights.

However I have another newbee question; the base looks like it is short on the rifle; see attached. Is this how it should be? or should I replace the base?

[dakotasin]

its ok - many of the 1-piece designs only use 3 screws.

i am not a fan of 1-piece designs, and you can see why - they are just generally not aesthetically pleasing to me, but they are functional.

[OYE]

I would agree. It's fine. For my own info, are your iron sights usable with the mount sitting on the receiver ?

[Uncle Mike]

You have a 'short' action base on a long action rifle.

It'll work, but as inexpensive as those bases are, why not use the correct one....?

If you get the right Leupold base, it will look great on your rifle, the correct base will align with your rifles receiver port.

Remove your rear sight if your not going to use it, install 'plug' screws in the holes, and while your at it, the front sight can leave also.

[lefteyedom]

Instead of worry about using iron sights as a backup carry a second scope. I started doing this after a Burris 2X7 fail on me. I mounted up a fix 4 power scope with matching rings and zero it in. That backup scope stays in the camper, worse case if the scopes fails (drop on a rock, step on by a horse, hit by lighting) a hike back to camp and 10 minutes later I am hunting again.

One of the advantage of a weaver style mounting system. There are others that will work as well.

[FL_Hunter]

You have a 'short' action base on a long action rifle.

It'll work, but as inexpensive as those bases are, why not use the correct one....?

If you get the right Leupold base, it will look great on your rifle, the correct base will align with your rifles receiver port.

Remove your rear sight if your not going to use it, install 'plug' screws in the holes, and while your at it, the front sight can leave also.

That is what I figured SA on a LA gun!
I plan to replace it and get the dual dovetail 2 piece base.

Removing the sights, front and back, are also part of the plan. I was at Basspro yesterday and was inquiring how to cover the sights' screw holes and the guy looked at me and said never mind the small holes! :eek:
screw plugs sounds good.

[OYE]

The holes shouldn't line up if it is for a short action. I don't like one piece bases either.

Hole spacing Rem 700 receivers ( Note #1 is at rear of receiver)

SHORT ACTION
1st to 2nd hole - .600, 1st to 3rd hole - 4.230, 1st to 4th hole - 5.090

LONG ACTION
1st to 2nd hole - .600 1st to 3rd hole - 5.085 1st to 4th hole - 5.945

[Idempotent]

For what it's worth, I used a two piece set of Warne Maxima Warner-style (low) rings and bases to mount my Leupold Mark 4 scope to my Remington 700 5R. I had no problems. Anything else would've been too high. The lower your scope over the barrel, the better. The main problem I see with a lot of those one-piece mounting systems, and especially the Picatinny rail tactical-style ones, is that they add so much height.

[OYE]

"For what it's worth, I used a two piece set of Warne Maxima Warner-style (low) rings and bases to mount my Leupold Mark 4 scope to my Remington 700 5R. I had no problems. Anything else would've been too high. The lower your scope over the barrel, the better. The main problem I see with a lot of those one-piece mounting systems, and especially the Picatinny rail tactical-style ones, is that they add so much height. "

Yes . Most of the mounting systems work o.k. until we start talking about horseback travel. The vibration is terrific and constant. The solid ring/base combos work. The
STD Redfield/ Leupold style front Dovetails work, the Griffin and Howe sidemounts work. Leupold says the Dual dovetail and QR system will work as well. ( I don't know on the latter two and I will not comment on those.) Personally I would not use any other type mount for horseback travel. It takes a good quality scope to hold up as well.

[Idempotent]

Horseback? I don't think the OP mentioned that as being one of his qualifications? It's not one of mine, that's for certain ..

[SSN Vet]

I have a very similar one piece base on my Savage-14

I know for sure that I have the correct base for the rifle

it looks just like that.... and only three screws are used.

it's not going anywhere.

I put a small piece of electical tape inside my rings and they have never marked my scope, which has now been on a couple different rifles.

[FL_Hunter]

I would agree. It's fine. For my own info, are your iron sights usable with the mount sitting on the receiver ?
with the current 1 piece base; yes, they are.

[OYE]

" with the current 1 piece base; yes, they are "

Hey thanks.

"Horseback? I don't think the OP mentioned that as being one of his qualifications? It's not one of mine, that's for certain .. "

And you are absolutely correct. And it's a good thing it's not one of your criteria. I could most certainly have let him find that out on his own. But I hated to see him have to learn the hard way.

[Uncle Mike]

The dual Dovetail bases from Leupold, Burris and Redfield will be fine. The Leupold bases are the best looking....

Anyone should know the advice you get from the majority of Bass Pro, Cabela's and Gander Mountain big box stores will be flawed at best, often times we'll stop by the local Bass Pro or Gander and just quietly listen to the nonsense the firearm employees are downloading on the customers, pretty funny, like being at the circus!

No, I'm not saying ALL employees of these fine establishments firearm departments are full of it, some are quite knowledgeable, but then again, some are full of it!

Plug the sight base holes, after a few seasons of dirt and water residing in the holes, rust will rear its ugly head, you know, rust never sleeps!

Try this....http://spinstage.http.internapcdn.net/Spinstage/userdocs/products/p_080716648_1.jpg


...........www.brownells.com/.aspx/pid=792/Product/PLUG_SCREW_KIT

[FL_Hunter]

The dual Dovetail bases from Leupold, Burris and Redfield will be fine. The Leupold bases are the best looking....

Anyone should know the advice you get from the majority of Bass Pro, Cabela's and Gander Mountain big box stores will be flawed at best, often times we'll stop by the local Bass Pro or Gander and just quietly listen to the nonsense the firearm employees are downloading on the customers, pretty funny, like being at the circus!

No, I'm not saying ALL employees of these fine establishments firearm departments are full of it, some are quite knowledgeable, but then again, some are full of it!

Plug the sight base holes, after a few seasons of dirt and water residing in the holes, rust will rear its ugly head, you know, rust never sleeps!

Try this....http://spinstage.http.internapcdn.net/Spinstage/userdocs/products/p_080716648_1.jpg


...........www.brownells.com/.aspx/pid=792/Product/PLUG_SCREW_KIT

Thanks for the great advice, I absolutely agree with you about rust. After snooping around, I learned that the size is 6-48 screws, midway pack of ten can be found here (http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productnumber=835122).

[Maverick223]

Or should I look at the quick release model ?If you can justify the additional cost for BUIS, absolutely. For me it greatly depends upon the intended purpose. I put QR style rings/mounts on rifles for DG and/or important tasks (expensive hunts). If either is a possibility for you, then I would recommend doing likewise; but if not it might not be worth the added expense. Despite my distaste for Leupold optics, I have used many of their mounting products to great success (but I can say likewise for Burris [including Signature rings], Warne, Weaver, Dednutz, and many others). In particular I like the dual dovetail version, if going with fixed mounts, and two pc. mounts for most any rifle that isn't destined for long range precision work.

:)

[FL_Hunter]

Ok guys, took the sights off, both front and rear, also took the 1 piece base off.

Getting the rifle ready for the dual dovetail base and low rings. (I was hoping for the superlow rings, but when tested my scope on this base with a set of low rings I have; the scope bell is about 1/4" from the barrel = any closer would be too close for comfort.)

All advice is really appreciated.

And FWIIW, this is a Long Action base, see marking in pic.

[Maverick223]

Good choice, though you probably could have went a size lower if you have 0.25in. clearance. The only important thing to keep in mind is a good cheek weld, if the rings you chose provide this (and they likely do), then you are good to go.

:)

[FL_Hunter]

Do you advise the use of Thread locker?
Looking at Loctite 222MS (Purple, Low Strength/Small Screw thread locker).
Or Locktite 242 or 248,
Anyone used any of these?

[Uncle Mike]

NO THREAD LOCKER!

IF you must use it too sleep at night, use the Purple(222MS) or at the least, use the blue(242).

IF you properly torque the base screws, they will not come loose, however, if the rifle is used, you may want to use the thread locker as who knows if the threads were 'pulled' in the receiver due to over-torque by the previous owner.

The ring caps should never have thread locker use on their screws, unless you feel the threads are damaged, just keep in mind that small screws and thread locker sometimes become one!

My question is...why do you feel 1/4" or less is too close to the barrel for the objective bell?

0.100" is good, as long as you can do what you want, like put on covers, or whatever....a correct cheekweld is more important than anything else!

[jimmyraythomason]

NO THREAD LOCKER!
Why? Always use blue Lok-tite on all mounting threads. Clean holes and screws with alcohol and use a couple of drops per fastener. I use it on all of my scope mounts and rings and am very happy with the results ie; no loosening screws or shifting scopes and ease of removal when ready. Torque drivers are good but not necessary. I mount all of my scopes low-over-bore and consider a 1/4" gap between barrel and scope as wide.

[JDGray]

15 ft/lbs
:eek: I realize you meant 15 inch/pounds, but others might not know that:)

[Maverick223]

Why? Always use blue Lok-tite on all mounting threads.It is often too easy to strip those small fasteners when you use LocTite. Personally I ride somewhere in the middle; I often use blue thread-locker on the mounting screws (depending upon the rifle), but NEVER on the rings. Those tiny fasteners are just too dang easy to strip, or worse shear off completely.

:)

[jimmyraythomason]

Those tiny fasteners are just too dang easy to strip, or worse shear off completely.

I'm constantly changing scopes around and haven't had it happen yet. Until it does (IF it does) I'll continue using my technique. It has work flawlessly all these many years. I started doing it when my scope kept loosening up on my Rem.Model 700ADL in 30.06. Haven't had a problem since.

[FL_Hunter]

It is often too easy to strip those small fasteners when you use LocTite. Personally I ride somewhere in the middle; I often use blue thread-locker on the mounting screws (depending upon the rifle), but NEVER on the rings. Those tiny fasteners are just too dang easy to strip, or worse shear off completely.

:)
Both screws, mounting and rings, are the same size; at least in this case anyways.

I am concerned with recoil, it is a 7mm MAG, however I am no expert so what do you guys think?

[Maverick223]

Both screws, mounting and rings, are the same size; at least in this case anyways.True, but that isn't always the case, and the mounts aren't typically removed (I tend to move around scopes, not mounts unless I have a problem).

:)

[jimmyraythomason]

I would never put a steel screw into an aluminum mount dry. If nothing else,a little anti-seize and tighten to the max torque.