[Carter]

Just ordered a Ruger american in .308 and a Redfield Revolution 4X12X40 for it. Only one question left: What are some good, affordable scope rings? I'm looking for something $40 or under hopefully.

[osprey176]

Weaver,Redfield,Leupold,and just about every other ring manufacturer makes Weaver-style rings.Stay away from the really cheap ones and you shouldn't have any problems.I like the Burris Z-Rings,but thats just my taste.

[husker]

I like see through rings, If the gun in question has iron sights.

[Carter]

No iron sights. What about ring hight? Is that personal preference or dependant upon the scope?

[red rick]

I like Talley.

[stsimons]

I have switched all my rifles to the Burris Signature Z rings with the pos-align inserts. You can adjust up to 20 MOA vertical or horizontal and you never have to worry about lapping your scope rings or messing up your scope tube by over tightening your rings. In a nutshell, you can center your reticle, move the inserts appropriately and adjust your scope to zero in just a few clicks. I have had much more expensive mounts that don't hold a candle to the Burris system.

[wrs840]

I have switched all my rifles to the Burris Signature Z rings with the pos-align inserts...

I agree wholeheartedly. These things are great. Really stable. (...and a lot of fun to monkey with to see just how close to zero you can get it with just manipulating the inserts).

[Carter]

The warne maxima rings look promising.

[ladytrapper300]

I use the Burris signature Z rings i put a set on my 300 RUM & they do a great job

[idcurrie]

What about ring hight? Is that personal preference or dependant upon the scope?

Some people like to install the scope as close to the bore as possible. This is wrong.

To determine the correct ring height, shoulder the rifle naturally with your eyes closed.

Open your eyes. That's the height you need.

[Zeke/PA]

Ring Heights?
The Objective Lens of the scope will determine this.

[Art Eatman]

idcurrie, while you're correct about proper height, from what I've seen some 99% of best height for a proper cheek weld is "as low as you can get". :) Most stocks are set up that way.

[Haxby]

Warne Maximas are rock solid. A bit heavy, and inconvenient to swap scopes or rifles, but for a rig that you're going to set up and leave alone, they're great.
Nothing wrong with the Burris rings.
Low Maximas are about the same height as Burris Zee mediums, and that is probably the height you want.

[Carter]

Thanks for the info. I think I'm going to get the warne maxima rings. Sadly, I'm not seeing any steel weaver bases to replace the stock aluminum ones that come with the rifle. Not a priority though.

Does anyone know if rugers have a problem with brown bear? I know its not the most accurate ammo, but I have a tight plinking budget.

[ArchStanton]

I third Warne Maxima. Been solid on my Savage .308.

[ArchStanton]

also, what haxby said about a permanent setup is very true. they aren't the easiest rings to install or swap out. if you've ever learned how to torque the lugs on a car wheel, use the same principle. alternate sides when tightening to get good torque.

[goalie]

I have switched all my rifles to the Burris Signature Z rings with the pos-align inserts. You can adjust up to 20 MOA vertical or horizontal and you never have to worry about lapping your scope rings or messing up your scope tube by over tightening your rings. In a nutshell, you can center your reticle, move the inserts appropriately and adjust your scope to zero in just a few clicks. I have had much more expensive mounts that don't hold a candle to the Burris system.

I don't have them on all my rifles, but I think they are great for hunting rifles, especially if you don't want to spend a lot. I also really like the DNZ Game Reaper's and Talley Lightweights. Any of the major-brand rings are going to get the job done if you mount them in-spec. The Burris ones just allow you to make adjustments with the insert, allowing you to have the full range of adjustment still available to use in the scope.

[idcurrie]

idcurrie, while you're correct about proper height, from what I've seen some 99% of best height for a proper cheek weld is "as low as you can get". Most stocks are set up that way.

Thank you for your comment.

I respectfully disagree.

I find that stock which have a traditional comb such as, say, the Ruger 10/22 and which are set up to align to the eye with iron sights work very well with low rings.

In all other stock designs such as straight comb, monte carlo, etc in my experience medium seems to be the most suitable.

While fitting scopes I have noted that people who want the scope as low as possible and who then perform the exercise outlined above report that there is a black half moon in the scope. In other words, their eye naturally opens higher than the center of the ocular plane with low rings.

I do find, however, that when you replace the stock on the aforementioned 10/22 with an aftermarket one with a straight comb, the user typically finds the scope no longer naturally lines up with the eye and the installation of medium rings is necessary.

All of this simply re-enforces that the height of the scope should be based on the natural shouldering of the rifle for the shooter in question and should NOT be based primarily, on the size of the objective bell.

[urbaneruralite]

DNZ Game Reapers are easier to use and as strong or stronger than any mount you'll find with a price appropriate for the rifle and scope.

[Hunterdad]

I've changed all my rings over to weaver quad-locks. I love them and they're pretty inexpensive.