scope ring design: which is "better"?

I do like vertically split rings for rimfire mounts as they pretty much can be used for 3/8" or 11mm grooved receivers.

Otherwise, I prefer mostly horizontally split rings.

Verticals look better to me, especially on slimmer guns like rimfire and levers. Horizontals are vastly easier to install/mount. Seems like on higher mounts, the horizontals have less metal and bulk to them.

I'm out on any rings of any style that have thumbscrews or nuts you tighten them down with.

I find it easier to get horizontal rings mounted properly. Either work, but I prefer simple designs.

all I can say is stay away from Nikon vertical rings. I purchased a set for my rimfire and the screws and rings were so soft. the screw began cross threading about 3/4 the way in and when I tried backing it out it stripped. I then tried an ez out and it just kept cutting the soft metal. I like the horizontal rings better and they will always be burris steel rings. steel screws all the way around with a torx head and they are built like tanks. all one piece construction also.

Col. Harrumph said:

Never minding the make

Click to expand...

but since you brought it up I like Warnes

I didn't cast a vote because neither is better than the other. Horizontal are easier to mount in some ways, vertical in others. I prefer Warne but it doesn't make them better than good quality horizontal rings. The reason I prefer vertical is the scope is less less likely to rotate when you are tightening the screws.

For me the most difficult rings to mount are Weaver because there are only screws on one side with a flange on the other. As such the scope always wants to turn when tightening the two screws(at least for me). Once you get them on though I've never seen them fail.

cdb1 said:

For me the most difficult rings to mount are Weaver because there are only screws on one side with a flange on the other. As such the scope always wants to turn when tightening the two screws(at least for me). Once you get them on though I've never seen them fail.

Click to expand...

This has been my experience as well.
I REALLY like the old weaver steel saddle rings, but i just assume my scope wont be strait up and down (well less so than usual) after installing and tightening them.

I like the look of vertically split rings, but have none. In horizontals, ive got everything from 5 dollar tascos to a couple sets of Talleys, and a DNZ, both of which i really like, tho i wish the DNZ had less meat on the rings them selves.

Horizontals -

greyling22 said:

Horizontals are vastly easier to install/mount.

Click to expand...

cdb1 said:

For me the most difficult rings to mount are Weaver because there are only screws on one side with a flange on the other. As such the scope always wants to turn when tightening the two screws(at least for me). Once you get them on though I've never seen them fail.

Click to expand...

I agree. Better also, if the scope needs shims to zero.

Vertical split may appear tight on the base mount, but are not. The ring has tightened on the scope instead. Seems to be a problem for new shooters doing there own install.

I've never shimmed rings, only bases. Again either way is right, no wrong.

weaver makes rings with two seperate straps on each ring(horizontals) and keeping the retical centered (not canted) is no problem. eastbank.

True, I was strictly talking about the original design.

i know what you mean and it was a pain keeping the retical centered with the two on one side. i mounted a 2.5x leupold scope on my turkey shotgun with the new weaver rings and it has not moved in two seasons of shooting 3" magnums out of a winchester 1300 turkey shotgun. eastbank.

eastbank said:

weaver makes rings with two seperate straps on each ring(horizontals) and keeping the retical centered (not canted) is no problem. eastbank.

Click to expand...

for cheap rings, these are my favorites. Im slowly replacing them with talleys, 3 plate lunches equals a new set of rings, and i like to eat....so those weavers will be around for a while.

243winxb said:

Vertical split may appear tight on the base mount, but are not. The ring has tightened on the scope instead. Seems to be a problem for new shooters doing there own install.

Click to expand...

From what ive read from time to time on the weebz many folks tighten vertically split rings top down it seems. Ive also personally seen a buddy of mine do that TWICE in the same day.

Horizontal with 6 screw mounts. Biased as I've only used horizontal splits with 6 hole tops, but I've never had a errors related to rings, and I stick with what I know and what works for me.

LoonWulf said:

From what ive read from time to time on the weebz many folks tighten vertically split rings top down it seems. Ive also personally seen a buddy of mine do that TWICE in the same day.

Click to expand...

I've never done that, probably a miracle I haven't. I have a propensity for doing such things.

Yeah in a way it makes sense.

The buddy who I watched do it also put the trigger spring for his ar in backwards twice and argued with me about it. Among other things......
So he might be a bad example.

Of course I like to lip-sync Romanian pop songs, you are in to cat juggling, horsey300 is president of the Peter Tork fan club and chicharrones is making a documentary on drunk driving titled, "Shaken not Swerved". So who are we to talk.

Well rounded and experienced group I say!


You know you just made me Google all that, and now in watching The Jerk......

Cool Beans.