1-piece or 2-piece scope base(s)

[MinnMooney]

I just bought a new Rem. 700 .300 Win. Mag and am about to buy scope bases (or a 1-piece scope base) for it and am wondering the pros/cons of one piece and two-piece bases.

Is the 1-pc better due to being straighter and not torquing the scope so badly? Does it get in the way of the loading slot?

Are there any weaknesses to the 2-pc bases?

Note : I'll be using Burris Signature Zee rings with the floating inserts so scope torque is a non-issue.

 

[WNTFW]

I like 1 piece mounts - I shoot paper targets.
My brother likes 2 piece mounts - He is a hunter.

1 piece gets in the way of the loading slot to a degree, but so does a scope. Not a big deal, but if you wear gloves it might be. It does not make it any easier to see into the area. I have no problem with it.

My brother prefers the 2 piece for the same reasons I prefer the 1 piece. He also like mags that are not blind.

The 1 piece is suppose to be more accurate. How much I don't know.
The 1 pc 20 MOA Picatinny is my favorite.

 

[BridgeTooFar]

Ever since I used my first DNZ mount, I will never go with anything else.

One piece makes mounting nearly foolproof. The construction seems much more stout, and they look pretty decent, too. Also, they're extremely affordable when compared to Talley, etc. mounts.

I first tried one for a mount on a flat-top AR; then on a Ruger 10/22; and then I put them on both my Tikka T3 Lite's. Never had one fail me, and that's been over about a 2 year span and probably 50 or 60 range outings and hunts.

Also, their customer service is amazing. If you call, you generally get somebody that really knows these mounts on the phone. Only time I've ever had to call is when I was determining what height mount I needed for a particular scope.

Long story short, I can't recommend DNZ one piece mounts enough.

 

[Art Eatman]

As far as the one-piece base dealing with recoil, many are three-screw. Two-piece bases are thus one-third stronger in shear.

In the FWIW department, I've used two-piece bases for many a decade and never ran across any "scope torquing" that was evident to me. All I know is that they always worked okay.

Not touting them, but I've never had a problem with Weaver stuff. ('06, .264 Win Mag and 7mm Rem Mag, among other cartridges.) Conetrols are sleeker and prettier.

 

[375shooter]

I've always used 2-piece bases on my M700's. I've never had a issue with them and I like the idea of having the bases attached with 4 screws (I'm not familiar with all 1-piece bases so don't know how many are attached with 3 screws). I think they look better than a 1-piece base also.

 

[double bogey]

I used a one piece leupold on my 7mm mag rem 700 (same length as the 300 mag). I felt like it would be in the way if you were reloading in a hurry. I went to a 2 piece, it worked fine leaving the ejection port open, but the rings are further apart and there isn't a lot of room to move the scope for eye relief adjustment. Some scopes are too short. My 12 year old Nikon monarch 3X9X40 barely fits.

 

[MinnMooney]

Thanks to all for your experiances with both the 1-pc and 2-pc mounts. It sounds like both work equally well.

Art : I've used 2-pc mounts on many a rifle (most, in fact) and like you, I've never had a problem. Glad to hear you never have either. I'm going Weaver 2-pc bases on this .300 W. M.

TDooley57 : That DNZ looks like it might be worth trying. I'm building a break-open where loading problems won't be a factor....... I think I'll try one on that rifle.

 

[Red State]

Another vote here for the DNZ. Its a solid base and ring combo for $50.

When compared to a one piece picatinny rail, the DNZ allows more access to the loading port.

By the way, mine attaches to the reciever with 4 screws. I almost went with the two piece Talley mounts, but I didnt want to have to worry about lapping.

 

[BridgeTooFar]

I will try to take a pic of the ones I have mounted to show the clearance for loading. Neither the Tikka nor the 10/22 have any overlap between the mount and ejection port. It helps that both load from a detachable magazine, but even if not, the mount wouldn't really hinder dropping a round in as they both "load" and eject more from the side than from the top.

Edit: Also, on what Red State said; I think the Tikka ones I have attached with 4 screws and the 10/22 was with 3 (as that's all the holes the gun has on top IIRC).

 

[mshootnit]

I really like going with a one piece rail base like the Warne tactical, that way you don't need extension rings, it looks very nice with the right rings like Leupold PRW's and it is very rock solid and straight. I know when both rings go on easy on a straight hunk of steel that I don't have alignment issues. I have found that scope tubes end up sitting in the rings straight and easy, with no binding. I also believe that a one piece rail can help stiffen an action.

 

[627PCFan]

I use 1 piece for heavy recoiling hunting firearms. I love a Talley one piece on my T3 7mm, and use a 1 piece Leupold bases on my muzzleloader. I do use 2 piece bases with my .223 and 6.5 because I had them already but it just gives an extra something to go wrong. My advice regardless is stay away from the non-steel bases, I have seen several aluminum bases sheered from the rings because recoiling of less than 100 rounds (30-06)

 

[MCMXI]

I favor one-piece bases on any bolt action rifle regardless of whether or not it has an internal or external magazine. Picatinny rails allow for proper scope placement and optimal ring placement. If you have a Remington 700, you can buy bases that extend forward of the receiver and that have an integral recoil lug. Badger Ordnance makes excellent steel one-piece Picatinny bases and LaRue makes excellent aluminum one-piece Picatinny bases. All quality one-piece Picatinny bases for the Remington 700 are secured with four screws.

 

[BridgeTooFar]

As promised; pics to show the clearance with the DNZ mount.