Quick release rings?

[sam700]

In another forum a month or so ago I mentioned that I was looking to install some open sights on my Kimber Montana to backup my scope in case of some unlikely failure. The reason is that I usually hunt too far from my car to make a second rifle in the trunk practical and I’d hate to end my hunt because I dropped my gun and broke a scope.

I asked a gunsmith about the possibility of installing open sights on my rifle and he recommended against it stating that because of the extremely thin profile of the Montana barrel, installing a sight on the end of the barrel would almost certainly effect accuracy.

I’m now thinking about switching to quick release rings and a second scope may be the way to go. Right now, I have a 4.5-14 VXIII, which is great for long shots, but a bit much for brush so I’m thinking that with a 1.5-5 power I could also expand the capabilities of the gun in addition to having a backup.

I was looking at one of three different kinds or quick release rings, but feel free to suggest others.

1. The Leupold QR rings

2. The Leupold LX mounting system, I think this one is pretty new

3. Warne QD system.

Right now I’m trying to decide which type of quick release mount would work the best for me. The most important issue is that the rings hold a zero. The gun is a .300 mag so it does have some kick. If there are any issues with quick release rings not holding a zero as well as well, then I will stick with my standard rings.

I’m also looking for it to get as close as possible to the original zero when the scope is replaced.

I’m trying to keep the gun light, so weight is an issue.

I realize I’m asking a lot from these mounts, but I am willing to save up to get the best quality mounts available. Any personal experience with these mounts would be appreciated.

 

[ArmedBear]

I can vouch for the Warne QD system.

I can take the scope off my gun for maintenance, put it back on, and it shoots to POA. The rings are guaranteed to 1 MOA, but in my experience, they're a good deal better. I'd have no qualms about sighting in two scopes and carrying one in a backpack as a spare.

For reference, I have Warne bases and Warne QD rings on a Weatherby Vanguard Sporter in .30-06, with a Burris Fullfield II 3-9X40 scope.

The Warnes are Weaver-style bases and rings that fit snugly before you tighten them. Simple, solid system.

 

[86thecat]

If you want good return to zero when reinstalling QD rings be sure to lap the rings so there is no stress.

 

[sam700]

Didn't know that, is that something a gunsmith should do?

 

[Safwan]

Have Leupold QR mounts on both my rifles (22-250 and .243).if they lose any zero when taken off and replaced i havn't noticed. The reason i have them is because i need all the room i can get in my gun cabinets!

 

[planetmobius]

You might want to look at some of the QD rings and bases offered by Talley Manufacturing. I have then on two rifles and couldn't ask for more. I put them on right out of the box and can take them on and off all day while maintaining zero. They are offered with either levers or screws. I chose levers just so I didn't have to keep a tool handy. They are vere precisely machined steel with a great finish. The only issue, if its an issue at all, is that when you spin them off you have to be sure to hold the scope and rifle at all times. When the rings release from the mounts, the scope will spontaneously dropp off the rifle.

 

[noydb]

+1 on all the brands listed above. I myself will never again use the Burris QD rings, they do not have a good contact point to the slot in the weaver base. The Leupolds are rock solid. And some folks swear you can beat on the Warnes with a hammer. I have never heard a discouraging word about the Talleys either.

Another option, Traditions makes a version that is almost a clone of the Leupolds for half the price. Steel and just as stout. But they don't have them on their web site, you have to call them. Part #s A891DSQ med A893DSQ high matte black.

When mounting to the base hold them tight against the back of the slot as you tighten them down. Then lap them or have them lapped by a gunsmith. When it's time to put them back on after removal, hold the gun with the muzzle slightly elevated and they'll sit flush with the rear of the slot again and you're good to go. I'm probably a little bit more anal about it than some. But I can testify that this works. You really can have a spare scope that you can mount in 10 seconds or so.

 

[Cocked & Locked]

When mounting to the base hold them tight against the back of the slot as you tighten them down.

Interesting concept. The instructions with the Warne Quick Detachable rings say the opposite:

...slide ring forward so the recoil lug is contacting the front of the cross slot in the base. To remount the scope, slide rings and scope forward until the recoil lug contacts the front of the base slot and tighten the rings

 

[ArmedBear]

WRT lapping, that was not an issue on my rifle. It also was on paper at 100 yards when I just screwed everything together and set the scope on 0:0

I'm guessing that, with modern machining techniques, things can line up extremely well out of the box. Depends on how the receiver was built, and how it was drilled and tapped, I suppose. But the rings and bases from Warne did not appear to add any error to the equation. They came out of the box perfect and close-tolerance.

 

[0007]

Normal way is to mount the ring against the forward edge of the base groove. The recoil of the rifle tends to (try to) move base to the rear as the recoil moves the rifle. By mounting the ring against the forward edge of the base-slot, the ring can't try to shift forward as rifle/base moves to the rear.

 

[ArmedBear]

The tolerance of my Warnes is such that I haven't paid much attention to front-vs.-back. They don't seem to budge forward or back, when I try to jiggle them along the barrel axis (I was curious about that when I started using them).

 

[noydb]

Whoops, my bad!!!!! Brain fart. It was 04:00 and the alcohol hadn't worn off and the drugs hadn't kicked in.