Savage 10FP - which rings and bases?

[dave3006]

I am going to buy a Savage 10FP in .308 and use a Bushnell Elite 3200 10X scope. This is a pretty lost cost setup. I would like to chose a good solid mounting system without spending a fortune. I am not much of a bolt gunner yet.

Which rings and bases do I chose?

 

[dakotasin]

for short to mid-range shooting (sounds like you), i would reccomend the leupold 2-piece std bases, and go w/ a leupold std ring.

second choice would be warne 2-piece bases, and warne rings (permanent attach, or 'pa'). this set up doesn't have the 'sex appeal' of the leupold set up, but it is rock solid, too.

once you get to where you want to explore the outer limits of your rifle's effective range, we'll talk badger, nightforce, and farrel xx moa bases...

 

[nipprdog]

heres some ideas..

http://glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=211222

I recently switched my millet rings for Warne rings.

 

[ocabj]

I have a Savage 10FP with a Bushnell Elite 3200 10x Mildot. I have the Ken Farrell base (0MOA) and Burris Signature Zee rings (mediums).

 

[tcdrennen]

I went with a Badger Ordnance Picatinny rail from Midway - just didn't want to take a chance with something generic and thought the one piece might be more versatile. The Leupold bases are probably fine, though- and the Badger IS pricey.

For rings I went with Leupold medium height QD 30mm. Needed the extra height for the 6-20x56 Springfield Armory MilDot I'm using. Eye relief and height above comb are good, I may add a cheek pad later if I don't swap out the whole stock (which seems fine, so far, but see below.)

Took the scope off my M1A, which now has a 3x Compact ACOG I found at SWFA.

So far, I've been very pleased with both combos, but haven't done groups with the Savage yet - just checked it on gongs at 100, 200 and 300 yards; extremely consistent, but the gongs are about 12" across so who knows what the grouping is like.

I'll do some group shots this Friday and "shoot the square", etc. The results will determine the future of the stock, as I'm aware of reports that the factory stock isn't as stable as it could be.

If I remember to bring the camera I'll post some photos.

 

[JohnMc]

FWIW, I went with Burris bases and Signature Rings for my Savage. They're strong and the insert system eliminates any lapping you may need to do.

 

[dave3006]

Ocabj, that is a nice setup. Is there a reason to go with medium rings instead of low ones?

Thanks,
Dave

 

[ojibweindian]

Ocabj, that is a nice setup. Is there a reason to go with medium rings instead of low ones?

I have a possible answer for that. My Winchester sports high rings because low and, for that matter, medium rings force me into an uncomfortable shooting position. Maybe the low rings, for Ocabj, forces him to assume an uncomfortable shooting position.

 

[Soap]

I like as low as possible provided that the rings are high enough to not have the objective hit the barrel. YMMV of course.

 

[ocabj]

Ocabj, that is a nice setup. Is there a reason to go with medium rings instead of low ones?

I didn't really do measurements before I bought the rings, so I guess I could have went with low rings, but I'm not sure if the objective would be hitting the barrel. Also, the bolt runs close enough to the scope, and low rings could make it too close.

Cheekweld is perfect for me with the mediums. If I had went with the low rings, it wouldn't be optimal for me.

If you look at the specs on the Signature Zee mediums and compare it to the lows of other manufacturers, I think they match up as far as ring height.

 

[Master Blaster]

How about a simple pair of weaver bases, either the original or some steel clones? They are simple inexpensive and they work. I used Millet rings after my leupold fiasco and they are working just fine.

I had a leupold one piece and standard rings on my 10fpLE1 and it would not stay put the front screws were too short but leupold insisted that they were good .

If you do a search you will find my thread on this. The bottom line is that if you have good solid screws and a decent weaver style mount it will stay put. SKIP the Leupold, it gave me nothing but problems.

 

[dojpros1998]

I have the very same rifle with the accutrigger. 6 months ago, it was a bit difficult to find a Leupold system that would work with the Savage with the new trigger. I originally had some Burris bases with the rear having an adj. for windage. I shot that loose (pissing away 15 rounds of GM match in the process, the group was tight but keep drifting right!). I now use Warne steel weaver bases and rings. Brownells has specific mounts for accutriggered Savage in Warne and other makers. The Warnes are rock solid.

In a pinch, I am told that one can use a front base mount on the rear of an accutriggered Savage if you just turn it arround. YMMV.

 

[lycanthrope]

Had several problems with Leopold STD rings when using a heavy scope and/or heavy recoil. My Model 70 actually broke two sets. The rear ring in the STD sets is adjustable for windage and is not as solid as a a standard weaver .style setup.

Burris Zee rings, however, are much stronger and are now on my 7STW (with the scope glued into the rings with Skotch Kote). Warne, Weaver Grand Slam and Nightforce are all steel and solid bases.