BigGameHunt.net Hunting Forums

[caper40]

hi guys and gals i got a chance to get a new set of weaver quad lock rings and mounts putting them on a rem 700 308 can get them at a decent price but would like suggestions from people who have used other rings and mounts i have tasco rings now and the guy that put them on stripped the hex screws and plus they look like cheap quality any suggestions?

[Hammer1]

Weaver always made a quality product and have been around longer than I can remember. Always tighten evenly and gradually in a 1,3,2,4 pattern.

[Don Fischer]

A lot of people make quite a to do about ring's. Many think that unless they are blued steel, they are junk. Actually there's only a couple thing's wrong with your Tasco ring's. First you think they look cheap, I agree. And second they are made of alumium if I remember right. Tighten down a steel screw to tight and you strip an alumiun screw hole. The screw's need to be snug but to many put them on to tight.

I've used Tasco ring's, don't have any now, Weaver is to inexpensive. Now I have Weaver's, Redfield and control. My favorite ring's, but don't like paying for them, are one piece bases with windage adjustment's on the back. I have alway's be led to believe that the one piece stiffen's the action. That is supposed to increase accuracy, if it does, I wouldn't know. But they do look good! Now day's when I need new rings, I get Weaver, only because Control has gotten so proud of their's. I avoid the high ring's that are supposed to allow you to use open sight's. The scope end's up mounted way to high and I can't imagine that they make a good platform for mounting a scope. Sort of like mounting them on a ladder. And although I have a set of tip off rings, the only use I find for them is the scope tip's away from the action when I'm cleaning the rifle. In truth, they seem to work as well as any, at least I haven't found a reason to change them out yet. I don't think the Quick Detachable type are all that necessary either. I've known a few people that had them and the only time the scope is ever off is when they are showing their friends how they work.

The claim for Q.D. rings is that they allow you to take off the scope when you get into brush or if you break a scope, remove it and use open sight's. I've seen scope's break but usually the owner had a rifle with no open sight's or open sight's that were never sighted in. It happened to me once but I carry a spare rifle when I hunt. If you get into tight cover or you start losing light, a low power scope is usually a better answer. You would be amazed how fast a 1-4x scope is in low light and how far away you can shoot well with one. So I can find no use for Q.D's.

The ring's meerly hold your scope, not much else. They don't have to be overly tight and they don't need to be adjustable. The best rings for the money, in my opinion, for hunting rifles, including varmit rifles are in fact Weaver. I'm not sure what the quad is but I'd guess the ones that have four small straps rather that a solid top? That's more sales gimic than anything. Of course anyone that think's they are getting something better is going to think just that. In the end, the rilfe won't shoot any better and the scope won't be held in place any better.

One more thing I might mention is that with the rings that have screws on one side only, the scope has a tendicity to be rotated in the rings as they are tightened down. I like the 4 screw set up best. Do as Hammer say's and pat attention to tightening sequence.

Pretty long opinion to a pretty short question. I'm like that! :D

[Hammer1]

I should have added this in my post. Make sure you use the proper size screw driver or hex key. The gap(if any) between the top and lower sections of the rings should be the same, so take a good look and adjust accordingly. I find that products like Lock-Tight are unnecessary when using the proper tool.