I have been looking for a 20 moa mount for my 700 and see that there are a few to choose from. Prices are from $50 to $150
are you paying for a name,material?
are you paying for a name,material?
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
- Thread starter StarkCountyShooter
- Start date
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
Well, to say a mount is a mount is like saying optics are optics. You are paying for a nome to some extent, but precision durring the fabrication process, fit and finish are things you pay for.
With that said, I have used Warnne basses as well as TPS, both cheaper than most and they worked. Will you be happy wearing Keds or do you need Nike shoes?
Kirk R
Well, to say a mount is a mount is like saying optics are optics. You are paying for a nome to some extent, but precision durring the fabrication process, fit and finish are things you pay for.
With that said, I have used Warnne basses as well as TPS, both cheaper than most and they worked. Will you be happy wearing Keds or do you need Nike shoes?
Kirk R
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
Not that price is a issue but I dont just want to give up a extra $100 for a name
Not that price is a issue but I dont just want to give up a extra $100 for a name
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
I'll 2nd EGW. I used to use there parts building 1911's, have used their rings and are great for the price.
There are other much higher priced units and depending on what you're doing may be worth it. The EGW's are aluminum while some of the higher end units such as badger ordinance are steel and some are titanium.
I'll be getting a picatnny rail soon and will probably go EGW.
I'll 2nd EGW. I used to use there parts building 1911's, have used their rings and are great for the price.
There are other much higher priced units and depending on what you're doing may be worth it. The EGW's are aluminum while some of the higher end units such as badger ordinance are steel and some are titanium.
I'll be getting a picatnny rail soon and will probably go EGW.
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
if you plan on beating the hell out of your weapon, go with badger... but if you only need it to take general abuse and even moderately heavy abuse, no problem with EGW. they make great products. it's what i run on my 700.
if you plan on beating the hell out of your weapon, go with badger... but if you only need it to take general abuse and even moderately heavy abuse, no problem with EGW. they make great products. it's what i run on my 700.
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
NF Direct Mount on my 308. Fewer pieces the better, imo.
I like the recoil tang on it, too. I'm a NF whore, tho haha
NF Direct Mount on my 308. Fewer pieces the better, imo.
I like the recoil tang on it, too. I'm a NF whore, tho haha
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
I've always been perplexed by this and I've heard it more than once, could someone please explain how one could abuse a rifle so badly that it'll damage an aluminium scope mount thru impact or leverage when it sits completely under a scope made of much lighter gauge aluminium and glass? Without destroying the optic of course, because really who cares what happens to a $50 mount when a $500-$3000 optic was just annihilated? Aluminium can gall if your rings are loose, so can titanium, steel is most resistant to galling but is heavier and its a non issue with tight but not overtight rings. Aluminium is typically more rigid than an equvalent piece of steel, and both are more rigid than Ti. Steel and Ti are considerably more resilient and crush and impact resistant, but that brings us back to the optic or rifle being between it and basically everything else. So what is the advantage to any one over the other? Aside from titanium being remarkably resistant to corrosion from almost anything.
I've always been perplexed by this and I've heard it more than once, could someone please explain how one could abuse a rifle so badly that it'll damage an aluminium scope mount thru impact or leverage when it sits completely under a scope made of much lighter gauge aluminium and glass? Without destroying the optic of course, because really who cares what happens to a $50 mount when a $500-$3000 optic was just annihilated? Aluminium can gall if your rings are loose, so can titanium, steel is most resistant to galling but is heavier and its a non issue with tight but not overtight rings. Aluminium is typically more rigid than an equvalent piece of steel, and both are more rigid than Ti. Steel and Ti are considerably more resilient and crush and impact resistant, but that brings us back to the optic or rifle being between it and basically everything else. So what is the advantage to any one over the other? Aside from titanium being remarkably resistant to corrosion from almost anything.
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
Dude, I agree... I don't worry about Al mounts. It's like this (and you said)... you drag your rifle through rocks, it bounces and dings off of everything, and the first thing to contact foreign objects are the turrets and the obj or ocular. It's all made out of aluminum and glass... so what good is having a set of Ti rings mounted to an Al scope? Not sure. Marketing?
I'm not smart enough to argue about metallurgy but I think that as long the damn thing is machined true, you should be good. I'm biased by being NF whore, tho
-edit
I hope someone doesn't post about barrel whip and metal flexing and how Ti is better or Chromoly steel is better or whatever. ridiculous
-edit again
besides, I'm more worried about my trigger control than the material of my scope mount...lol
Dude, I agree... I don't worry about Al mounts. It's like this (and you said)... you drag your rifle through rocks, it bounces and dings off of everything, and the first thing to contact foreign objects are the turrets and the obj or ocular. It's all made out of aluminum and glass... so what good is having a set of Ti rings mounted to an Al scope? Not sure. Marketing?
I'm not smart enough to argue about metallurgy but I think that as long the damn thing is machined true, you should be good. I'm biased by being NF whore, tho
-edit
I hope someone doesn't post about barrel whip and metal flexing and how Ti is better or Chromoly steel is better or whatever. ridiculous
-edit again
besides, I'm more worried about my trigger control than the material of my scope mount...lol
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
could not agree more with you two dudes. that's why i have an EGW lol.
could not agree more with you two dudes. that's why i have an EGW lol.
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
and also, like it has been said before. I think the fabrication process is what makes the prices so much different.
MD2, i would also agree that marketing is the sole factor in prices going up on certain products. badger is "better" so it must be more expensive.
and also, like it has been said before. I think the fabrication process is what makes the prices so much different.
MD2, i would also agree that marketing is the sole factor in prices going up on certain products. badger is "better" so it must be more expensive.
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
I have a Badger 20 MOA steel base on my 700. The machining is excellent, the fit is perfect, and there has never been any question whether it was a weak link in the system. That makes it worth the price to me.
The biggest factor in my choice was the fact that I was using steel rings (Leopold Mk 4). I didn't feel comfortable using an aluminum base with them.
I can't comment on the cheaper bases since I have no experience with them. They may be just as good for all I know. But I don't think anyone would be disappointed with Badger.
I have a Badger 20 MOA steel base on my 700. The machining is excellent, the fit is perfect, and there has never been any question whether it was a weak link in the system. That makes it worth the price to me.
The biggest factor in my choice was the fact that I was using steel rings (Leopold Mk 4). I didn't feel comfortable using an aluminum base with them.
I can't comment on the cheaper bases since I have no experience with them. They may be just as good for all I know. But I don't think anyone would be disappointed with Badger.
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
EGW 20 MOA HD Base. 7075 Aluminum (very strong). Awesome bang for the buck.
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=673117&cm_vc=S016
EGW 20 MOA HD Base. 7075 Aluminum (very strong). Awesome bang for the buck.
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=673117&cm_vc=S016
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
Can't say for certain, but I would imagine the machining process for the bases are very similar among the various manufacturers. Take a piece of metal, put it on a CNC mill, run all the contours (profiles), cut them to length and then machine or grind the taper.
I'd be willing to bet that they're fixtured and several are done at once.
Can't say for certain, but I would imagine the machining process for the bases are very similar among the various manufacturers. Take a piece of metal, put it on a CNC mill, run all the contours (profiles), cut them to length and then machine or grind the taper.
I'd be willing to bet that they're fixtured and several are done at once.
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying aluminum or any metal is best, I was actually asking which one is and why? Nor am I knocking buying expensive parts, or saying less expensive ones are just as good, but they might be.
Using rings and bases of the same material is probably the best argument I can think of, or atleast keeping the clamped material harder than the clamp. I spose if you swapped optics allot in feild conditions and didn't always torque, steel or ti would show allot of merit.
I'd certainly hope fit and finish would look better on he higher end ones.
I suspect, with modern manufacturing being what it is, that as long as you stay away from cheap shit with really juvenile cool sounding names from companies you've never heard of you're probably not getting junk, and installed properly it will serve fine. But I could be wrong.
For the OP, I have a weaver on my 700 .308, I had to bed the rail to the receiver to get it stress free, the regular old 1 peice mount I had before didn't need that. Otherwise its straight and flat, and it has a definite downward slant, true 20 MOA, I dunno, but it works, it does show some machining marks where inside cuts were made, doesn't affect performance, have to look real close to see it one the gun.
Every manufactured part is built to fit in a range of tolerances, some are .0001" or finer, some are .1" or larger, I don't know remingtons tolerances but mount manufacturers pick something inside those to base their tolerances off of, so if theirs are .0001 or finer but its at the opposite end of remmy's from the rifle you have, it won't fit perfect no matter how "perfect" the mount is. Just some more food for thought.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying aluminum or any metal is best, I was actually asking which one is and why? Nor am I knocking buying expensive parts, or saying less expensive ones are just as good, but they might be.
Using rings and bases of the same material is probably the best argument I can think of, or atleast keeping the clamped material harder than the clamp. I spose if you swapped optics allot in feild conditions and didn't always torque, steel or ti would show allot of merit.
I'd certainly hope fit and finish would look better on he higher end ones.
I suspect, with modern manufacturing being what it is, that as long as you stay away from cheap shit with really juvenile cool sounding names from companies you've never heard of you're probably not getting junk, and installed properly it will serve fine. But I could be wrong.
For the OP, I have a weaver on my 700 .308, I had to bed the rail to the receiver to get it stress free, the regular old 1 peice mount I had before didn't need that. Otherwise its straight and flat, and it has a definite downward slant, true 20 MOA, I dunno, but it works, it does show some machining marks where inside cuts were made, doesn't affect performance, have to look real close to see it one the gun.
Every manufactured part is built to fit in a range of tolerances, some are .0001" or finer, some are .1" or larger, I don't know remingtons tolerances but mount manufacturers pick something inside those to base their tolerances off of, so if theirs are .0001 or finer but its at the opposite end of remmy's from the rifle you have, it won't fit perfect no matter how "perfect" the mount is. Just some more food for thought.
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
Never used on, but looks nice! Larue is top notch too!!
http://www.laruetactical.com/remington-700-rail
Never used on, but looks nice! Larue is top notch too!!
http://www.laruetactical.com/remington-700-rail
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
Then I look at the TPS steel base at midwayusa for $65. Steel and has a recoil lug!
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/default.aspx?productNumber=366794
Which to buy...
Then I look at the TPS steel base at midwayusa for $65. Steel and has a recoil lug!
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/default.aspx?productNumber=366794
Which to buy...
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
Buying secondhand is definitely the best bang for your buck lol. congrats on the purchase. What kind of glass on top? rings? stock?
Buying secondhand is definitely the best bang for your buck lol. congrats on the purchase. What kind of glass on top? rings? stock?
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
Bell & Carlson Tactical Medalist A5,Vortex PST,as for rings havent decided on yet
Bell & Carlson Tactical Medalist A5,Vortex PST,as for rings havent decided on yet
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
<span style="font-weight: bold">I almost purchased the LaRue 20 MOA base, but decided that it's extra length could potentially cause a problem with the objective bell and the use of low rings. Looks like a good deal for $75 though. I've always been impressed with LaRue quality. I ended up purchasing a Seekins Precision rail and I'm very happy with it. It looks to be top-notch quality and sells for about $100, which is still better than most of the higher end bases. </span>
<span style="font-weight: bold">I almost purchased the LaRue 20 MOA base, but decided that it's extra length could potentially cause a problem with the objective bell and the use of low rings. Looks like a good deal for $75 though. I've always been impressed with LaRue quality. I ended up purchasing a Seekins Precision rail and I'm very happy with it. It looks to be top-notch quality and sells for about $100, which is still better than most of the higher end bases. </span>
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
Picked up the EGW very nice for the price great piece for a buget build
Picked up the EGW very nice for the price great piece for a buget build
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
The only time I have ever had a scope base fail, was an EGW. Would not hold tight on a 7wsm no matter the torque or lock-tite used. Replaced with a Badger, problem solved. As the EGW lacks anything even resembling a lug, I would not suggest its use on anything other than a pea-shooter.
The only time I have ever had a scope base fail, was an EGW. Would not hold tight on a 7wsm no matter the torque or lock-tite used. Replaced with a Badger, problem solved. As the EGW lacks anything even resembling a lug, I would not suggest its use on anything other than a pea-shooter.
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
If you have that issue, either use sleeve retainer on the mating surfaces or bed the base with normal bedding compounds so you acheive 100% contact since friction actually holds it, the screws simply apply the pressure. Its not a terrible idea to bed a mount anyway since its simple and neither the receiver or base will likely ever be 100% true to each other anyway and will induce stresses.
If you have that issue, either use sleeve retainer on the mating surfaces or bed the base with normal bedding compounds so you acheive 100% contact since friction actually holds it, the screws simply apply the pressure. Its not a terrible idea to bed a mount anyway since its simple and neither the receiver or base will likely ever be 100% true to each other anyway and will induce stresses.
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
I went with the Weaver 20 MOA base for my first rifle. $30. Looks good, is straight, and has a recoil lug. It didn't fit my receiver perfectly though. I'm not sure if that's the base's fault or the gun's. Time will tell how well it is. I'm not concerned though.
I went with the Weaver 20 MOA base for my first rifle. $30. Looks good, is straight, and has a recoil lug. It didn't fit my receiver perfectly though. I'm not sure if that's the base's fault or the gun's. Time will tell how well it is. I'm not concerned though.
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Beef</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you have that issue, either use sleeve retainer on the mating surfaces or bed the base with normal bedding compounds so you acheive 100% contact since friction actually holds it, the screws simply apply the pressure. Its not a terrible idea to bed a mount anyway since its simple and neither the receiver or base will likely ever be 100% true to each other anyway and will induce stresses. </div></div>
or use a better designed base
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Beef</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you have that issue, either use sleeve retainer on the mating surfaces or bed the base with normal bedding compounds so you acheive 100% contact since friction actually holds it, the screws simply apply the pressure. Its not a terrible idea to bed a mount anyway since its simple and neither the receiver or base will likely ever be 100% true to each other anyway and will induce stresses. </div></div>
or use a better designed base
Re: Question on 700sa 20 moa mount
all depends on the quality
in other words this is the medium in which the rings and scope are attached to the rifle, IMHO spend the money and then u wont have the niggling feeling later on i guess it all comes back down to not being able to blame the rifle or any integral components at all...
for instance Nightforce scope plus badger max 50 rings cost around 3K here in Australia would you mount these onto a 50 dollars worth of base, personally i wouldn't but we all have our choices to make.
that being said a friend of mine machines his own because he got sick of spending 240 Aus dollars every time he needed a base
all depends on the quality
in other words this is the medium in which the rings and scope are attached to the rifle, IMHO spend the money and then u wont have the niggling feeling later on i guess it all comes back down to not being able to blame the rifle or any integral components at all...
for instance Nightforce scope plus badger max 50 rings cost around 3K here in Australia would you mount these onto a 50 dollars worth of base, personally i wouldn't but we all have our choices to make.
that being said a friend of mine machines his own because he got sick of spending 240 Aus dollars every time he needed a base
