Rail - Alum vs Steel
- Thread starter mtngun
- Start date
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
Things I would consider:
You dont mention what it goes on. I dont see the point in putting a steel base on a alloy action, or steel rings on a alloy base, or steel rings on a scope body that in not beefy and strong. Think weakest link here.
If its on anything thats about the power of a 308, I would stick to alloy.
Things I would consider:
You dont mention what it goes on. I dont see the point in putting a steel base on a alloy action, or steel rings on a alloy base, or steel rings on a scope body that in not beefy and strong. Think weakest link here.
If its on anything thats about the power of a 308, I would stick to alloy.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
I see now more details would have helped.
I plan to mount a nf 50mm (w/30mmtube) scope in seekins rings on a 7mm rm savage 111 w/accutrigger (round action).
One rail manufacturer (Farrell) offers both steel and alloy for this action. I've always used steel bases or rails in the past. I'm considering the alloy, even though Ken said about 95% of his sales are steel.
I'm open to trying something new, but was not sure I wanted to be part of the 5% without hearng pros/cons.
I see now more details would have helped.
I plan to mount a nf 50mm (w/30mmtube) scope in seekins rings on a 7mm rm savage 111 w/accutrigger (round action).
One rail manufacturer (Farrell) offers both steel and alloy for this action. I've always used steel bases or rails in the past. I'm considering the alloy, even though Ken said about 95% of his sales are steel.
I'm open to trying something new, but was not sure I wanted to be part of the 5% without hearng pros/cons.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
I was originally going to go with Badger steel base and rings. Then after calling them and not being able to get any for weeks (they had a big Navy contract to fulfill) I changed gears. Decided to go with a local PNW company Seekins Precision. They have a great rep here on Hide. I went with their alum 30 MOA base and 30mm alum rings. Also helped that alum is cheaper than the steel versions. Base and rings only cost me $235 shipped.
These are installed on a Rem 700 MLR .338 Lapua Mag. I was worried about alum standing up to the recoil of the LM, but so far zero issues. The quality is great and everything is holding perfectly.
I was originally going to go with Badger steel base and rings. Then after calling them and not being able to get any for weeks (they had a big Navy contract to fulfill) I changed gears. Decided to go with a local PNW company Seekins Precision. They have a great rep here on Hide. I went with their alum 30 MOA base and 30mm alum rings. Also helped that alum is cheaper than the steel versions. Base and rings only cost me $235 shipped.
These are installed on a Rem 700 MLR .338 Lapua Mag. I was worried about alum standing up to the recoil of the LM, but so far zero issues. The quality is great and everything is holding perfectly.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
Aluminum is lighter but easier to damage. I doubt that you would be able to tell the difference in performance between the two in any but the most severe use, and I suspect other things, like the scope, would be damaged first or at least along with the rail.
Aluminum is lighter but easier to damage. I doubt that you would be able to tell the difference in performance between the two in any but the most severe use, and I suspect other things, like the scope, would be damaged first or at least along with the rail.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
They make airplanes out of aluminum you know.
AR receivers too. Its got some merits for strength, its not going to turn to butter in the heat of the sun.
Think about what can actually even touch the scope base when there is a scope mounted to it.
They make airplanes out of aluminum you know.
AR receivers too. Its got some merits for strength, its not going to turn to butter in the heat of the sun.
Think about what can actually even touch the scope base when there is a scope mounted to it.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: OFIS</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They make airplanes out of aluminum you know.
AR receivers too. Its got some merits for strength, its not going to turn to butter in the heat of the sun.
Think about what can actually even touch the scope base when there is a scope mounted to it. </div></div>
they'd make airplanes out of steel if it weighed as much as alum.
because they make airplanes out of fiberglass, you'd use it as a base or rings?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: OFIS</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They make airplanes out of aluminum you know.
AR receivers too. Its got some merits for strength, its not going to turn to butter in the heat of the sun.
Think about what can actually even touch the scope base when there is a scope mounted to it. </div></div>
they'd make airplanes out of steel if it weighed as much as alum.
because they make airplanes out of fiberglass, you'd use it as a base or rings?
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
7075 Aluminum is stronger than the 6061 Aluminum your scope is probably made from. With 7075 rings on the market, there is no reason to use steel unless you just want your rifle to be heavier than it has to be.
7075 Aluminum is stronger than the 6061 Aluminum your scope is probably made from. With 7075 rings on the market, there is no reason to use steel unless you just want your rifle to be heavier than it has to be.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: greentimber</div><div class="ubbcode-body">7075 Aluminum is stronger than the 6061 Aluminum your scope is probably made from. With 7075 rings on the market, there is no reason to use steel unless you just want your rifle to be heavier than it has to be. </div></div>
This. I would not buy a 6061 base.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: greentimber</div><div class="ubbcode-body">7075 Aluminum is stronger than the 6061 Aluminum your scope is probably made from. With 7075 rings on the market, there is no reason to use steel unless you just want your rifle to be heavier than it has to be. </div></div>
This. I would not buy a 6061 base.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
I'm having great difficulty finding out which rail manufacturers make their rails of 7075.
Seekins does not have rails for the savage round long actions.
Talley makes one piece rings and base of 7000 series alloy.
Anyone know if anyone offers a 20 moa rail for savage long action with accutrigger in the 7075 alloy?
This is proving a difficult find.
I'm having great difficulty finding out which rail manufacturers make their rails of 7075.
Seekins does not have rails for the savage round long actions.
Talley makes one piece rings and base of 7000 series alloy.
Anyone know if anyone offers a 20 moa rail for savage long action with accutrigger in the 7075 alloy?
This is proving a difficult find.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
Badger Ordnance Savage P/N 306-07 SAT Long action, for rifles w/Accutrigger 20 MOA cant, 5.7 oz.
Yes, not 7075 Alloy, but what the hell, it's a good rail even though it's 3 oz too heavy.....
Badger Ordnance Savage P/N 306-07 SAT Long action, for rifles w/Accutrigger 20 MOA cant, 5.7 oz.
Yes, not 7075 Alloy, but what the hell, it's a good rail even though it's 3 oz too heavy.....
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
Glad to see my Seekins 30MOA rail is made from 7075 alum.
http://www.seekinsprecision.com/index_p.php?p=rails
"SP picatinny base specs.
Material: Billet 7075-T6 Aluminum alloy
Coating: Milstd Type III Black hard anodized"
Glad to see my Seekins 30MOA rail is made from 7075 alum.
http://www.seekinsprecision.com/index_p.php?p=rails
"SP picatinny base specs.
Material: Billet 7075-T6 Aluminum alloy
Coating: Milstd Type III Black hard anodized"
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
I have always used steel bases and never had any problems. I doubt I would have had any issues had I used aluminum though.
If it were me I would focus more on ensuring that the screws that come with the base are quality items and get torqued properly.
I have always used steel bases and never had any problems. I doubt I would have had any issues had I used aluminum though.
If it were me I would focus more on ensuring that the screws that come with the base are quality items and get torqued properly.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: taseal</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: OFIS</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They make airplanes out of aluminum you know.
AR receivers too. Its got some merits for strength, its not going to turn to butter in the heat of the sun.
Think about what can actually even touch the scope base when there is a scope mounted to it. </div></div>
they'd make airplanes out of steel if it weighed as much as alum.
because they make airplanes out of fiberglass, you'd use it as a base or rings?</div></div>
if your gun was to fall off a tower or off a table, whats gonna take the impact? not your base, so the weight differential is more important to me than strength. If it was to take abuse that could hurt a quality alum base then youve got bigger problems like your scope
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: taseal</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: OFIS</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They make airplanes out of aluminum you know.
AR receivers too. Its got some merits for strength, its not going to turn to butter in the heat of the sun.
Think about what can actually even touch the scope base when there is a scope mounted to it. </div></div>
they'd make airplanes out of steel if it weighed as much as alum.
because they make airplanes out of fiberglass, you'd use it as a base or rings?</div></div>
if your gun was to fall off a tower or off a table, whats gonna take the impact? not your base, so the weight differential is more important to me than strength. If it was to take abuse that could hurt a quality alum base then youve got bigger problems like your scope
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: VAJayJayPunisher</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: taseal</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: OFIS</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They make airplanes out of aluminum you know.
AR receivers too. Its got some merits for strength, its not going to turn to butter in the heat of the sun.
Think about what can actually even touch the scope base when there is a scope mounted to it. </div></div>
they'd make airplanes out of steel if it weighed as much as alum.
because they make airplanes out of fiberglass, you'd use it as a base or rings?</div></div>
if your gun was to fall off a tower or off a table, whats gonna take the impact? not your base, so the weight differential is more important to me than strength. If it was to take abuse that could hurt a quality alum base then youve got bigger problems like your scope </div></div>
x10 When the bell of scope looks a lil crooked...you won't be worried about w/your base is alum or steel.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: VAJayJayPunisher</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: taseal</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: OFIS</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They make airplanes out of aluminum you know.
AR receivers too. Its got some merits for strength, its not going to turn to butter in the heat of the sun.
Think about what can actually even touch the scope base when there is a scope mounted to it. </div></div>
they'd make airplanes out of steel if it weighed as much as alum.
because they make airplanes out of fiberglass, you'd use it as a base or rings?</div></div>
if your gun was to fall off a tower or off a table, whats gonna take the impact? not your base, so the weight differential is more important to me than strength. If it was to take abuse that could hurt a quality alum base then youve got bigger problems like your scope </div></div>
x10 When the bell of scope looks a lil crooked...you won't be worried about w/your base is alum or steel.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
thank you Carbinero, I sought and located the EGW's fairly easily. Now to decide on final choice of rings. ARC's are looking better with the savings on the rail.
As this is a hunting rig, I'm trying to keep weight down, yet maintain strength and stability of platform.
Lastly, I've realized much has changed in the past several years, long gone are the days that one simply gets a pair of weaver rings tossed in with the purchase of a scope. That, and a quality scope can match or easily exceed the cost of a rifle, why cheap out of the rings and mount?
thank you Carbinero, I sought and located the EGW's fairly easily. Now to decide on final choice of rings. ARC's are looking better with the savings on the rail.
As this is a hunting rig, I'm trying to keep weight down, yet maintain strength and stability of platform.
Lastly, I've realized much has changed in the past several years, long gone are the days that one simply gets a pair of weaver rings tossed in with the purchase of a scope. That, and a quality scope can match or easily exceed the cost of a rifle, why cheap out of the rings and mount?
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
I recieved the EGW base and ARC rings tuesday and thursday. Got a chance to set them up and want to report the machine work and stability seem to be superior to the components I looked at and tried previously. I do not believe I will need to lap the rings, will wait until I mount and torque the rail.
Both EGW and ARC should be proud of the componets they produced.
I'm very impressed with this light weight setup.
I recieved the EGW base and ARC rings tuesday and thursday. Got a chance to set them up and want to report the machine work and stability seem to be superior to the components I looked at and tried previously. I do not believe I will need to lap the rings, will wait until I mount and torque the rail.
Both EGW and ARC should be proud of the componets they produced.
I'm very impressed with this light weight setup.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mtngun</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I recieved the EGW base and ARC rings tuesday and thursday. Got a chance to set them up and want to report the machine work and stability seem to be superior to the components I looked at and tried previously. I do not believe I will need to lap the rings, will wait until I mount and torque the rail.
Both EGW and ARC should be proud of the componets they produced.
I'm very impressed with this light weight setup. </div></div>
Which EGW rail did you get ?? The 6000 for $39 or the 7000 for $69??? how do you like it now??
I am also in need of a rail from my Savage 10...hence the question
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mtngun</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I recieved the EGW base and ARC rings tuesday and thursday. Got a chance to set them up and want to report the machine work and stability seem to be superior to the components I looked at and tried previously. I do not believe I will need to lap the rings, will wait until I mount and torque the rail.
Both EGW and ARC should be proud of the componets they produced.
I'm very impressed with this light weight setup. </div></div>
Which EGW rail did you get ?? The 6000 for $39 or the 7000 for $69??? how do you like it now??
I am also in need of a rail from my Savage 10...hence the question
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
I've been told that the alum rings just run more of a risk of stripping the threads. Not sure how true that really is but I knew a couple people whom over several scope remounts stripped some threads.
I've been told that the alum rings just run more of a risk of stripping the threads. Not sure how true that really is but I knew a couple people whom over several scope remounts stripped some threads.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
I personally chose Seekins. As many have pointed out, it doesn't need to be steel. Other things will get damaged before the rings/base will.
Another advantage over steel is that rust won't be a possible issue.
I personally chose Seekins. As many have pointed out, it doesn't need to be steel. Other things will get damaged before the rings/base will.
Another advantage over steel is that rust won't be a possible issue.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DerMeister</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Another advantage over steel is that rust won't be a possible issue. </div></div>Aluminum may not rust, but it will oxidize.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DerMeister</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Another advantage over steel is that rust won't be a possible issue. </div></div>Aluminum may not rust, but it will oxidize.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DerMeister</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Another advantage over steel is that rust won't be a possible issue.
</div></div>
With proper care and routine maintenance rust and corrosion are a non issue. Bedding an aluminum base will prevent the chemical reaction, corrosion, that takes place between steel and aluminum over a period of time. Spending a few dollars to have everything cerekoted, also, will go a long way to near maintenance free as you can get, that's what I do. I have no issue with steel vs aluminum regarding one being better than the other, both are good, and both have their range of applications. I'm running mostly cerekoted aluminum stuff now with no regrets.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DerMeister</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Another advantage over steel is that rust won't be a possible issue.
</div></div>
With proper care and routine maintenance rust and corrosion are a non issue. Bedding an aluminum base will prevent the chemical reaction, corrosion, that takes place between steel and aluminum over a period of time. Spending a few dollars to have everything cerekoted, also, will go a long way to near maintenance free as you can get, that's what I do. I have no issue with steel vs aluminum regarding one being better than the other, both are good, and both have their range of applications. I'm running mostly cerekoted aluminum stuff now with no regrets.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tripwire</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Spending a few dollars to have everything cerekoted, also, will go a long way to near maintenance free as you can get, that's what I do...I'm running mostly cerekoted aluminum stuff now with no regrets.</div></div>Absolutely do not Cerakote everything. Specifically do not mount Cerakote to Cerakote with regard to bases and rings. Most of the top 'smiths, from Terry Cross to GAP, have found that Cerakoted rings can wear and/or flake under use when expected to hold torque for long periods of time against Cerakote. If you Cerakote everything, the tolerances between the base and the ring cross-bars may change over time.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tripwire</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Spending a few dollars to have everything cerekoted, also, will go a long way to near maintenance free as you can get, that's what I do...I'm running mostly cerekoted aluminum stuff now with no regrets.</div></div>Absolutely do not Cerakote everything. Specifically do not mount Cerakote to Cerakote with regard to bases and rings. Most of the top 'smiths, from Terry Cross to GAP, have found that Cerakoted rings can wear and/or flake under use when expected to hold torque for long periods of time against Cerakote. If you Cerakote everything, the tolerances between the base and the ring cross-bars may change over time.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Graham</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Absolutely do not Cerakote everything. Specifically do not mount Cerakote to Cerakote with regard to bases and rings. Most of the top 'smiths, from Terry Cross to GAP, have found that Cerakoted rings can wear and/or flake under use when expected to hold torque for long periods of time against Cerakote. If you Cerakote everything, the tolerances between the base and the ring cross-bars may change over time. </div></div>
With all due respect to Cross and GAP, that's not been my finding......
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Graham</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Absolutely do not Cerakote everything. Specifically do not mount Cerakote to Cerakote with regard to bases and rings. Most of the top 'smiths, from Terry Cross to GAP, have found that Cerakoted rings can wear and/or flake under use when expected to hold torque for long periods of time against Cerakote. If you Cerakote everything, the tolerances between the base and the ring cross-bars may change over time. </div></div>
With all due respect to Cross and GAP, that's not been my finding......
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tripwire</div><div class="ubbcode-body">With all due respect to Cross and GAP, that's not been my finding...... </div></div>Fair enough. So what have you tried, how many times and why, what were your findings and how are they different?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tripwire</div><div class="ubbcode-body">With all due respect to Cross and GAP, that's not been my finding...... </div></div>Fair enough. So what have you tried, how many times and why, what were your findings and how are they different?
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
EGW makes some quality stuff. their steel is very good quality steel. I went with their piccatiny rail for my savage 16.
EGW makes some quality stuff. their steel is very good quality steel. I went with their piccatiny rail for my savage 16.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
Agreed. I have used EGW bases with good results (good results meaning that they were straight, and durable). They are an affordable alternative to the more expensive one-piece bases like Badger and NF.
Agreed. I have used EGW bases with good results (good results meaning that they were straight, and durable). They are an affordable alternative to the more expensive one-piece bases like Badger and NF.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Graham</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tripwire</div><div class="ubbcode-body">With all due respect to Cross and GAP, that's not been my finding...... </div></div>Fair enough. So what have you tried, how many times and why, what were your findings and how are they different? </div></div>
First and foremost, I do not own safe queens, all of my rifles are hard use tools that take a beating even on a good day. I have personally had many examples of cerekote to cerekote, and it's my humble experience that you simply can't beat the stuff off with a hammer. If you can, then the coating wasn't mixed right, applied right, properly prepared for, incorrectly cured, or a combination thereof. As it concerns the topic of this thread I have never seen on any of my stuff any chipping or flaking with regard to the mating surfaces of rings and bases, or any compromise thereof with respect to a torque value. I have one current example of durakote to durakote, and the jury is still out on that with it being a recent build this year, so far it's doing fine. If it doesn't hold up, then it'll get redone in cerekote, as the durakote was a try and see experiment. Like I said, with all due respect.......
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Graham</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tripwire</div><div class="ubbcode-body">With all due respect to Cross and GAP, that's not been my finding...... </div></div>Fair enough. So what have you tried, how many times and why, what were your findings and how are they different? </div></div>
First and foremost, I do not own safe queens, all of my rifles are hard use tools that take a beating even on a good day. I have personally had many examples of cerekote to cerekote, and it's my humble experience that you simply can't beat the stuff off with a hammer. If you can, then the coating wasn't mixed right, applied right, properly prepared for, incorrectly cured, or a combination thereof. As it concerns the topic of this thread I have never seen on any of my stuff any chipping or flaking with regard to the mating surfaces of rings and bases, or any compromise thereof with respect to a torque value. I have one current example of durakote to durakote, and the jury is still out on that with it being a recent build this year, so far it's doing fine. If it doesn't hold up, then it'll get redone in cerekote, as the durakote was a try and see experiment. Like I said, with all due respect.......
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
I don't think most people would be able to tell if there is any difference between a steel and aluminum base. Go with the one that is better quality.
I don't think most people would be able to tell if there is any difference between a steel and aluminum base. Go with the one that is better quality.
Re: Rail - Alum vs Steel
So what's more important- A good base, or good rings? If you can't afford to go all out on both, what is more important to make sure it's of high quality?
So what's more important- A good base, or good rings? If you can't afford to go all out on both, what is more important to make sure it's of high quality?
