Rifle Scopes Ring/Mount Suggestions

[erikc641]

So, I just picked up a 110 Elite Precision in 338 LM, dies, 220 pieces of Lapua brass, Berger 300gr bullets, ammunition and a Silencerco 36M. After a lot of deliberation, I decided on a Mark 5HD 7-35x56 scope that will be here Wednesday. What does everyone prefer to mount something like this in (one piece, two)? Am I just overthinking it? I have looked at Spuhr, Tier One, Hawkins Precision, Leupold, F3R Machine, Badger, MDT and ARC just to name a few. The one piece mounts are quite a bit higher than a lot of the rings, perhaps this isn't as big a deal as I'm thinking, and anything I have listed will be fine. Right now, I am leaning toward the ARC M10.

 

[Carlos Danger]

I chose Badger for mine

 

[carbonbased]

The nice thing about ARC rings is that there’s only two bolts per ring. With M10s I’ve never had a scope cant a little while torquing, which is something that’s happened to me with Burris Signature rings of all flavors (admittedly, they are much different than straight-up solid aluminum rings).

And I’m lazy. I like torquing only two bolts vs up to eight per ring.

The instructions are a little weird as they suggest lightly oiling the bolt threads and surfaces where the bolt head flange meets the rings, and each bolt on the “cap” is torqued much higher than regular ring cap bolts (50-55 in/lbs).

But it all makes sense because on most centerfire ringcaps there are 4-6 bolts whereas the ARC M10 has but one single bolt.

The only gotcha with M10s is before you tighten the ring “cap” bolt, make sure the little pins on each pivot are pushed in flush. Sucks to finish up, admire your handiwork, and then realize that you do indeed suck.

Edit: as far as two-piece vs one, I guess the quality of your Savage’s rail will dictate that. I am guessing the Hide’s consensus on that will be a one-piece for you.

 

[erikc641]

Thanks to you both. I will also say that the scope base, originally on the Savage, was removed and replaced.

 

[BuildingConceptsllc]

I'm a huge fan of the MDT elite rings. I'm trying to find a used set 34mm right now, but if I can't pretty soon I will just order new. They are just excellent rings period. Also the best price for that level of rings.

 

[carbonbased]

Thanks to you both. I will also say that the scope base, originally on the Savage, was removed and replaced.

What did you replace it with?

Also, FYI you prob know this, but M10s come in one-piece and two-piece versions if you go that way.

 

[erikc641]

The EGW HD rail. I saw the one piece version, just can’t get over the height of some of them.

 

[NewsShooter]

ARC rings are all I buy now, if I need something cheaper it's seekins.

 

[erikc641]

Thank you. Here I thought I had made all the difficult decisions.

 

[Baron23]

ARC M-10 all day long. They eliminate the stupid shit of the scope moving when trying to tighten the rings and are rock solid.

 

[erikc641]

Feeling good about my decision thus far with the ARC M10

 

[carbonbased]

Feeling good about my decision thus far with the ARC M10

In my semi-retarded view, all of your choices are good (except Leupold, MDT, and F3R Machine-note I am NOT equating or judging them, just have no experience or have not researched them so cannot honestly comment).

Comes down to convenience, preferred height, cost, looks, and other preferences. The essential quality is all there across the board.

 

[gnochi]

The instructions are a little weird as they suggest lightly oiling the bolt threads and surfaces where the bolt head flange meets the rings, and each bolt on the “cap” is torqued much higher than regular ring cap bolts (50-55 in/lbs).

Speaking professionally as an engineer:

• The holding force of scope rings depends on the tensile load (“preload”) in the bolts balanced against geometry of how the rings and scope fit together
• Too much load (preload + additional load) in a bolt pops the heads off
• Lubricated threads and larger threads will have much more consistent preloads for a given nominal torque value. You might get +/- 25% preload with the ARC solution and +/- 40% with dry “traditional” ring screws, between the tolerances on nut factor and the torque of the driver itself. Compare to +/- 80% with human-driven gutentight torque specs.
• Larger bolts can carry a much higher load without breaking, scaling with the square of the root diameter of the thread
• Larger bolts need higher torque to reach the same tensile load

All this said, the ARC rings are much easier to deal with, and the higher torque spec with a larger bolt is not a problem for your scope any more than using rings that use 6x #6-48 screws instead of 4x are.

 

[loveha]

Used to buy NF till I tried a set of ARC. ARC are all I will buy now.

 

[carbonbased]

Speaking professionally as an engineer:

• The holding force of scope rings depends on the tensile load (“preload”) in the bolts balanced against geometry of how the rings and scope fit together
• Too much load (preload + additional load) in a bolt pops the heads off
• Lubricated threads and larger threads will have much more consistent preloads for a given torque value. You might get +/-
• Larger bolts can carry a much higher load without breaking, scaling with the square of the root diameter of the thread
• Larger bolts need higher torque to reach the same tensile load

All this said, the ARC rings are much easier to deal with, and the higher torque spec with a larger bolt is not a problem for your scope any more than using rings that use 6x #6-48 screws instead of 4x are.

Haha! I knew there was a reason. Just didn’t know exactly what it was. Sometimes I wish I was a machinist combined with an engineer. Instead I’m neither.

 

[gnochi]

Haha! I knew there was a reason. Just didn’t know exactly what it was. Sometimes I wish I was a machinist combined with an engineer. Instead I’m neither.

I will admit that I love my job All I need is for a couple companies I’ve worked for to go public so I can afford a garage, and a machine shop to put in it…

 

[erikc641]

Speaking professionally as an engineer:

• The holding force of scope rings depends on the tensile load (“preload”) in the bolts balanced against geometry of how the rings and scope fit together
• Too much load (preload + additional load) in a bolt pops the heads off
• Lubricated threads and larger threads will have much more consistent preloads for a given nominal torque value. You might get +/- 25% preload with the ARC solution and +/- 40% with dry “traditional” ring screws, between the tolerances on nut factor and the torque of the driver itself. Compare to +/- 80% with human-driven gutentight torque specs.
• Larger bolts can carry a much higher load without breaking, scaling with the square of the root diameter of the thread
• Larger bolts need higher torque to reach the same tensile load

All this said, the ARC rings are much easier to deal with, and the higher torque spec with a larger bolt is not a problem for your scope any more than using rings that use 6x #6-48 screws instead of 4x are.

Thank you. ARC it is. As soon as I get the scope to confirm my measurements clear up front and the bolt, they will be on the way.

 

[erikc641]

 

[Baron23]

Speaking professionally as an engineer:

• The holding force of scope rings depends on the tensile load (“preload”) in the bolts balanced against geometry of how the rings and scope fit together
• Too much load (preload + additional load) in a bolt pops the heads off
• Lubricated threads and larger threads will have much more consistent preloads for a given nominal torque value. You might get +/- 25% preload with the ARC solution and +/- 40% with dry “traditional” ring screws, between the tolerances on nut factor and the torque of the driver itself. Compare to +/- 80% with human-driven gutentight torque specs.
• Larger bolts can carry a much higher load without breaking, scaling with the square of the root diameter of the thread
• Larger bolts need higher torque to reach the same tensile load

All this said, the ARC rings are much easier to deal with, and the higher torque spec with a larger bolt is not a problem for your scope any more than using rings that use 6x #6-48 screws instead of 4x are.

I have M-10 on a very nice 6.5 CM and recently took the scope in the rings off of the rail to move a bit for better relief when prone.

I use fix-it-stick torque limiters and torque per ARC instructions but somehow missed the part about a small drop of oil on bolt heads.

When backing the rail bolts off I actually saw and smelled a few small sparks coming off the bolt/ring interface.

I have had these off before and never have I seen such a thing. Everything looked fine in inspection after…maybe a pin point of blemish in bluing under the bolt head. Needless to say I put a drop of Rem Oil on the bolt heads when reassembling.

I’m assuming from your comments that you may be a mech eng….got any insights about this sparking? I have just never seen nor heard of this.

 

[gnochi]

I’m assuming from your comments that you may be a mech eng….got any insights about this sparking? I have just never seen nor heard of this.

Good assumption!

Hmmm. The screw is steel, the rings are anodized aluminum. I see a couple possibilities off the top of my head:

• A couple small pieces of aluminum - perhaps in the threads - got shaved off but weren’t exposed to air to slowly oxidize, and when you backed the screw off they instantly burned up.
• There was a spot of rust on the screw, and when unscrewed it exposed a bit of aluminum, and the heat from friction kickstarted the thermite reaction (but, since only a small bit of rust, not for too long).

Please note that I don’t think this is dangerous or anything - sometime, go to the driving range at night with a titanium driver and watch the sparks fly! Tiny particles are far more exciting due to the surface area to volume ratio.

 

[Baron23]

Good assumption!

Hmmm. The screw is steel, the rings are anodized aluminum. I see a couple possibilities off the top of my head:

• A couple small pieces of aluminum - perhaps in the threads - got shaved off but weren’t exposed to air to slowly oxidize, and when you backed the screw off they instantly burned up.
• There was a spot of rust on the screw, and when unscrewed it exposed a bit of aluminum, and the heat from friction kickstarted the thermite reaction (but, since only a small bit of rust, not for too long).

Please note that I don’t think this is dangerous or anything - sometime, go to the driving range at night with a titanium driver and watch the sparks fly! Tiny particles are far more exciting due to the surface area to volume ratio.

Thanks!! I appreciate your taking the time to reply.

best of luck.

 

[Nathantc]

View attachment 7687271

i'm jealous
been eyeing and saving for the $2,000 sting of buying my first tier 1 optic, the Leupold Mark 5HD 5-25x56 M1C3 FFP PR1-MOA. Currently the most i've ever spent on a rifle scope is $600. This will be going on my 110FCP in 300PRC im currently building. Keeping the saying alive of buying an optic that cost as much as the rifle build. Just really hoping it can out do in every way, the vortex strike eagle i recently (regrettably) sold.

​

 

[erikc641]

i'm jealous
been eyeing and saving for the $2,000 sting of buying my first tier 1 optic, the Leupold Mark 5HD 5-25x56 M1C3 FFP PR1-MOA. Currently the most i've ever spent on a rifle scope is $600. This will be going on my 110FCP in 300PRC im currently building. Keeping the saying alive of buying an optic that cost as much as the rifle build. Just really hoping it can out do in every way, the vortex strike eagle i recently (regrettably) sold.

​

So far I’m really impressed with it and will hopefully get it mounted this weekend (if the rings come in). Up to this point the best I have is a Zeiss V4 and a Burris XTRII. Have a few strike eagles too and they’ve always done what they’re told.

 

[1moaoff]

I will admit that I love my job All I need is for a couple companies I’ve worked for to go public so I can afford a garage, and a machine shop to put in it…

Too bad your in CA. I have a complete set up here you might enjoy thats under utilized

 

[erikc641]

Super easy. Really like those rings!