What if any difference does the material used make? Aluminum vs steel. I have researched material bases are made from and I think the base is very crucial. I noticed the better bases are made with stronger steel. Cheap stuff is all aluminum, tps and night force are cold rolled steel, and badger uses super strong prehardened steel. Rings are a little different. I see different materials all over the map at far as price and was wanting a little more info on what you guys know if possible
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Ring question for the pros
- Thread starter Ragin_cajun
- Start date
Re: Ring question for the pros
You'll probably get different opinions about this, but the best thing to do (IMO) is to stay with top quality parts. For bases and rings I like Near, Seekins, USO, Badger Ordinance, and Nightforce. Forget the cheaper stuff, and focus on top quality.
I had a problem some time ago with some aluminum rings on a rifle that traveled with me (trunk of car) for thousands of miles, months on end, and I had some POI changes with it, over time.
I attributed this proble to differences in temperature and the use of those (Burrus) aluminum rings on the steel Badger Ordinance base, because changing to a set of Badger steel rings solved the problem completely.
After further consideration, I am convinced that the material did not cause the problem, rather it was likely due to the cheaper construction of the Burrus rings (i.e., not as precisely machined).
If I'd changed to Seekins rings, it is equally likely that they would have solved my problem even though they are an aluminum alloy.
You'll probably get different opinions about this, but the best thing to do (IMO) is to stay with top quality parts. For bases and rings I like Near, Seekins, USO, Badger Ordinance, and Nightforce. Forget the cheaper stuff, and focus on top quality.
I had a problem some time ago with some aluminum rings on a rifle that traveled with me (trunk of car) for thousands of miles, months on end, and I had some POI changes with it, over time.
I attributed this proble to differences in temperature and the use of those (Burrus) aluminum rings on the steel Badger Ordinance base, because changing to a set of Badger steel rings solved the problem completely.
After further consideration, I am convinced that the material did not cause the problem, rather it was likely due to the cheaper construction of the Burrus rings (i.e., not as precisely machined).
If I'd changed to Seekins rings, it is equally likely that they would have solved my problem even though they are an aluminum alloy.
Re: Ring question for the pros
Diablo pretty much covered it. Use quality parts and don't worry about steel or aluminum. I have used Badger and Seekins and neither let me down. That includes hard match use and flying. Not just a light car trip to the range. Seekins is what I use exclusively now.
Diablo pretty much covered it. Use quality parts and don't worry about steel or aluminum. I have used Badger and Seekins and neither let me down. That includes hard match use and flying. Not just a light car trip to the range. Seekins is what I use exclusively now.
Re: Ring question for the pros
A Seekins base will serve you just as well as a Badger base. Also not all aluminums and steels are created equal. I highly doubt Weaver uses the same aluminum as Seekins. Steel gets heavy fast so I try to stay with aluminum for rings and bases. I'm no engineer but I would think the screws holding all these parts together is your weakest link. Just use a base with a recoil lug or have it pinned. Murphy Precision makes titanium riings and bases if you want the best of both worlds.
A Seekins base will serve you just as well as a Badger base. Also not all aluminums and steels are created equal. I highly doubt Weaver uses the same aluminum as Seekins. Steel gets heavy fast so I try to stay with aluminum for rings and bases. I'm no engineer but I would think the screws holding all these parts together is your weakest link. Just use a base with a recoil lug or have it pinned. Murphy Precision makes titanium riings and bases if you want the best of both worlds.
Re: Ring question for the pros
Im in no hurry with this gun so I think I'll wait a few weeks and get badger base and rings. I know not all metal are made the same, the design of rings I think is as important as metal. Im using a ss 5-20 lluminated so it's a brick. With a scope that heavy I was thinking the base and screws would take tons of abuse. My thoughts are the stiffer the base= less flex which means less stress on screws.
Im in no hurry with this gun so I think I'll wait a few weeks and get badger base and rings. I know not all metal are made the same, the design of rings I think is as important as metal. Im using a ss 5-20 lluminated so it's a brick. With a scope that heavy I was thinking the base and screws would take tons of abuse. My thoughts are the stiffer the base= less flex which means less stress on screws.
Re: Ring question for the pros
I've been using a Nightforce 20MOA base with a set of TPS rings. Jedi turned me onto the TPS rings and I must say they work, without leaving behind any ring marks. I get no change in my zero point when I have rechecked my base line zero.
I've been using a Nightforce 20MOA base with a set of TPS rings. Jedi turned me onto the TPS rings and I must say they work, without leaving behind any ring marks. I get no change in my zero point when I have rechecked my base line zero.
Re: Ring question for the pros
The Question alu VS steel is totally zero interesting when it comes to reliability. Far more interesting is the quality of the aluminium and the steel.
There is really poor aluminium out there and there is really good. But militarywise more and more is going towards alu as steel is far to heavy.
Another thing that is interesting about rings and mounts is the geometry on how they actually grips the scoppe.
For example the classic german style of hunting mounts from Apel and Recknagel where the rings clamps the scope at 7 and 5 o'clock always makes ring marks on the scope, and pretty ugly ones.
Our solution for really have an ultralow risk of ring marks is that the end of the radius in the ring, is a radius of 2" in maybe 1/8" lenght.
That way the 34mm ring doesnt end in a sharp or chamfered end, but in a 2" radius.
The soluions of this togeteher with the 1,25" lenght of the rings seems to be very good for the minimizing the risk of ring marks on scopes.
Try to show it on this picture, but its difficult.
The Question alu VS steel is totally zero interesting when it comes to reliability. Far more interesting is the quality of the aluminium and the steel.
There is really poor aluminium out there and there is really good. But militarywise more and more is going towards alu as steel is far to heavy.
Another thing that is interesting about rings and mounts is the geometry on how they actually grips the scoppe.
For example the classic german style of hunting mounts from Apel and Recknagel where the rings clamps the scope at 7 and 5 o'clock always makes ring marks on the scope, and pretty ugly ones.
Our solution for really have an ultralow risk of ring marks is that the end of the radius in the ring, is a radius of 2" in maybe 1/8" lenght.
That way the 34mm ring doesnt end in a sharp or chamfered end, but in a 2" radius.
The soluions of this togeteher with the 1,25" lenght of the rings seems to be very good for the minimizing the risk of ring marks on scopes.
Try to show it on this picture, but its difficult.
Similar threads
