Looking for some advise/experience - Weaver style rings/picatinny rail/Leupold scope

riversrest

riversrest

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
19   0   0
Location
BC
I have a Leupold VX Freedom (bought new) mounted with Leupold quick detach rings in an EGW rail on a 7-08 rifle. I find the scope is having clear optics and enough light gathering properties for my needs. However, for a scope at this price point windage/elevation adjustments are really mushy without having a posive tactile feel (even the older bushnell banners are better) and the crosshairs don't seem to move until you reach about ten clicks or so. (Observed while rough sighting in a gun vise with a laser bore sighter)

The rings are really nice, but the recoil crossbar is not the full width of the Picatinny slot, so there is some back-and-forth play before you lock down the rings. Hence, I've pushed the rings forward in the cross-slots before securing them down.

First, I've sighted in the rifle with the rail installed at 50 meters using the stock iron sights. (The EGW rail allows the iron sights to be picked-up when the otics are removed). I can shot 3 round groups into 25mm. Very happy with that...

Then I tried with the scope and my shots were all over the place like 5" on 50 meters. Now, I wonder if the scope is having issues or if I should adjust the rings so there is no back-and-forth play in the picatinny rail?

Please note, rail and rings are torqued to specs with a wheeler fat wrench and blue loctite was used for all mounting screws.

What is your experience/opinion?

RR
 
Did some more testing today and believe the scope is facked. First time trying a Leupold and most likely the last time too.

RR
 
Don't use Weaver rings with a Picatinny, particularly the EGW which has a middle groove. The rings will damage the rail and try to ride out of the slot. I've seen this happen twice, in both cases accuracy was seriously degraded. Get true Picatinny rings...
 
There is no wear showing on the base and the scope has no movement slide marks or ring marks on the tube from installing/shooting. Ammo was factory loads, Hornady and Federal, and even with a hot barrel the iron sights grouped better than the scope.

RR
 
We'll also support using picatinny rings on a pic rail. That said, if you continue to experience issues with the optic/mounts, please send the scope to us for our tech's to inspect.

Feel free to reach out with any questions you may have.

KGL
 
Looked into it some more and? Isn't WARNE like a "Made in US / Oregon" company as well? They claim on their web-site:

"Any weaver style mount will work on both weaver style and picatinny rails, however, some manufacturers make picatinny specific mounts, and these mounts can only mount to a picatinny rail for a few reasons. Either the recoil lug that is being used is too wide for the weaver style slot, or there are multiple lugs that are spaced for the picatinny slot spacing, and they will not align with the weaver style slot placement. Warne Maxima and Tactical rings are a weaver style ring that will work on both weaver and picatinny style bases. Some customers ask us “how do they fit both?, wouldn’t there be a lot of play in the picatinny slot?”. In short, the answer is yes, there is more forward and back play in a picatinny slot. The main thing to consider is that there is still a bit of play in a weaver slot, and typically picatinny specific rings also have a bit of play in a picatinny slot. Since we recommend pushing both rings forward toward the muzzle, the amount of play in the slot is a moot point. The purpose of the recoil key is to keep the scope from moving. When a rifle recoils back into the shooter’s shoulder, the scope wants to stay in place, which happens to place the load of that recoil on the forward face of the slot. It would be similar to putting your car in reverse and giving it some throttle, your body will go forward. The same principal applies to the rings. When you push the rings forward, you seat the recoil key against the front of the slot, stopping any potential for movement.

Inertia-Recoil-1024x593.jpg


I more and more believe it is the Leupold scope on my rifle that is faulty!

RR
 
Yes - We all understand the recoil/inertia phenomenon, and mount scopes accordingly. The issue is the amount of contact area that the small and round Weaver cross-bolt has. Couple this with the small contact area offered by the EGW aluminum rail and the issue arises. (the cross-bolt does not make square contact and wants to ride upward and forward over the rail under recoil.)
Compare this to the contact area offered by the large square Picatinny cross-bolt.
Anyway, swapping scopes to prove out your theory is a quick test.
 
riversrest said:
Looked into it some more and? Isn't WARNE like a "Made in US / Oregon" company as well? They claim on their web-site:

"Any weaver style mount will work on both weaver style and picatinny rails, however, some manufacturers make picatinny specific mounts, and these mounts can only mount to a picatinny rail for a few reasons. Either the recoil lug that is being used is too wide for the weaver style slot, or there are multiple lugs that are spaced for the picatinny slot spacing, and they will not align with the weaver style slot placement. Warne Maxima and Tactical rings are a weaver style ring that will work on both weaver and picatinny style bases. Some customers ask us “how do they fit both?, wouldn’t there be a lot of play in the picatinny slot?”. In short, the answer is yes, there is more forward and back play in a picatinny slot. The main thing to consider is that there is still a bit of play in a weaver slot, and typically picatinny specific rings also have a bit of play in a picatinny slot. Since we recommend pushing both rings forward toward the muzzle, the amount of play in the slot is a moot point. The purpose of the recoil key is to keep the scope from moving. When a rifle recoils back into the shooter’s shoulder, the scope wants to stay in place, which happens to place the load of that recoil on the forward face of the slot. It would be similar to putting your car in reverse and giving it some throttle, your body will go forward. The same principal applies to the rings. When you push the rings forward, you seat the recoil key against the front of the slot, stopping any potential for movement.

Inertia-Recoil-1024x593.jpg


I more and more believe it is the Leupold scope on my rifle that is faulty!

RR
Click to expand...

If you continue to have this issue, please send your scope back to us. Our technicians will correct any issues the optic may be experiencing.

KGL
 
cosmic said:
Yes - We all understand the recoil/inertia phenomenon, and mount scopes accordingly. The issue is the amount of contact area that the small and round Weaver cross-bolt has. Couple this with the small contact area offered by the EGW aluminum rail and the issue arises. (the cross-bolt does not make square contact and wants to ride upward and forward over the rail under recoil.)
Compare this to the contact area offered by the large square Picatinny cross-bolt.
Anyway, swapping scopes to prove out your theory is a quick test.
Click to expand...

Cosmic, thanks for your advise! It's well appreciated and made me go to check the cross-bolts.

Turns out that the cross-bolts on the Leupold QRW2 rings are square, NOT rounded. So there is full square contact with the rail in both slots towards the muzzle. IMO that - combined with the "dovetail" clamp-down - would eliminate the force trying to ride the scope upward and forward under recoil.

I think, I'll put the scope on a rimfire rifle (which I know is accurate) in order to check if it tracks well and can hold zero under very little recoil. .22 is inexpensive for testing and I'll go from there then...

And thanks to KGL for their proactive customer service. I'll send the scope to you if necessary!

RR
 
riversrest said:
Cosmic, thanks for your advise! It's well appreciated and made me go to check the cross-bolts.

Turns out that the cross-bolts on the Leupold QRW2 rings are square, NOT rounded. So there is full square contact with the rail in both slots towards the muzzle. IMO that - combined with the "dovetail" clamp-down - would eliminate the force trying to ride the scope upward and forward under recoil.

I think, I'll put the scope on a rimfire rifle (which I know is accurate) in order to check if it tracks well and can hold zero under very little recoil. .22 is inexpensive for testing and I'll go from there then...

And thanks to KGL for their proactive customer service. I'll send the scope to you if necessary!

RR
Click to expand...

We are here to help where we can. Good luck with your 22 test!

KGL
 
Korth Group Ltd said:
If you continue to have this issue, please send your scope back to us. Our technicians will correct any issues the optic may be experiencing.

KGL
Click to expand...


Korth Group Ltd said:
We are here to help where we can. Good luck with your 22 test!

KGL
Click to expand...


Yah, Thanks again but no luck here!

Scope is coming your way... unfortunately - and I really wanted to like it.

Nevertheless, a good long week-end to all of us CGNers.

RR
 
It was defective and deemed "repaired" by some when it came back.

I didn't trust it and sold it on full disclosure before mounting it back on any of my rifles. It was junk from the get go. Sold the rings as well but still have the same rail with another scope.
 
BTW. it came back with a dented original box as if somebody stepped on it and bent it back in place. The the outer paper packaging didn't show a scratch.

There was also some "repair report" in the damaged box together with the scope with some scribbling on it about parallax issue. I honestly couldn't decipher all the scribbles. So much about your guess.

That was my last dealings with Leupold products period. Never again.

FYI, I replaced the rings with Warnes QDs and the scope with a 2-7x32 Monarch 3. And yes, I know they are out of replacement stock if warranty should arise...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom