aluminum or steel rings?

I've used both the steel and the aluminum TPS rings and neither have let me down at all. I prefer the steel though as I've always been led to believe that they are better even though I have no evidence for this lol.
 
Well made rings will perform just fine.

Pick the style and brand and material that suits your fancy.

I even use those with plastic inserts.

They all work... The one thing for sure... steel rings weigh more for a given size.

Jerry
 
I used to use steel all the time till i got talking with a good friend about this and he said he uses aluminum because of the fact that the scope tube is aluminum and u dont end up with varying expansion rate stress on the scope tube if u use the aluminum ring as things heat up and cool down. I realize it is minimal but .0001" deflection at the scope tube will have a measureable effect on things. Whether a person shoots at a level to notice it is one thing but it is a variable that can be eliminated. Just my 2 pennies
 
Jeromeo said:
Good question... If I was putting optics on a 50 or another large magnum, I'd throw steel rings on for peace of mind.

Thanks for the input so far.
Click to expand...

Ironically, most of those big 6 bolt cap rings you see on boomers are made of aluminum.

But when something is over 1" thick, how the heck are you going to shear that under normal use?

Steel rings by comparison are more dainty and slimmer looking.

There is alum and then there is alum. Quality rings will use an alloy strong enough to maintain bolt tension of the caps and cross bolt. That is what keeps your scope in place.

I have never heard of rings actually shearing off a rifle no matter how cheap or crappy the alloy.

But many low end rings have stripped holes.

Jerry
 
Quote: " the techs i've spoken to at nightforce seem to favor and recommend aluminium.:

This is also what Nightforce has told us and we asked an aeronautical engineer-shooter about this and his long response was to favour aluminum.

Regards,

Peter
 
wadedc said:
On big magnums I like to use 2 sets of TPS rings. Twice the surface area and half the cost of one set of nightforce rings.

Wade
Click to expand...

THIS is a big mistake. Ever seen how much a scope flexs during recoil? The tube is engineered to flex during recoil. By reducing the amount of the tube that can flex you have created 2 areas on the scope tube where the flex is concentrated
I don't quite know how to explain this properly.
 
Originally Posted by alberta tactical rifle
THIS is a big mistake. Ever seen how much a scope flexs during recoil? The tube is engineered to flex during recoil. By reducing the amount of the tube that can flex you have created 2 areas on the scope tube where the flex is concentrated
I don't quite know how to explain this properly.



I have seen videos of how much scopes flex. I thought that is what I was trying to avoid with 2 sets of rings? 2 sets of rings means half as much pressure at each point i thought?

Wade
 
I think he means the area not in contact with the rings.

The thought is (I'm guessing) that the area that is affected by the flex is concentrated by reducing the surface of the scope that is allowed to flex.

By using only one set the scope is allowed to flex freely rather than magnifying the tension on the scope which are not in contact with the rings.

This was a wild guess on the thought behind the one set vs two. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom