Farrell and Leupold PRW

B

bearkilr

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
356   0   0
Location
Nowhere, ......just past the middle
I'm having some issues(I think) with my Farrell base and 34mm Leupold PRW rings.
Anyone else encounter this? Do these rings not work with a Farrell base?

It seems they are slightly canted, like the base is too wide for the ring base to seat properly, or conversely, the rings are too narrow?

I was under the impression that everything was standard size when it came to Picatinny. Perhaps I'll need different rings?

Attached photo:
prw003.jpg
 
Last edited:
It should work just fine. I just installed a Farrel one piece base and Burris rings and thought the fit was top notch.

Does the cross pin (that fits into the groove) rotate? Maybe it is causing interference?
 
the_dude306 said:
It should work just fine. I just installed a Farrel one piece base and Burris rings and thought the fit was top notch.

Does the cross pin (that fits into the groove) rotate? Maybe it is causing interference?
Click to expand...

The cross pin doesn't seem to be interfering. When one looks at the picture, notice how the "ring clamp"(on left side) is not at a 90 to the base?

It looks to me like the base is too wide for the rings to seat properly, though Leupold advertises them as fitting any Picatinny style base.

There is a gap between the bottom of the rings and the base as well.
 
the_dude306 said:
Ya, I noticed that. That's why I thought the cross pin wasn't seating properly. If you take off the tension will the base sit flat on it's own? (make sure to take the scope out of the rings)
Click to expand...

Yes it will if loosened completely. When I retighten, it seems to climb as the base is too wide/ring base too narrow.

I installed the scope ring base first then tightened the scope in the rings, just to make sure there was no side tension or such.

Maybe that's just the way it's supposed to look? Not sure, most of my other rifles have Talley bases and rings. However, even a cheapo Weaver set-up looks more square than this.
 
It should sit flat.

Is the clamp upside down? Maybe it is offset and can only work one way? Are both bases doing it?

After that I got nothing. Get out the calipers and measure the base and rings. Or try them on another rail.
 
Hard to see in the picture (try good diffuced or indirect lighting and the macro setting on your camera). I would get a clear pic and send it to Ken Farrel and see what he has to say. His customer service is top notch. If it's nto as simple as flipping the clamp piece then he can clear it up for you.
 
Farrel are not picatinny mil spec they have a weaver slot, not that it should have anything to do with Leupold rings, but other rings that are not W will not fit,,at least the ones I have had. On a side note Farrel may make 2 types of slots..just the ones I had were not picatinny.
 
I've updated the picture to a better one now that the sun is shining. :)

It appears to be a simple scenario of the rings not matching the bases. The base is too wide/rings too narrow.

The clamp can't be flipped, the screws are not in the center. It also looks like the clamps have bent under tightening due to things not lining up. The front looks the same.

So, my next question, who sells 34mm rings in Canada that fit a Farrell base?

Better yet, 34mm Farrell rings.

FWIW, these are the ones that came with the scope from Leupold, but I imagine all Leupold PRW's are the same. I had it mounted on Leupold QRW/PRW bases, but wanted a one piece. They fit those bases just fine. Oh well.

Thanks for the help so far.

EDIT

After closer inspection, the Leupold bases are identical in size and dimensions to the Farrell. Evidently, the fault lies with the Leupold rings. Once I get different rings, I'll send these in to Leupold.
 
bearkilr said:
It appears to be a simple scenario of the rings not matching the bases. The base is too wide/rings too narrow.

The clamp can't be flipped, the screws are not in the center. It also looks like the clamps have bent under tightening due to things not lining up. The front looks the same.

So, my next question, who sells 34mm rings in Canada that fit a Farrell base?

Better yet, 34mm Farrell rings.

FWIW, these are the ones that came with the scope from Leupold, but I imagine all Leupold PRW's are the same. I had it mounted on Leupold QRW/PRW bases, but wanted a one piece. They fit those bases just fine. Oh well.

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

As suggested before why not contact Ken? If the base is incorrect he can offer warranty on it. If it is correct he can certainly offer suggestions as to what rings would be best for you. Give him a chance to make things right.

If all else fails he sells matched rings for his bases and does ship to Canada.
 
woolly said:
As suggested before why not contact Ken? If the base is incorrect he can offer warranty on it. If it is correct he can certainly offer suggestions as to what rings would be best for you. Give him a chance to make things right.

If all else fails he sells matched rings for his bases and does ship to Canada.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I'll contact him in regard to rings. As I noted in my above edited post, I firmly believe the fault lies with the Leupold rings.
 
That is the way it is supposed to be, I don't know why.
I just took a look at mine and it is the same as yours. If you take a look at the cross bars on the bottom of the rings, they are canted. Mine also have a gap between the base and the bottom of the rings, Both of my rifles are like that.
 
mightyhunter said:
That is the way it is supposed to be, I don't know why.
I just took a look at mine and it is the same as yours. If you take a look at the cross bars on the bottom of the rings, they are canted. Mine also have a gap between the base and the bottom of the rings, Both of my rifles are like that.
Click to expand...

Interesting. Is your clamp bent a bit like mine looks to be or did I maybe overtighten it?

I guess so long as it continues to hold zero, it should be alright. Maybe I'll send a picture to Leupold tech to see if that's normal.
 
No, mine is not bent at all. On the PRW rings I only torque it to 45 inch pound and it fine. On mine Badger and NF rings that come with the 1/2" nuts, I torque them to 65" lbs. Just make sure the scope is level with the action and it will be ok.
 
TPS makes 34mm rings - I am using it for my S&B PM2. They work very well and are very strong - it hasn't shaken loose on my 338 LM. I am not a big Farrell base fan, I have used his stuff before but I always found them to be much higher sitting then other bases.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom