Frustrated!! UPDATE!!!!

I agree. Ken Farrells are way too high. I actually discussed the issue with him very nicely a few times but he just kind if made me feel like he couldn't care less. He just told me to return the base for a refund. The rings are good. I was only telling him that there was no way I could get my scope low enough with any ring or base combo he had and there were alot of people with the same problem. I like it so there's a hair gap between scope and barrel. The best I could do was slightly less than 1/4". He actually told me he wasn't planning on changing anything. Sorry.
Nuff said.

John
 
Last edited:
Hammerhead said:
I know that they are more money, but why don't you try a better base like the nightforce 20MOA once piece base. That's what I have on my guns and I have never had a problem. Sometimes spending the money is worth it in the end.
Click to expand...

You cannot get a better base than one from Richard Near, ww w.nearmfg.com
Richard makes bases for the US military, RCMP ERT uses them on their rifles, FN uses Near bases on their SPR Rifles and so does a host of others when they could have used any base like a Badger, Nightforce, TPS Seekins etc. I have two of Richard's bases, a 25 moa and a 20 moa base. I will not use any other base on my rifles. They are top notch, plus he is Canadian.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have the same problem with a M700 short action. I had about 4 MOA elevation on a 0 MOA base, and the 20 MOA base gives me 24 MOA total, which puts me exactly int the middle for the elevation range (and not enough to get to 1000m - too bad). I thought it was the scope (4200 6-24x50), but maybe not ?
 
A high base like a Ferrell allows you to use shorter rings with 56mm objective scopes. I REALLY like that. It also creates more room for knuckles and with meat hooks like mine, I like that too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom