Recommendation for scope mount

Mik123

Mik123

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Super GunNutz
Rating - 100%
267   0   0
Location
Lower Mainland, BC
Hi All,

I'm hoping to get some recommendations for mounting options for a Leupold VX3-2.4-10x40 scope on my Kimber Talkeetna. The two base options I'm looking are:

1. One piece picatinny rail:
+Adds rigidity to receiver once bedded
+Easier to align scope rings and has more adjustment for proper eye relief.

-Less room to load cartridges (rifle has a blind mag)

2. Two piece Warne weaver bases:
+/- are the opposite of the above as far as I can tell
I've only found these at Grouse River, if anyone knows a place in lower mainland these bases for the Kimber 8400 received I would like to check them out in person.

The reason I'm looking at the above is because I would like to have the option of moving the scope to my two other rifles which have picatinny rails.

I'm not sure about which rings to buy and could use suggestions for that as well. I have a pair of ATRS rings and I would use them not but they don't make a 1 in version.

Thanks,

Milos
 
Last edited:
Two piece. That Kimber loads and unloads from the top. You don't need a one piece getting in the way.

Warne is great, actually. You can get extension bases for the front and rear, and their quick release rings are terrific. Spending more on a hunting rifle doesn't make sense to me.

Forget about moving the scope. It's a pain in the ass. If you need to do that, sell down your rifles until you have enough scopes.
 
one problem I've seen with 2 pc bases is with "some" scopes. The shortness of some scopes results in basically no or very little room to adjust for proper eye relief. Something to keep in mind. I prefer the 1 pc bases and have had no issues loading/unloading etc with them.
 
I move my scopes around all the time. It allows me to have better optics, that i can use all year around, instead of them just sitting in the safe.

I vote for a one piece rail, but you shouldn't need a 400$ one piece mount/rings for a hunting rig.

I know nothing about the Kimbers, but I think EGW makes solid rails with cutaway sections for easier loading. I don't know if they'll fit.

-J.
 
LeftFootOfDoom said:
one problem I've seen with 2 pc bases is with "some" scopes. The shortness of some scopes results in basically no or very little room to adjust for proper eye relief. Something to keep in mind. I prefer the 1 pc bases and have had no issues loading/unloading etc with them.
Click to expand...

Warne makes front extension bases and rear extension bases that will let you use any body length of scope, within reason. Loading a blind mag or hinged drop plate with a rail going across is a pain in the butt compared with loading and unloading with nothing in the way. If it's a mag fed rifle it's *less* of a problem, but you still have to unload the round in the chamber. Plus, the one piece rail is unnecessary weight.

Cheers, man.


Gunneegoogoo said:
I move my scopes around all the time. It allows me to have better optics, that i can use all year around, instead of them just sitting in the safe.

I vote for a one piece rail, but you shouldn't need a 400$ one piece mount/rings for a hunting rig.

I know nothing about the Kimbers, but I think EGW makes solid rails with cutaway sections for easier loading. I don't know if they'll fit.

-J.
Click to expand...

I don't move my scopes around. My hunting scopes aren't useful magnification ranges for any other type of shooting I do, and life can get busy... what if the scope for my 6.4x55 is sitting on my AR, and so my deer rifle isn't ready to go? I went hunting on 12 hours notice this year, and "1 hour before first light" is a bad time to be trying to sight in.

The cutaway section either doesn't have useful rail across it, or isn't very cut-away, right? In either case, it's an unnecessary pain in the butt.

I agree about the price. $100 all-in for mounts and rings, certainly not more than that.

If you *really* want to move your scopes around, fix it in your head to only ever move the rear ring on the scope tube, and buy a torque driver. Mine was $80, Taiwanese, and it's terrific. Once you've decided to move the rear ring, the scope can go anywhere, and the front ring makes sure the scope stays level with respect to the first rifle.

Really, though, it you've got rifles that require optics and no optics on them because of the expense, you've got more rifles than you can afford. I don't say that about *you personally*, or to be offensive. Cheers, friend.
 
^Thanks for the advice. I went with the weaver basesand rings after all. I don't plan on moving the scope around too much at all. I have scopes for all my rifles. It's just that most of them might be a bit too heavy to take hunting. I wanted to have the option of moving this scope (if needed) while I buy a few more hunting scopes. Since both of my other rifles have picatinny rails I though it shouldn't be too hard to move the scope over without taking the rings off.

Cheers,

Mik
 
Mik123 said:
^Thanks for the advice. I went with the weaver basesand rings after all. I don't plan on moving the scope around too much at all. I have scopes for all my rifles. It's just that most of them might be a bit too heavy to take hunting. I wanted to have the option of moving this scope (if needed) while I buy a few more hunting scopes. Since both of my other rifles have picatinny rails I though it shouldn't be too hard to move the scope over without taking the rings off.

Cheers,

Mik
Click to expand...

Hi Mik,

Those weaver rings scratch the hell out of scopes, so be careful.

Cheers!
 
Mik123 said:
Thanks for the heads up. I got the lapping compound ready!
Click to expand...

Wait, Weaver-style rings and bases made by Weaver, or Weaver-style rings and bases made by Warne?

If it's Warne, no worries of scratching. I wouldn't even bother lapping. Very nice stuff. If it's weaver by weaver, scratchy scratch scratch! :)
 
Bartledan said:
Wait, Weaver-style rings and bases made by Weaver, or Weaver-style rings and bases made by Warne?

If it's Warne, no worries of scratching. I wouldn't even bother lapping. Very nice stuff. If it's weaver by weaver, scratchy scratch scratch! :)
Click to expand...


They're Warne bases and rings. Glad to hear there's less work involved :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom