Rings.. cheap vs expensive
- Thread starter eco
- Start date
True.....if you're buying junk, like from Amazon. (Which is fine if that's all ya need.)
Not so if you want high quality product.
The good ones have the bore for the scope tube machined with the 2 ring halves together at the time. It makes it automatically Center the tube in the ring. I have experience the poor and irritating contrast of attempting to use cheap rings.
The small cost difference makes a big difference in having the scope zero properly. When the holes hold the scope in a skewed position, adjusting your scope doesn’t behave in the predictable way it ought to. You adjust one parameter in a specific direction and the outcome isn’t as calculated.
This probably makes zero difference at 40 yards, but it’s dramatic down range. On an order of magnitude it alters the point of impact.
I found another problem with cheap tip-off rimfire rings. Sometimes they actually aren’t ma honed the right width for a standard 3/8 groove/dovetail. They end up tossed in the garbage.
I’ve only used a few decent brands. Burris. Leupold, and a couple others I can’t remember off the top of my head. I assume the others are great too. Of the cheap ones I’ve tried, they all sit in a box in my cupboard but should just be tossed. Thanks for reminding me to do this.
$100 divided by 25 years is $4 per year. Not a bad deal for happily up hitting the mark. And usually you can find brand name ones for $50.
The small cost difference makes a big difference in having the scope zero properly. When the holes hold the scope in a skewed position, adjusting your scope doesn’t behave in the predictable way it ought to. You adjust one parameter in a specific direction and the outcome isn’t as calculated.
This probably makes zero difference at 40 yards, but it’s dramatic down range. On an order of magnitude it alters the point of impact.
I found another problem with cheap tip-off rimfire rings. Sometimes they actually aren’t ma honed the right width for a standard 3/8 groove/dovetail. They end up tossed in the garbage.
I’ve only used a few decent brands. Burris. Leupold, and a couple others I can’t remember off the top of my head. I assume the others are great too. Of the cheap ones I’ve tried, they all sit in a box in my cupboard but should just be tossed. Thanks for reminding me to do this.
$100 divided by 25 years is $4 per year. Not a bad deal for happily up hitting the mark. And usually you can find brand name ones for $50.
Was just curious from a simple physics and real life test perspective... whether the expensive stuff is worth the 1000% increase in price.
Or whether it's just an insane brand markup... just because they can.
I appreciate nice things and good quality. Hence my new zeiss scope.
The rings are just throwing me off.
Wish there were real life true tests, lab or range, whichever, with a same rifle and same loads. Side by side. To see what the difference, if any, there is.
Over my life time I've noticed just how many things the general public gets screwed on. I remember my buddy decades ago working at Ford parts. Lug nuts they would get for pennies, they were selling dollars, five to ten fold the markup. Because it was the "authentic" stuff.
Same goes for clothes, accessories, etc. All made from same material, same animal for example. But one costs $20 and the other $1000. Something like stupid belt.. a cheap leather belt vs a Gucci or armani etc crap. Both made of leather. Both same thickness, do the same job. I've had one before and it fell apart, was crap. My Walmart one from 20yrs ago I'm still using.
Add a brand/label on it and you can jack it up 1000%
Brands used to mean something back in the day when people and their hard work made that brand. Attention to details. Workmanship. Pride.
Now 90% of the world comes mass produced from China. Crappy dingy factories using poor people as slave labour to operate mass production machines.
Just because it has a stamp on it, to me personally doesn't mean crap anymore.
Some things still do, but for the most past it's all make believe. And as long as there is sheep willing to fork out the money, manufactures will keep jacking up the already unreasonable prices even higher.
At times higher price can mean better quality.
The rings specifically (without any actual testing done to compare) I'm having hard time seeing the difference.. literally 2 half rings of aluminum, a base, and few screws.
Maybe made out of some fancy rare metal it might be worth 300-400... but plain aluminum or some cheap alloy.. I don't see it.
Maybe it's just me.
Ended up getting talley's. Lots of good feedback and middle of pack price wise.
For my rim fire and cheaper ones think I'll stay with cheap rings
Last edited:
Zeiss dosent make rings, 
If you want bottom cost and still functional buy sportsmatch, Arken, swfa….I wouldn’t buy 20$ stuff but you don’t need to spend multiple of hundreds either
Lots of excellent quality used rings for sale here and on gp.
If you want bottom cost and still functional buy sportsmatch, Arken, swfa….I wouldn’t buy 20$ stuff but you don’t need to spend multiple of hundreds either
Lots of excellent quality used rings for sale here and on gp.
Didn't even know about rockslide. Great site. Lots of good info.
So some are saying they had experience where the rings were not properly aligning, no 2 true half circles, etc.
One saying his AR was grouping differently when compared to other set of rings
- Location
- Blaster land, Okanagan BC
This^^^
I have PRW/QRW and Burris Zee rings on most of my scoped rifles, they have never failed to hold tight. Weaver grand slams on one other, none of them have been overly expensive.
Last edited:
Tier-One makes rings for Zeiss.
Although true, this really only accounts for the scopes bore through the rings and leaves out the clamping surfaces Which are not necessarily as perfect even though they should be.
Then add the base which may or may not be precisely in line, then the mounting holes in the receiver which may or may not be perfect and so on down the line.
If u want the Cadillac, its a precision machined one-piece base and even that clamps to something. .
I have spuhr aesthetic rings on my main hunting rifle. They cost way too much but they look good and they are super low which i like and they are also precise and super secure.
Everything else is in MDT or Vortex or Arken rings and I have never had a loss of zero.
Meh….
I was gonna suggest Talley but you already chose them. Certainly a good starting point for a hunting rifle.
Anything cheaper I'd be nervous to dent my quality scopes as I torque the rings. You could help that a complete ring mounting and lapping kit. There are things to confirm rings alignment (parallel) and all.
Anything cheaper I'd be nervous to dent my quality scopes as I torque the rings. You could help that a complete ring mounting and lapping kit. There are things to confirm rings alignment (parallel) and all.
270WSMXBolt
Regular
- Location
- Delta B.C.
It's a respectable question when trying to budget a build.
Most manufactures regardless of industry and product, grade their product prior to sale. Some have a higher tolerance to deviations in subjects/materials/measurements. Those that grade their products beyond a yes or no standard have multiple price points for markets. If you are purchasing a multiple pricing set, it is a different quality based on the manufactures standards. Better is more moolah. There is a massive difference in tooling and quality control regardless of manufacturer.
I recently re-mounted crappy Weaver scope on a 300 WSM Savage that had Weaver knock off rings on it. Maybe the scope was too. The rings were slightly rounded on the Weaver aluminum base slots and had hammered the crap out of the base as they just weren't made well. It was an $900.00 cdn gun package deal P.O.S. If your only shooting 100 yrds with subsonic or light rounds it's not really gonna matter. But a big heavy projectile being moved by a large volume of powder will show the flaws in anything. All auto reloads slam back and forth so the tolerance really matters. Anyone paying big bucks for rings will be #####ing loud if they aren't happy. If Roulette or Craps is the game then take your chances.
Higher standards means more manufacturing expenses. No way around that.
BTW the scope on that rifle was ruined by the bad rings. It can't hold a zero anymore. Sometimes being cheap is more expensive.
Cheers
Most manufactures regardless of industry and product, grade their product prior to sale. Some have a higher tolerance to deviations in subjects/materials/measurements. Those that grade their products beyond a yes or no standard have multiple price points for markets. If you are purchasing a multiple pricing set, it is a different quality based on the manufactures standards. Better is more moolah. There is a massive difference in tooling and quality control regardless of manufacturer.
I recently re-mounted crappy Weaver scope on a 300 WSM Savage that had Weaver knock off rings on it. Maybe the scope was too. The rings were slightly rounded on the Weaver aluminum base slots and had hammered the crap out of the base as they just weren't made well. It was an $900.00 cdn gun package deal P.O.S. If your only shooting 100 yrds with subsonic or light rounds it's not really gonna matter. But a big heavy projectile being moved by a large volume of powder will show the flaws in anything. All auto reloads slam back and forth so the tolerance really matters. Anyone paying big bucks for rings will be #####ing loud if they aren't happy. If Roulette or Craps is the game then take your chances.
Higher standards means more manufacturing expenses. No way around that.
BTW the scope on that rifle was ruined by the bad rings. It can't hold a zero anymore. Sometimes being cheap is more expensive.
Cheers
This. Chinesium rings are mass produced; thrown in probably a sketchy at best fixture and just made to look decent. There's likely little to no attention paid to making sure the bores are straight, or exactly the right size, or in the exact same position across multiples. Torque down a scope in mis-matched rings and it's going to crush it, twist it, etc. Then you ruin your expensive scope because you cheaped out on rings.
Or it might be fine. They might work just as well as the expensive ones. But you're gambling every time. Worth it?
I guess it all depends on what a person considers cheap. I think I would pass on the $15 Amazon rings from China. I mostly use Burris or Vortex tactical rings with one piece picattiny base and have had no problems, not that cheap but not expensive either. I recently bought a pair of Sportsmatch rimfire dovetail rings, $40, made in Britain, look to be decent quality.
I have atleast a dozen Warne Maxima rails and ring sets and have never had an issue. The Maxina stuff is steel but they also offer cheaper aluminum products.
Yes, on every point.
If I had my druthers, I’d have the Sako or Ruger setup on everything - no base, just a ring right on the receiver. Unfortunate I don’t have either on anything I own.
I also like the rings that screws to the receiver without a base. I have that on one rifle. I think it may be a Talley setup.
