Ruger 10/22T weaver rail a little off-spec? anyone notice this?

manbearpig

manbearpig

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
72   0   0
Location
Somewhere in the Third World
just mounted a Bushnell T-Dot (ACOG wannabe) on it and its kindof... off kilter a bit. nothing wrong with the reddot's mount as it sits fine on my Warne weaver bases.

anyone notice that the stock Ruger 10/22T rail is a little 'off'?
should i replace it or just leave it as is?
 
no hump.
i mean the base seems 'wider' than a standard weaver. perhaps it started off as standard size but the thick coat of paint they put on it made it slightly too fat.
when clamped onto it, the weaver mount of the reddot doesnt square up the way it should when tightened, it stays a little 'open' - as if the weaver base were too fat.

i dont have this problem with this or any other rings/reddot on any of my other weaver bases - and yes im mounting them properly :)
 
I didn't bother with the wimpy rail supplied with my 10/22T.

Added a PC 10/22 Receiver Mounted Scope Base from Hawkteckarms.com instead.

Meaty, machined base that is perfect for mounting your rings and scope.
 
Mightymouse said:
I didn't bother with the wimpy rail supplied with my 10/22T.

Added a PC 10/22 Receiver Mounted Scope Base from Hawkteckarms.com instead.

Meaty, machined base that is perfect for mounting your rings and scope.
Click to expand...

yeah my base just got here, before the rifle, which i'm still waiting for lol
 
(Ronin) said:
You sure the mount is made for a weaver rail?
Click to expand...

yeah :)
works perfect on any other picatinny/weaver rail i have.

i think im going to replace the stock 10/22 rail, it creeps me out that my mounts dont sit perfectly on it.

i think the problem is that the aluminum weaver rail is machined perfectly to spec, but then Ruger coats it with this thickass black paint which probably adds several thousandths of an inch, on 2 sides and the top, which ends up making it oversized.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom