Warne bases for BLR aluminum receiver

[BRvalley]

Are these the proper bases for a BLR model 81 with aluminum receiver?

The gun shop says they are, but they don’t sit flush? The package says steel receiver, but the gun shop says there is the same gap when mounted on the steel receivers....not sure I’m buying that

The fit with weaver base was a lot better, but the bases are higher profile and impair the use of open sights

My first lever centre fire and still learning about blr’s, any chance somebody could recommend bases/part numbers for the aluminum receiver? I wanted to use the warne quick release rings hopefully

https://i.imgur.com/4q5EpxJ.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/sRYHjJH.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/RTts8gB.jpg

 

[SuperCub]

I'd use the weavers with the lowest ring of good quality I could find. The combs on BLRs tend to be quite low, thus the low rings set up for a better cheek weld.

Forget about using the iron sights. A good scope won't usually fail and is MUCH preferable to iron sights under all circumstances.

 

[BRvalley]

I just don’t have any open sight center fires, wanted to add something different to the collection....and flexibility to use open sights when I’m in my stands or still hunting thick bush

Looking at the website now it seems warne m848 bases are what I need for the lightweight receiver...only wasted 30L in gas, even though I called in advance lol

Mounting a 2-7x33 Leupold, would the low rings let the scope clear the rear sight?

 

[Hand Skills]

I have/had Talley, EGW and Nikon bases on the BLR 81 - none sit flush... I just do my best to centre the base on the receiver and seat the edges of the base into the grooves on the receiver. They are designed this way to take stress off the screws, minimizing shearing forces.

I really wish weaver made an extended base, but I ended up with the Nikon A-series BAR bases for a bit of mounting flexibility. BAR and BLR mounts are cross compatible

 

[Hitzy]

For any solid top receiver's, I'm a fan of 1 piece rails. EGW makes a decent rail, grooved down the middle as well so you may be able to see the irons easier.

 

[Hitzy]

I just don’t have any open sight center fires, wanted to add something different to the collection....and flexibility to use open sights when I’m in my stands or still hunting thick bush

Looking at the website now it seems warne m848 bases are what I need for the lightweight receiver...only wasted 30L in gas, even though I called in advance lol

Mounting a 2-7x33 Leupold, would the low rings let the scope clear the rear sight?

Looking at Brownells, they list the 838 for the BLR, 848 for BAR.
ht tps://www.brownells.com/optics-mounting/rings-mounts-amp-bases/rifle-bases/maxima-2-piece-steel-bases-prod24131.aspx

 

[boxhitch]

Warne lists 2 bases for BLRs , one for steel , one for lightning
would be nice to trust a lgs with things like that, but not so
Weaver bases for the two are definitely differnt profile, not interchangable

I have the QRW rings with a Vari-X III 2.5-8x36 , on Weaver bases and they clear the rear sight enough it can be adjusted up to be usable
Rings measure 5mm, not sure whether they are low or med

 

[jjohnwm]

Not only are the steel and aluminum receivers differently profiled, but to add to the mess the takedown version is slightly different from other aluminum variants. It has a slight hump at the front edge which prevents a flat base from seating properly.

Once you do finally get the correct base for your gun, be aware also that the BLR, like most leverguns, forces you to deal with the projecting hammer strut as well. Scopes must mount either high enough to clear the strut, or far enough forward that there is no interference.

 

[BRvalley]

for what it's worth, the m848 bases fit better....but still not perfectly, triggers my OCD lol....might look for leupold bases to compare the fit, but at least this gets me range time and maybe still time to use it hunting this season

I went with the medium height rings, which lets the scope clear the rear sight