Yet, despite your claim of dovetail obsolescence, European manufacturers continue to only make rimfire rifles with dovetail grooves. Other than the alleged advantage of having Picatinny or Weaver-style bases on your Rugers, are either of them better performing rifles than European models?
You must accept that, unlike many North American manufacturers, European rifle makers and shooters are not as wedded to the idea of Picatinny/Weaver-style scope mounting being necessary on rimfire rifles. Dovetail grooves and rings are able to mount scopes without issue. It's not like rimfire has any significant recoil to deal with. There's nothing that a 0 MOA base can do (other than the obvious ability to use different rings) that good dovetail rings don't do.
Besides, if a 0 MOA rail was included with every rifle regardless of origin, there would always be shooters complaining that they prefer a canted rail which would cost extra. Furthermore, if a rail was machined directly into the receiver, that couldn't satisfy everyone -- would it be 0, 20, or 30 MOA?
You sound like you're trapped in the 50's.
Technology has moved on and some people like to be able to remove a scope from a rifle and have it return to zero when they reinstall it.
Or, they like to be able to use the same rings and mounts for their centerfire and rimfire rifles.
Comparing U.S. or European made rifles is also ridiculous, they are all cheaply made nowadays. I was disappointed to pull my Tikka out of the box and to see how much plastic there is on it and how lame the plastic magazines are.
Will it stack up to my 452's? I doubt it. But it offers a similar platform to my T3X's.
Nobody, and I mean NOBODY makes the perfect rimfire. Only the CZ 452's came close in my opinion, and even they are a PITA because the dovetails are different between the Luxes and Americans. Most rings that work on one rifle will simply not work on the other, and they never seem to sit just right either.
Can you not comprehend how having a proven mounting system that is compatible with every rifle type would be advantageous?
I doubt that you speak for European shooters in regards to their scope mounting preferences. I suspect that they too would prefer a reliable and universal mounting system.
As for worrying about the angle of the mount, that's a ridiculous concern. There are enough one-piece mounting systems with MOA built into them already to meet the needs of anyone requiring more elevation adjustments at long range.
Simply put, your argument just doesn't hold any water.
