PDA

View Full Version : Scope Mounts for remington 700 adl .270


4whln
November 13, 2011, 11:35 PM
Okay, I bought a remmy 700 adl in .270. I decided not to spend the $400 right now on a Nikon Monarch, so I found a Redfield Revolution on ebay for $175 with free shipping. Does anyone know if this is a good scope or should I not waste my time? What scope mounts do I need to get? Thanks.

T-CAIN
November 14, 2011, 12:31 AM
I put the same scope on a .223 last summer, one of the best scopes in my arsenal. Very clear, doesn't fog easily, and so far it has held it's zero perfectly. I think that you will find yourself sticking with the revolution and forgetting about the monarch.....

warbirdlover
November 14, 2011, 12:44 AM
It's a great scope. Looked through a whole bunch at Gander and it was one of the best. And I'd put good Leupold mounts and rings on like these....

http://swfa.com/Leupold-Standard-2-Piece-Base-P1132.aspx

http://swfa.com/Leupold-Standard-1-Rings-P1139.aspx

jmr40
November 14, 2011, 05:48 AM
I'd avoid anything with dovetails or windage adjustment. There are many much better mounting systems out there. Those were designed to be used back in the day when gunsmiths had to drill and tap receivers since they did not come from the factory with mounting holes. The holes were often not drilled straight with the barrel and these mounts could adjust to compensate for this. Unless your mounting holes are drilled incorrectly they are a poor choice.

For a rifle used for target or precision shooting go with some type of rail and rings with a cross slot to fit the rail. On a hunting rifle, either the DNZ mounts or Talley lightweights are all I'll use anymore. Nothing at all wrong with the old Weaver system. They are light, inexpensive but work just as well as anything. Not the best looking, but very functional.

10-96
November 14, 2011, 06:22 AM
+1 what Warbird said. Yes, they may be "old school" but they are solid and add class to a bolt action- keeps you from looking like a high school kid run amuck with a pocket full of screwdrivers and spare parts on national Mall Ninja Day. Those holes in the top of Remington receivers have been reliable, straight, and apparently put there by a guy on regular payroll for at least 40-50 years.

As for rings, I like the Burris Signature line with the inserts. There's like no way to marr your scope or dink up the tube if something isn't 100% straight.

eastbank
November 14, 2011, 07:17 AM
i have seen more weaver type rings fail than all others combined.,plus if you are not carefull you can marr the hell out of you scope tube. with leupold,burris or redfield type bases and rings,you can interchange rings and bases and while most rifle recievers are drilled straite today,its nice to know you can adjust the windage if needed and they are cheaper to buy. if i had a rifle with weaver bases,i would use millet rings on it. i just bought a set of leupold bases and rings(new) for a 700 at a gun show for 12.00. you will not find any weaver style rings on any of my center fire rifles,only on .22 rifles. eastbank.

mrawesome22
November 14, 2011, 11:33 AM
Talley. Best there is IMO.

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/129972/talley-lightweight-2-piece-scope-mounts-with-integral-1-rings-remington-700-matte-medium

http://media.midwayusa.com/productimages/large/129/129972.jpg

silvrjeepr
November 15, 2011, 01:03 AM
Remington sells some inexpensive solid 2 piece bases. Screw each base on and sit the scope in. They're about as solid as you can get. Talley makes the same type bases for a little more $$.

Picher
November 15, 2011, 09:04 AM
I've found problems with the rotary dovetail mounts over the years. The dovetail can move within the base.

I use Weaver-style top mounts and have no problems with zero when switching scopes (provided they're both sighted in on that rifle). The steel bases may be a bit more sturdy, but I've never had a problem with the aluminum ones.

Four-screw Weaver Top Mounts are easier/better to use because scopes often rotate when two screw mounts are tightened.

eastbank
November 15, 2011, 09:11 AM
the most common failure i have seen on the weaver style rings has been the large screw that tightens the rings to the base.eastbank.

GeauxTide
November 15, 2011, 12:41 PM
I've replaced the mounts on nine rifles with Talley's. Amazing. Midwayusa.com

Art Eatman
November 15, 2011, 01:12 PM
Weaver two-piece rigs work as well as any. Many others are just as good. The Conetrols are probably among the sleekest looking, and they are excellent; been on my pet .243 for some forty years, now.

Palmetto-Pride
November 15, 2011, 01:54 PM
Get the Talley one peice rings you can't go wrong. I have had them on my 700 .270 for a few years now and I have yet to have to rezero my scope. They are simple clean looking rings....

Palmetto-Pride
November 15, 2011, 02:01 PM
Anybody with a slight bit of mechanical know how would not reccomend those Leupold adjustable base and rings. If your holes are drilled correctly please explain the need for a rear base that can adjust for Windage it just adds to one more variable that can go wrong......also doesn't that apply undo stress to the scope if you try to push the rear over more than the front.

Fusion
November 15, 2011, 03:05 PM
I personally like a quality set of Weaver style bases, but the dual dovetail styles are pretty good too. I wouldn't get the windage adjustable bases though. I've got a set and hate them.

For the rings, I've used lots of different types of rings, and my favorite under $100 by far is the Burris Signature Zee rings with the inserts. You can pick them up for $35 or so a set. They really are great, and it's what I'd go with.


For the scope there certainly are worse choices out there than that Redfield, but there are a lot better options too. I'd personally take a look at the Burris Fullfield II in that price range. I've not used the new E1. I'd like to, but haven't yet, however I've used several of the regular FFII's and they are great scopes. I've also got a couple of Monarchs, and honestly the Burris FFII's have better glass. IMO this is one of the best scopes you can get until you step up to the Zeiss Conquest at double the price. While the Conquest is better, it's also not a huge difference so only you know if it's worth the price difference for you. In me on a hunting rifle, it wouldn't be, but there are scenarios where it could be.

jmr40
November 15, 2011, 09:22 PM
Yes, they may be "old school" but they are solid and add class to a bolt action-

The dovetail, windage adjustable mounts are among the weakest of all mounts. The dovetails often have a sloppy fit between rings and bases. You will never see them used on precision rifles. The dual dovetails look nice enough, but the bolts on the side of the windage adjustable mounts look like Frankenstein's neck.

They are the most difficult mounts to get set up properly, and if not set up exactly right will cause the most problems afterward. Just getting the scopes adjustments centered and the windage screws set takes twice as long as the entire mounting process with anything else.

If you want precision get something with a cross slot, or a rail.

On a hunting rifle you cant beat either the Talley Lightweights or DNZ. They cost less than the steel dovetail mounts, weigh about 1/4 lb less, are actually stronger since the rings and base are 1 solid piece. And you can have them mounted and your rifle zeroed while someone is still counting clicks on his scope trying to get their dovetail mounts set up.

If you need them because your rifle has mounting holes drilled incorrectly, them use them. That is what they are designed for. But that is pretty rare these days. Otherwise almost any other mounting system is a better design.

warbirdlover
November 15, 2011, 10:26 PM
I've been thinking about a set of these someday. One piece base and rings (one for front and one for back).

http://www.remington.com/products/accessories/gun-parts/scope-mounts-and-rails/integral-scope-mounts.aspx