Can you recommend some good rings?

zcrenna · March 4, 2013, 01:17 AM

Looking to get some new rings.
Gonna be upgrading my scope soon. Currently have a cheap barska 3-9x40 on there.

I can afford the rings now, and they'll probably also hold the barska a little better for the time being. The current rings I have hold the scope a little high, so I'd also be interested in some lower profile ones.

Suggestions welcome

P.s. have a Ruger American 308

chadio · March 4, 2013, 05:00 AM

www.warnescopemounts.com

Proudly made in Tualatin, OR U.S.A.

... I have a set on my crossbow and I'm quite pleased with them.

hooligan1 · March 4, 2013, 06:47 AM

Leupold rings and bases are what I use.

jmr40 · March 4, 2013, 08:34 AM

On the Ruger American I'd go to Walmart and buy a set of Weaver's. Inexpnsive, and will work in the supplied bases. You can spend more and get something slightly better looking, but won't get anything stronger. On a Ruger American you aren't going to hurt the overall looks with an ugly ring.

reynolds357 · March 4, 2013, 11:40 AM

JMR40 Weaver Grand Slam rings are good. Regular Weaver stuff is not worth mounting. If you bump your scope on anything, you might as well go to the range and check zero using the Weaver $9 rings. In addition to that, they mark up the scope you mount with them terribly.
To O.P. You cant go wrong with Burris Signature, Warne, or Talley in either the weaver or the integral configuration. I put Burris Signature on my American. I love them because they will not mark the scope, and I change scopes between rifles quite regularly. Talley that has the ring and base as a single piece are quite impressive for the price. The only draw back to using them in this instance is that you already have bases.

Revolver1 · March 4, 2013, 12:04 PM

Of all the rings I owned over the years, the Deadnutz are the best. The rings and base are integral. Solid one piece billet aluminum.

geetarman · March 4, 2013, 12:23 PM

I have the Warne QD steel rings on everything but my Rem 700P. I have Leupold rings and bases and scope on that one.

The Warne rings are all for Picatinny rails and if I take a scope from any rifle and put on any other rifle that has the P rail and they will work. Some minor rezeroing might be required.

If I had a P rail for the Rem, I would be changing the rings out. They are not cheap but they are good.

**Art Eatman** · March 4, 2013, 12:43 PM

Other than super-el-cheapo, it's hard to find bad rings. It's all about personal preference.

I've used Weaver-made rings and bases for some sixty years, and I've never had a problem with losing zero. Conetrols are prettier, of course. I've used Leupolds, and other brands have received compliments here.

The main thing is to match the height of the bases with the scope's fit on the rifle, to enable a good cheek weld.

zcrenna · March 4, 2013, 07:09 PM

Thanks everyone. I found some leupolds at a nice price. Think I'm gonna go with them

**Brian Pfleuger** · March 5, 2013, 01:34 PM

I have several sets of Warne rings. I don't like them and I don't see the attraction. It seems like they went out of their way to make them complicated and difficult to install. It's not rocket science but it's harder than it should be, when they don't do anything that any other ring doesn't do. Now, I prefer Burris Signature rings.

Striker1 · March 5, 2013, 01:52 PM

Quote:

I have several sets of Warne rings. I don't like them and I don't see the attraction. It seems like they went out of their way to make them complicated and difficult to install. It's not rocket science but it's harder than it should be, when they don't do anything that any other ring doesn't do. Now, I prefer Burris Signature rings.

I don't get this...I have Warne rings on mine and they were very simple to mount. What's overly complicated about yours?

jp_over · March 5, 2013, 01:55 PM

I've had great success with Warne.

**Brian Pfleuger** · March 5, 2013, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Striker1

I don't get this...

YMMV.

I've had a bunch of different ring styles. I don't find the Warne rings to do anything particularly better than others and they're a relative pain to install. The recoil key is obnoxious. You have to put them on the scope first, fit the key in the bottom and then put the whole thing on the gun without dropping the key out. I don't like them much. I have several sets. I like Burris Signature better AND they do things that other rings don't do.

Striker1 · March 5, 2013, 02:10 PM

Quote:

YMMV.

I've had a bunch of different ring styles. I don't find the Warne rings to do anything particularly better than others and they're a relative pain to install. The recoil key is obnoxious. You have to put them on the scope first and then put the whole thing on the gun. I don't like them much. I have several sets. I like Burris Signature better AND they do things that other rings don't do.

Mine are mounted on a CZ 550, maybe different set up than normal since they mount directly to the receiver?

**Brian Pfleuger** · March 5, 2013, 02:18 PM

Generic pictures of the 550 I Google look like it wouldn't use the recoil key, so that'd make it easier, if true.

The main thing is that they don't install nearly as easily as "traditional" rings.

What I normally do is:

Mount the gun in a padded vice and level it.

Mount the bottom of the rings and verify alignment and level.

Set the scope in the bottoms, verify it's placement and level it.

Slowly tighten the screws alternating until I get the correct torque and verify level.

Warne rings mess with my methods.

reynolds357 · March 5, 2013, 06:44 PM

Striker, I agree with you here. Warne is pretty simple once you figure them out.
I have also had some good laughs about warne rings. A guy was Zeroing his deer rifle at the range a while back and could not get on paper. He had tightened the top screws on his Warne rings first.

To be more correct, he had bottomed the top screws out before tightening the bottom ones.

hooligan1 · March 5, 2013, 08:07 PM

zcrenna, you made a wise choice.... I take my scope mounting very serious, once my scopes are mounted, they don't loose zero, not no time, not no how, not ever.

Striker1 · March 5, 2013, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Generic pictures of the 550 I Google look like it wouldn't use the recoil key, so that'd make it easier, if true.

Actually it does on the rear left side of the receiver dove tail, there is a square notch cut out. All rings for a CZ 550 should have a lug or "foot" as I call it that fits down in the receiver notch. I am no ring guru, having only had to install 2 sets...ever, but those Warne rings fit the CZ'z notch precisely. Been on it for 9 years without issue.

zcrenna · March 6, 2013, 03:10 AM

On these leupold rings, I'm seeing Low and Medium sizes.

My scope is 40mm so not totally sure the lows will fit, but I do want to get the scope as low as possible. The mediums also look a little sturdier.

Anyone know if the mediums are a little sturdier than the lows?
Or if these will even fit my rifle with a 40mm scope? As I said earlier, I'm shooting a ruger American 308.

hooligan1 · March 6, 2013, 06:41 AM

The med. rings aren't actually stronger, they are just taller to accept a larger objective bell to fit over the rifle barrel, google Leupold get their number and call, talk with a tech and tll thm your application and they will tell you exactly what you need to purchase,,,,, they are cool to work with.

zcrenna · March 6, 2013, 10:19 PM

Awesome. Thanks a lot

trg42wraglefragle · March 6, 2013, 10:36 PM

Steel Warne rings are quite heavy, but very well built.
Cant see me ever having trouble from the pair I brought.

Not too bad price either.

boattale · March 6, 2013, 10:46 PM

Buy an M77 and your ring issues are over forever and ever, amen.

reynolds357 · March 7, 2013, 09:16 PM

Guess thats why adapters to get from Ruger to Weaver are so popular.

**Mike Irwin** · March 8, 2013, 10:51 AM

Last three sets I put on rifles were Redfields.

I'm very happy with them.

March 4, 2013, 01:17 AM	#1
zcrenna Member Join Date: February 4, 2013 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 45	Can you recommend some good rings? Looking to get some new rings. Gonna be upgrading my scope soon. Currently have a cheap barska 3-9x40 on there. I can afford the rings now, and they'll probably also hold the barska a little better for the time being. The current rings I have hold the scope a little high, so I'd also be interested in some lower profile ones. Suggestions welcome P.s. have a Ruger American 308

March 4, 2013, 05:00 AM	#2
chadio Senior Member Join Date: June 29, 2011 Posts: 620	www.warnescopemounts.com Proudly made in Tualatin, OR U.S.A. ... I have a set on my crossbow and I'm quite pleased with them. __________________ Ex - Navy, Persian Gulf Veteran. Loved shooting the M14, 1911, M60, M2 "No matter what you do with a striker gun, it still feels like a power stapler." - Gats Italian

March 4, 2013, 06:47 AM	#3
hooligan1 Senior Member Join Date: July 18, 2010 Location: Independence Missouri Posts: 2,835	Leupold rings and bases are what I use. __________________ Thanks for coming!

March 4, 2013, 12:23 PM	#7
geetarman Senior Member Join Date: November 18, 2009 Location: Arizona Posts: 2,353	I have the Warne QD steel rings on everything but my Rem 700P. I have Leupold rings and bases and scope on that one. The Warne rings are all for Picatinny rails and if I take a scope from any rifle and put on any other rifle that has the P rail and they will work. Some minor rezeroing might be required. If I had a P rail for the Rem, I would be changing the rings out. They are not cheap but they are good. __________________ Geetarman Carpe Cerveza

March 4, 2013, 12:43 PM	#8
Art Eatman Staff Lead Join Date: November 13, 1998 Location: Terlingua, TX, USA Posts: 20,937	Other than super-el-cheapo, it's hard to find bad rings. It's all about personal preference. I've used Weaver-made rings and bases for some sixty years, and I've never had a problem with losing zero. Conetrols are prettier, of course. I've used Leupolds, and other brands have received compliments here. The main thing is to match the height of the bases with the scope's fit on the rifle, to enable a good cheek weld. __________________ You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!

March 4, 2013, 08:34 AM	#4
jmr40 Senior Member Join Date: June 15, 2008 Location: Georgia Posts: 4,485	On the Ruger American I'd go to Walmart and buy a set of Weaver's. Inexpnsive, and will work in the supplied bases. You can spend more and get something slightly better looking, but won't get anything stronger. On a Ruger American you aren't going to hurt the overall looks with an ugly ring.

March 4, 2013, 11:40 AM	#5
reynolds357 Senior Member Join Date: December 10, 2012 Posts: 849	JMR40 Weaver Grand Slam rings are good. Regular Weaver stuff is not worth mounting. If you bump your scope on anything, you might as well go to the range and check zero using the Weaver $9 rings. In addition to that, they mark up the scope you mount with them terribly. To O.P. You cant go wrong with Burris Signature, Warne, or Talley in either the weaver or the integral configuration. I put Burris Signature on my American. I love them because they will not mark the scope, and I change scopes between rifles quite regularly. Talley that has the ring and base as a single piece are quite impressive for the price. The only draw back to using them in this instance is that you already have bases.

March 4, 2013, 12:04 PM	#6
Revolver1 Junior member Join Date: January 21, 2013 Location: NY Posts: 150	Of all the rings I owned over the years, the Deadnutz are the best. The rings and base are integral. Solid one piece billet aluminum.

March 4, 2013, 07:09 PM	#9
zcrenna Member Join Date: February 4, 2013 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 45	Thanks everyone. I found some leupolds at a nice price. Think I'm gonna go with them

March 5, 2013, 01:34 PM	#10
Brian Pfleuger Staff Join Date: June 25, 2008 Location: Central, Southern NY, USA Posts: 14,487	I have several sets of Warne rings. I don't like them and I don't see the attraction. It seems like they went out of their way to make them complicated and difficult to install. It's not rocket science but it's harder than it should be, when they don't do anything that any other ring doesn't do. Now, I prefer Burris Signature rings. __________________ Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza. --- You do not HAVE a soul. You ARE a soul. You HAVE a body. -C.S. Lewis He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose. -Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.

March 5, 2013, 01:55 PM	#12
jp_over Member Join Date: February 4, 2006 Location: Afghanistan, again! Posts: 58	I've had great success with Warne.

March 5, 2013, 02:18 PM	#15
Brian Pfleuger Staff Join Date: June 25, 2008 Location: Central, Southern NY, USA Posts: 14,487	Generic pictures of the 550 I Google look like it wouldn't use the recoil key, so that'd make it easier, if true. The main thing is that they don't install nearly as easily as "traditional" rings. What I normally do is: Mount the gun in a padded vice and level it. Mount the bottom of the rings and verify alignment and level. Set the scope in the bottoms, verify it's placement and level it. Slowly tighten the screws alternating until I get the correct torque and verify level. Warne rings mess with my methods. __________________ Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza. --- You do not HAVE a soul. You ARE a soul. You HAVE a body. -C.S. Lewis He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose. -Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.

March 5, 2013, 06:44 PM	#16
reynolds357 Senior Member Join Date: December 10, 2012 Posts: 849	Striker, I agree with you here. Warne is pretty simple once you figure them out. I have also had some good laughs about warne rings. A guy was Zeroing his deer rifle at the range a while back and could not get on paper. He had tightened the top screws on his Warne rings first. To be more correct, he had bottomed the top screws out before tightening the bottom ones.

March 5, 2013, 08:07 PM	#17
hooligan1 Senior Member Join Date: July 18, 2010 Location: Independence Missouri Posts: 2,835	zcrenna, you made a wise choice.... I take my scope mounting very serious, once my scopes are mounted, they don't loose zero, not no time, not no how, not ever. __________________ Thanks for coming!

March 6, 2013, 03:10 AM	#19
zcrenna Member Join Date: February 4, 2013 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 45	On these leupold rings, I'm seeing Low and Medium sizes. My scope is 40mm so not totally sure the lows will fit, but I do want to get the scope as low as possible. The mediums also look a little sturdier. Anyone know if the mediums are a little sturdier than the lows? Or if these will even fit my rifle with a 40mm scope? As I said earlier, I'm shooting a ruger American 308.

March 6, 2013, 10:19 PM	#21
zcrenna Member Join Date: February 4, 2013 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 45	Awesome. Thanks a lot

March 6, 2013, 10:36 PM	#22
trg42wraglefragle Senior Member Join Date: April 21, 2008 Location: new zealand Posts: 635	Steel Warne rings are quite heavy, but very well built. Cant see me ever having trouble from the pair I brought. Not too bad price either.

March 6, 2013, 10:46 PM	#23
boattale Senior Member Join Date: November 28, 2012 Posts: 118	Buy an M77 and your ring issues are over forever and ever, amen. __________________ Its all downhill from here. Except the parts that are uphill.

March 7, 2013, 09:16 PM	#24
reynolds357 Senior Member Join Date: December 10, 2012 Posts: 849	Guess thats why adapters to get from Ruger to Weaver are so popular.

March 8, 2013, 10:51 AM	#25
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 14, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 33,116	Last three sets I put on rifles were Redfields. I'm very happy with them. __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.