I usually like to make decisions for my self, but I dont know a whole lot about this. So like the title says, what makes quality rings? What should I look for in a good set of rings? Signs of quality?
Rifle Scopes What actually makes rings "good".
- Thread starter Cfl Mike
- Start date
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
tolerances they are machined to. material used and design for durabiltiy.
tolerances they are machined to. material used and design for durabiltiy.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
Materials and workmanship. Just like with anything else. I've seen $70 rings made by Burris that I thought looked pretty good... Until I saw a set made by Badger Ordinance. Closer to $300. And... It's not easy to find the really nice ones in stores to get a look at them. At least not here in Central Fl.
Materials and workmanship. Just like with anything else. I've seen $70 rings made by Burris that I thought looked pretty good... Until I saw a set made by Badger Ordinance. Closer to $300. And... It's not easy to find the really nice ones in stores to get a look at them. At least not here in Central Fl.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: oneshot onekill</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Materials and workmanship. Just like with anything else. I've seen $70 rings made by Burris that I thought looked pretty good... Until I saw a set made by Badger Ordinance. Closer to $300. And... It's not easy to find the really nice ones in stores to get a look at them. At least not here in Central Fl. </div></div>
I am also in CFL so I cant really just go look at them. So is there no way to tell if your buying online? Its just a shot in the dark?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: oneshot onekill</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Materials and workmanship. Just like with anything else. I've seen $70 rings made by Burris that I thought looked pretty good... Until I saw a set made by Badger Ordinance. Closer to $300. And... It's not easy to find the really nice ones in stores to get a look at them. At least not here in Central Fl. </div></div>
I am also in CFL so I cant really just go look at them. So is there no way to tell if your buying online? Its just a shot in the dark?
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
IMO, the most affordable rings with the highest quality would be seekins from www.seekinsprecision.com
Cheaper rings like TPS, Warne, etc work but scratching the scope tube or even worse crushing the scope tube even if you torque to spec and snapping ring bolts are not uncommon.
Just buy the best you can afford... no need to justify anything.
We didn't get into shooting and guns to save money anyhow.
IMO, the most affordable rings with the highest quality would be seekins from www.seekinsprecision.com
Cheaper rings like TPS, Warne, etc work but scratching the scope tube or even worse crushing the scope tube even if you torque to spec and snapping ring bolts are not uncommon.
Just buy the best you can afford... no need to justify anything.
We didn't get into shooting and guns to save money anyhow.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
I love the Burris Signature Zee rings for cheap rings. Seem like great quality and you don't have to worry about lapping the rings, nor them leaving ring marks. You can pick these up for $35 or so which is barely any more than the crappy Weaver rings and similar.
That being said, it's about the only set of cheap rings I can really recommend, but I love them and I have been using them anytime I buy scope rings lately.
I love the Burris Signature Zee rings for cheap rings. Seem like great quality and you don't have to worry about lapping the rings, nor them leaving ring marks. You can pick these up for $35 or so which is barely any more than the crappy Weaver rings and similar.
That being said, it's about the only set of cheap rings I can really recommend, but I love them and I have been using them anytime I buy scope rings lately.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
I too have used the Burris Signature rings. I like them for cheaper rings as well. I have had issues with them on the heavier recoil rifles though. Both on my 7mm RM and 300 RUM they have failed.
I too have used the Burris Signature rings. I like them for cheaper rings as well. I have had issues with them on the heavier recoil rifles though. Both on my 7mm RM and 300 RUM they have failed.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
Well I Lap my rings, I don't care who made them, how much they cost, what size they are, or the materials they are made, from, lapping is the only way to ensure the rings are straight on the rail they mounted on, and with the proper torque ensures that the clamping force applied to the scope is even preventing damage to the scope tube.
Well I Lap my rings, I don't care who made them, how much they cost, what size they are, or the materials they are made, from, lapping is the only way to ensure the rings are straight on the rail they mounted on, and with the proper torque ensures that the clamping force applied to the scope is even preventing damage to the scope tube.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
Well I am not trying to be an asshole or anything but, I am just asking what makes them good? and how can you tell from online? I know its about tolerances and such, but this is something you cant really do anything about from the web; unless there is another way to tell?
Though I will take those suggestions to heart, though on this gun it came with a Weaver Mount (Not brand, but style like Picaitiny) , so if you have any good suggestions for Weaver im all ears.
Well I am not trying to be an asshole or anything but, I am just asking what makes them good? and how can you tell from online? I know its about tolerances and such, but this is something you cant really do anything about from the web; unless there is another way to tell?
Though I will take those suggestions to heart, though on this gun it came with a Weaver Mount (Not brand, but style like Picaitiny) , so if you have any good suggestions for Weaver im all ears.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
I have a 300 RUM and have been trying to decide on rings for a while. Having held and inspected many brands. I went with Badger.Buy once cry once.On a 308 I run prw(leupold) and they are fine.
I have a 300 RUM and have been trying to decide on rings for a while. Having held and inspected many brands. I went with Badger.Buy once cry once.On a 308 I run prw(leupold) and they are fine.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
http://www.weaveroptics.com/rings_bases/tactical/6-hole_picatinny_rings/
Check out these ring made by Weaver and built similar to the higher priced ring like BO. I put a set on a 22lr which is way over kill but the rings were at the right price for that applaction so I went with it. I'd buy again even for a higher priced build. The set I got seems to be good to go.
Side note there about 10-20 dollars cheaper than listed here over on Midway.
http://www.weaveroptics.com/rings_bases/tactical/6-hole_picatinny_rings/
Check out these ring made by Weaver and built similar to the higher priced ring like BO. I put a set on a 22lr which is way over kill but the rings were at the right price for that applaction so I went with it. I'd buy again even for a higher priced build. The set I got seems to be good to go.
Side note there about 10-20 dollars cheaper than listed here over on Midway.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
i have seen all kinds of things break,rings included,
so get what you like, shop quality, buy the best you can afford and carry on........its just a tool
i have seen all kinds of things break,rings included,
so get what you like, shop quality, buy the best you can afford and carry on........its just a tool
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Cfl Mike</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well I am not trying to be an asshole or anything but, I am just asking what makes them good? and how can you tell from online? I know its about tolerances and such, but this is something you cant really do anything about from the web; unless there is another way to tell?
</div></div>
True you can't inspect pics of scope rings on the web. Usually the price reflects the quality (and name of course)... this solely depends on what the end user feels defines "quality".
Take Near Manufacturing scope mounts. They run $325 for his 1 piece Alpha mount, and $278 for his scope rings. The mounts are made from a proprietary stainless alloy that Richard Near spec'd out himself. He machines everything nicely, has good designs, radius/chamfers all the holes and edges, and uses strong hardware. To me, it defines a quality product and I think $325 is well worth the piece.
Badgers are good also.
You just need to be comfortable with how much you want to spend. Buy the most you can reasonably afford and you should be fine.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Cfl Mike</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well I am not trying to be an asshole or anything but, I am just asking what makes them good? and how can you tell from online? I know its about tolerances and such, but this is something you cant really do anything about from the web; unless there is another way to tell?
</div></div>
True you can't inspect pics of scope rings on the web. Usually the price reflects the quality (and name of course)... this solely depends on what the end user feels defines "quality".
Take Near Manufacturing scope mounts. They run $325 for his 1 piece Alpha mount, and $278 for his scope rings. The mounts are made from a proprietary stainless alloy that Richard Near spec'd out himself. He machines everything nicely, has good designs, radius/chamfers all the holes and edges, and uses strong hardware. To me, it defines a quality product and I think $325 is well worth the piece.
Badgers are good also.
You just need to be comfortable with how much you want to spend. Buy the most you can reasonably afford and you should be fine.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Cfl Mike</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well I am not trying to be an asshole or anything but, I am just asking what makes them good? and how can you tell from online? I know its about tolerances and such, but this is something you cant really do anything about from the web; unless there is another way to tell?
Though I will take those suggestions to heart, though on this gun it came with a Weaver Mount (Not brand, but style like Picaitiny) , so if you have any good suggestions for Weaver im all ears. </div></div>
You can't tell the quality of ANYTHING from internet web pages, now can you? You only see what their marketing people want to show you.
The quality of nearly anything is (most times) a function of the design, the quality of the raw materials being used and the precision/accuracy/consistency of the manufacturing process ("tolerances and such..." )
Sale price may...or may not...have any relationship to quality. To truly determine this "quality" you'd have to do a bunch of materials testing, precision measurement, design analysis, etc., etc....none of this is practical for the average person.
The alternative is to seek advice from those who have used the product (and preferably those who have used it hard) to see what they prefer. In most cases many have learned the hard way what works and what doesn't.
If you do just a tad bit of searching here you'll find the same names cropping up as being the best. Seekins, Badger Ordnance, USO, Nightforce and a very few select others. I would call this a CLUE as to who is producing a quality product. Everybody has their own personal opinions and biases, but when you look at a big cross-section of users and the same 3 or 4 brands keep popping up as best, then it is a pretty sure thing that these brands are "high quality".
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Cfl Mike</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well I am not trying to be an asshole or anything but, I am just asking what makes them good? and how can you tell from online? I know its about tolerances and such, but this is something you cant really do anything about from the web; unless there is another way to tell?
Though I will take those suggestions to heart, though on this gun it came with a Weaver Mount (Not brand, but style like Picaitiny) , so if you have any good suggestions for Weaver im all ears. </div></div>
You can't tell the quality of ANYTHING from internet web pages, now can you? You only see what their marketing people want to show you.
The quality of nearly anything is (most times) a function of the design, the quality of the raw materials being used and the precision/accuracy/consistency of the manufacturing process ("tolerances and such..."
Sale price may...or may not...have any relationship to quality. To truly determine this "quality" you'd have to do a bunch of materials testing, precision measurement, design analysis, etc., etc....none of this is practical for the average person.
The alternative is to seek advice from those who have used the product (and preferably those who have used it hard) to see what they prefer. In most cases many have learned the hard way what works and what doesn't.
If you do just a tad bit of searching here you'll find the same names cropping up as being the best. Seekins, Badger Ordnance, USO, Nightforce and a very few select others. I would call this a CLUE as to who is producing a quality product. Everybody has their own personal opinions and biases, but when you look at a big cross-section of users and the same 3 or 4 brands keep popping up as best, then it is a pretty sure thing that these brands are "high quality".
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
Well I just thought like scopes, you could somewhat tell quality from numbers and features; or even a gun.
Anyways, so I guess, I am going on reviews and brands, so what do you guys think of this one. TPS TSR's? If its a need to know, its Weaver mount, Medium Height (1.075"), and 30mm.
Well I just thought like scopes, you could somewhat tell quality from numbers and features; or even a gun.
Anyways, so I guess, I am going on reviews and brands, so what do you guys think of this one. TPS TSR's? If its a need to know, its Weaver mount, Medium Height (1.075"), and 30mm.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
I agree with buggs' post above, for the most part, in strictly practical terms. I've always been a proponent of the "buy once, cry once" philosophy because I don't have enough time or money to buy 10-15 different crappy products only to find out in the long run that I should've simply bought the more expensive item first and saved myself a lot of time and money. <span style="font-style: italic">More often than not in this world, you get what you pay for.</span>
BUT...what muddies the waters when you're talking about items such as high-dollar scope rings, high-dollar wine, high-dollar this-or-that, is that people who've bought this expensive stuff don't want to feel like chumps as a result of paying more than they needed to, so they talk-up what they've purchased. Other people buy it on their recommendation and end up doing the same. Several psychological studies have been conducted focused on wine-tasting, with the conclusion that a person's perception of a wine's quality is primarily based on what they think the bottle of wine costs, and has very very little to do with actual taste.
On the other hand, there are people who get off on buying cheap stuff and "finding a deal" or finding out that some cheap knock-off product actually is of comparable quality to others' high-dollar products. These people do their part in the misinformation campaign by, often inadvertently, overlooking the downfalls of the cheaper item versus the more expensive product.
When available, I tend to put <span style="font-style: italic">a lot</span> of stock in the results of trials or studies pitting products of differing costs/manufacture/quality against one another under a series of tests. Military evaluations/trials/competitions sometimes provide very valuable insight into matters like you're exploring here in this thread.
I agree with buggs' post above, for the most part, in strictly practical terms. I've always been a proponent of the "buy once, cry once" philosophy because I don't have enough time or money to buy 10-15 different crappy products only to find out in the long run that I should've simply bought the more expensive item first and saved myself a lot of time and money. <span style="font-style: italic">More often than not in this world, you get what you pay for.</span>
BUT...what muddies the waters when you're talking about items such as high-dollar scope rings, high-dollar wine, high-dollar this-or-that, is that people who've bought this expensive stuff don't want to feel like chumps as a result of paying more than they needed to, so they talk-up what they've purchased. Other people buy it on their recommendation and end up doing the same. Several psychological studies have been conducted focused on wine-tasting, with the conclusion that a person's perception of a wine's quality is primarily based on what they think the bottle of wine costs, and has very very little to do with actual taste.
On the other hand, there are people who get off on buying cheap stuff and "finding a deal" or finding out that some cheap knock-off product actually is of comparable quality to others' high-dollar products. These people do their part in the misinformation campaign by, often inadvertently, overlooking the downfalls of the cheaper item versus the more expensive product.
When available, I tend to put <span style="font-style: italic">a lot</span> of stock in the results of trials or studies pitting products of differing costs/manufacture/quality against one another under a series of tests. Military evaluations/trials/competitions sometimes provide very valuable insight into matters like you're exploring here in this thread.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
I have always purchased from the high end and used by other as I did not one to be the tester. I have never had issues with any of the top end vendors.
That said I am now exclusively using NightForce unimount on anything with rails and the direct mount for lighter weight hunting setup. I can move a scope between rifles, look up the dial changes and right on target.
I have always purchased from the high end and used by other as I did not one to be the tester. I have never had issues with any of the top end vendors.
That said I am now exclusively using NightForce unimount on anything with rails and the direct mount for lighter weight hunting setup. I can move a scope between rifles, look up the dial changes and right on target.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
As with everything, high price MAY mean quality. It MAY also mean the manufacturer or dealer wants to make a lot of money.
Ive used:
TPS
Badger
Leupold
Warne
Burris
NF
Farrell
Honestly, all of them did just fine on 308s. I've only used Farrell and NF on the braked 338, and both were fine.
I believe rings oughtta be lapped.
I think people are, for the most part, exaggerating the "tolerances" bit. Most any ring is made on a CNC, and its a piece of cake to hold .002" on any decent CNC. I'm not aware of any rings that are honed to some super-tolerance, and wouldnt pay for them if they were.
My choice is Farrell, because Ken is a great guy, does good work, his rings look cool, he serializes rings together, sells serialized matched bases/rings, and his prices are fair.
Lastly, for no great reason, I like to put steel bases/rings on steel receivers, and aluminum bases/rings on aluminum receivers.
As with everything, high price MAY mean quality. It MAY also mean the manufacturer or dealer wants to make a lot of money.
Ive used:
TPS
Badger
Leupold
Warne
Burris
NF
Farrell
Honestly, all of them did just fine on 308s. I've only used Farrell and NF on the braked 338, and both were fine.
I believe rings oughtta be lapped.
I think people are, for the most part, exaggerating the "tolerances" bit. Most any ring is made on a CNC, and its a piece of cake to hold .002" on any decent CNC. I'm not aware of any rings that are honed to some super-tolerance, and wouldnt pay for them if they were.
My choice is Farrell, because Ken is a great guy, does good work, his rings look cool, he serializes rings together, sells serialized matched bases/rings, and his prices are fair.
Lastly, for no great reason, I like to put steel bases/rings on steel receivers, and aluminum bases/rings on aluminum receivers.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
For people who don't have the equipment, time or know-how to properly mount and lap rings, manufacturer can matter quite a lot. With "better quality rings" you get better quality control during manufacturing and everything will line up better, thus holding your optics tighter and straighter (keeping from scratching your expensive scope).
I currently have a few sets of US Optics on a few of my rifles and I love them. I also have a few sets of sub $10 Leupold rings on a few rifles that shoot just as good. How do you say? The leupolds have been mounted correctly and lapped properly, so they are "perfectly true". It is amazing sometimes how much finish will come off of a set of rings before they are correctly lapped. I have never seen any differences (aside from weight) between steel and aluminum. I have heard of people mixing them even with good results (although lots of people will argue this to the bitter end).
Note: Do not lap US Optics rings, their type 3 hard anodizing will (supposedly) eat your lapping bar instead of the rings.
For people who don't have the equipment, time or know-how to properly mount and lap rings, manufacturer can matter quite a lot. With "better quality rings" you get better quality control during manufacturing and everything will line up better, thus holding your optics tighter and straighter (keeping from scratching your expensive scope).
I currently have a few sets of US Optics on a few of my rifles and I love them. I also have a few sets of sub $10 Leupold rings on a few rifles that shoot just as good. How do you say? The leupolds have been mounted correctly and lapped properly, so they are "perfectly true". It is amazing sometimes how much finish will come off of a set of rings before they are correctly lapped. I have never seen any differences (aside from weight) between steel and aluminum. I have heard of people mixing them even with good results (although lots of people will argue this to the bitter end).
Note: Do not lap US Optics rings, their type 3 hard anodizing will (supposedly) eat your lapping bar instead of the rings.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
Burris extreme tactical rings run about 50 bucks and are really nice for the price
Burris extreme tactical rings run about 50 bucks and are really nice for the price
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
on the other end seekins makes "precision matched" rings that are about 125 and you will never worry about it to begin with.
on the other end seekins makes "precision matched" rings that are about 125 and you will never worry about it to begin with.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
Right..., well what do you guys think of the TPS TSR's I mentioned above?
By the way, what is lapping?
Right..., well what do you guys think of the TPS TSR's I mentioned above?
By the way, what is lapping?
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
I do not like TPS. I had a new set that slipped on a new scope. Scuffed the scope pretty badly as I had them tourqed to spec when they slipped. I yes, I did follow the directions. Many people us them tho
I do not like TPS. I had a new set that slipped on a new scope. Scuffed the scope pretty badly as I had them tourqed to spec when they slipped. I yes, I did follow the directions. Many people us them tho
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
First you can look at quality, such as machining, deburring, etc.
Secondly you should first think over your needs.
1. On a hunting rifle with a specific height on the comb lowest possible rings are most desirable for mostly people. On a tactical rig it's different as you have other possiblitys for changing the cheekweld. But it's no point to chose a perfect set of rings if they are in a height that doesent fit to your needs.
2. Are you the last owner on the scope? if not and it's an expensive quality scope it might be a good idea to chose rings that have a reputation to leave as little marks as possible.
3. Is it important for you to see your knobs for your shooting position? For example if you take a good set of rings like Warne or Talley, that have it's screw 12 o'clock. then the elevation turret will be covered behind the ear on the rings.
Will that work for you? Some scopes have high turrets, and there is not that problem, but some scopes have very low turrets.
4. is it important for you to see your windage knob from shotting position?
same arguments and same problems as above.
5. Will you be using a secondary sight?
Some scopes have a long tube and extra assesories can be mounted around the tube, like a secondary sight. But some scopes like S&B PMll have a very short maintube and there is not much place for assesories. Then you need rings that can accept secondary sights, on the top or where you need the secondary sight.
6. Are you using a gun with an integral rail?
TRG, AI, T3, Sauer have all excellent integral steel rails and it would be stupid to mount a picatinny on the top of that.
Go for a direct mount instead.
7. If you are shooting long range a level might be very usefull.
Think about the level placement now, and get that solution at the same time. There is loads of various solutions.
Inside the scope, in the mount, mounted around the scope, mounted on the mount, mounted on the picrail.
8. Any special needs?
Simrad? Need to mount a laser or an illuminator?
Its always best to mount the illuminator on the top of the scope as there is much less chance of illuminating the grass and the flashhider that way.
Chose a ring/mount system that supports this from the beginning.
9. Get the rings/mount that is supposed and made for that type of gun. Some people get normal rings for an AR15 and thus get a wrong scopeplacement, other people take their extreme extended AR15 mount and put on to their heavy recoil .300 WM and really use the mount for something entierly different than it was made for.
In my opinion there is LOADS of things to think about before even start thinking about the name of the manufacturer!
How about maybe ordering or downloading the catalogs from different manufacturors so you can see what they have to offer?
Håkan Spuhr
First you can look at quality, such as machining, deburring, etc.
Secondly you should first think over your needs.
1. On a hunting rifle with a specific height on the comb lowest possible rings are most desirable for mostly people. On a tactical rig it's different as you have other possiblitys for changing the cheekweld. But it's no point to chose a perfect set of rings if they are in a height that doesent fit to your needs.
2. Are you the last owner on the scope? if not and it's an expensive quality scope it might be a good idea to chose rings that have a reputation to leave as little marks as possible.
3. Is it important for you to see your knobs for your shooting position? For example if you take a good set of rings like Warne or Talley, that have it's screw 12 o'clock. then the elevation turret will be covered behind the ear on the rings.
Will that work for you? Some scopes have high turrets, and there is not that problem, but some scopes have very low turrets.
4. is it important for you to see your windage knob from shotting position?
same arguments and same problems as above.
5. Will you be using a secondary sight?
Some scopes have a long tube and extra assesories can be mounted around the tube, like a secondary sight. But some scopes like S&B PMll have a very short maintube and there is not much place for assesories. Then you need rings that can accept secondary sights, on the top or where you need the secondary sight.
6. Are you using a gun with an integral rail?
TRG, AI, T3, Sauer have all excellent integral steel rails and it would be stupid to mount a picatinny on the top of that.
Go for a direct mount instead.
7. If you are shooting long range a level might be very usefull.
Think about the level placement now, and get that solution at the same time. There is loads of various solutions.
Inside the scope, in the mount, mounted around the scope, mounted on the mount, mounted on the picrail.
8. Any special needs?
Simrad? Need to mount a laser or an illuminator?
Its always best to mount the illuminator on the top of the scope as there is much less chance of illuminating the grass and the flashhider that way.
Chose a ring/mount system that supports this from the beginning.
9. Get the rings/mount that is supposed and made for that type of gun. Some people get normal rings for an AR15 and thus get a wrong scopeplacement, other people take their extreme extended AR15 mount and put on to their heavy recoil .300 WM and really use the mount for something entierly different than it was made for.
In my opinion there is LOADS of things to think about before even start thinking about the name of the manufacturer!
How about maybe ordering or downloading the catalogs from different manufacturors so you can see what they have to offer?
Håkan Spuhr
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pupdawg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">IMO, the most affordable rings with the highest quality would be seekins from www.seekinsprecision.com
</div></div>
+1
I have made the switch to Seekings, because I am now buying more expensive scopes and I don't want ring marks on my scope tubes, it kills resale value of a scope.
SScott
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pupdawg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">IMO, the most affordable rings with the highest quality would be seekins from www.seekinsprecision.com
</div></div>
+1
I have made the switch to Seekings, because I am now buying more expensive scopes and I don't want ring marks on my scope tubes, it kills resale value of a scope.
SScott
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
The debate over who makes the best rings will go on forever.
A few points to consider if the manufacturer makes them available.
How are the rings made? As matched sets? As a single ring body then caps sawn off?
Matched sets provide the best solution period. That means that the ID bore of 1 ring is identical to the 2nd as well the rail contact area is the same from ring to ring. How does one know this? Matching serial numbers on both bases AND caps is a clue. This manufacturing method provides the best surface contact area to the tube and prevents tube binding. Another key point that is a huge advantage of this method is a true concentric bore.
The caps when manufactured in this manner should be marked to identify which ring base they came from and the direction of placement.
How they clamp the rail.
Grabbing the rail with as much surface area with both the fixed side and clamp is extremely important for SWS that see harsh environment use such as MIL/LE but also provides greater clamping force on the base.
Recoil lug of the ring body:
The picatinny spec is as follows:
crossbolt width .206 +.008 -.000
crossbolt depth .118 +.008 -.000
Larger recoil lug width and depth prohibits optic movement under recoil. Most of the pressed clamping bolt designs do not come close to meeting the above spec which can easily lead to movement under recoil.
Material:
Choose what meets your needs is a good recommendation.
Steel 4140PHT works extremely well as does some stainless however when weight is a concern (especially when some glass requires tall (1.350"min)OCL they can be heavy.
Titanium averages 40% reduction in wt based on identical parts.
titanium is extremely corrosive resistant and strong but consider a 1.2"OCL scope ring starts from a $19.00 blank (when made as 1pc) and coating Ti is far from cheap. MIL entities like the benefits of Ti which is where it is best suited. (not saying don’t buy it)
Aluminum averages a 60% reduction in wt here and while you can debate 6061T6 vs 7075T6 a lot has to do with the design to eliminate fracture of the part. This is also an area that is a pressed clamping bolt design can have issue. Aluminum is what the MIL wants currently on most of the new SWS since ounces = pounds.
Hardware:
Using steel hardware in certain applications can cause issue between corrosion and galling (ruining the ring)
Inspection:
Any true precision CNC shop will inspect the product numerous times during production. Some do 5% some do 50% some do 100% inspection during the process on key areas.
Coating and finish:
If you pick up a product and see tooling marks lines or mis-matches basically the manufacturer doesn’t care about the product. this is present in companies that mass produce blow out low tier product and you will see it more on products that are sub-contracted to the PAC RIM. Most of today’s current CNC's easily hold sub .001 all day and .0005 on critical dimension.
As for coating Aluminum should be 8625 TYPE III hardcoat or you going to have issues even when they have ceramic molyresin as a top coat they should be 8625. Black oxide offers minimal corrosive resistance and is classified as a "decorative finish"
QPQ black nitride is a solid choice for steel. High Temp black oxide works well on Stainless. Titanium is a separate animal and since 8625 is not available for Ti a PVD is best.
Lastly look at who is willing to put their name on them. The larger manufacturers that use someone else’s design or production almost always do 2 things compare products from an engineering standpoint and inspect the products that they receive.
sorry for the long write just hope it helps from a technical perspective
The debate over who makes the best rings will go on forever.
A few points to consider if the manufacturer makes them available.
How are the rings made? As matched sets? As a single ring body then caps sawn off?
Matched sets provide the best solution period. That means that the ID bore of 1 ring is identical to the 2nd as well the rail contact area is the same from ring to ring. How does one know this? Matching serial numbers on both bases AND caps is a clue. This manufacturing method provides the best surface contact area to the tube and prevents tube binding. Another key point that is a huge advantage of this method is a true concentric bore.
The caps when manufactured in this manner should be marked to identify which ring base they came from and the direction of placement.
How they clamp the rail.
Grabbing the rail with as much surface area with both the fixed side and clamp is extremely important for SWS that see harsh environment use such as MIL/LE but also provides greater clamping force on the base.
Recoil lug of the ring body:
The picatinny spec is as follows:
crossbolt width .206 +.008 -.000
crossbolt depth .118 +.008 -.000
Larger recoil lug width and depth prohibits optic movement under recoil. Most of the pressed clamping bolt designs do not come close to meeting the above spec which can easily lead to movement under recoil.
Material:
Choose what meets your needs is a good recommendation.
Steel 4140PHT works extremely well as does some stainless however when weight is a concern (especially when some glass requires tall (1.350"min)OCL they can be heavy.
Titanium averages 40% reduction in wt based on identical parts.
titanium is extremely corrosive resistant and strong but consider a 1.2"OCL scope ring starts from a $19.00 blank (when made as 1pc) and coating Ti is far from cheap. MIL entities like the benefits of Ti which is where it is best suited. (not saying don’t buy it)
Aluminum averages a 60% reduction in wt here and while you can debate 6061T6 vs 7075T6 a lot has to do with the design to eliminate fracture of the part. This is also an area that is a pressed clamping bolt design can have issue. Aluminum is what the MIL wants currently on most of the new SWS since ounces = pounds.
Hardware:
Using steel hardware in certain applications can cause issue between corrosion and galling (ruining the ring)
Inspection:
Any true precision CNC shop will inspect the product numerous times during production. Some do 5% some do 50% some do 100% inspection during the process on key areas.
Coating and finish:
If you pick up a product and see tooling marks lines or mis-matches basically the manufacturer doesn’t care about the product. this is present in companies that mass produce blow out low tier product and you will see it more on products that are sub-contracted to the PAC RIM. Most of today’s current CNC's easily hold sub .001 all day and .0005 on critical dimension.
As for coating Aluminum should be 8625 TYPE III hardcoat or you going to have issues even when they have ceramic molyresin as a top coat they should be 8625. Black oxide offers minimal corrosive resistance and is classified as a "decorative finish"
QPQ black nitride is a solid choice for steel. High Temp black oxide works well on Stainless. Titanium is a separate animal and since 8625 is not available for Ti a PVD is best.
Lastly look at who is willing to put their name on them. The larger manufacturers that use someone else’s design or production almost always do 2 things compare products from an engineering standpoint and inspect the products that they receive.
sorry for the long write just hope it helps from a technical perspective
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
That last post thank you, thats the type of answer I was after, and thank you to the other posts like it.
As for the rest, wtf? In fact Seekins doesnt even make Weaver Mount style rings. I always appreciate input on stuff of the sort, but you really didnt even read my posts.
So anyways, what do you think of the TPS TSR "W" Rings? They seem to be like the best Weaver Mounts I can find. (3rd time)
That last post thank you, thats the type of answer I was after, and thank you to the other posts like it.
As for the rest, wtf? In fact Seekins doesnt even make Weaver Mount style rings. I always appreciate input on stuff of the sort, but you really didnt even read my posts.
So anyways, what do you think of the TPS TSR "W" Rings? They seem to be like the best Weaver Mounts I can find. (3rd time)
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
Mike, this may help.
most of the "pressed in" side clamp bolt designs (badger leupols mk4 NF etc) will work in the weaver rail design. The Leupold MK4 evolved from the Leupold Ultra series designed for the initial M24 and earlier US Army SWS. that SWS used the Leupold Ultra mount that is to Weaver spec's not 1913 pic since that came later (99% on that) and without giving a technical explanation as to why, the pressed in design has a shallower protrusion into the crossbolt depth.
I can tell you factually that rings that have integral recoil lugs ie FNH, USO, MFM, S&B PSR ver and some others WILL NOT work on weaver geometry rails, nope not one bit. (unless you want to file)
Badger makes a great ring in this design that went forward where Leupold stopped. they also have made the design in alloy.
you need to assess what OCL you require based on the glass your looking at and the objective bell dia.
also 99% of QD bases that have 2 recoil lugs will NOT work on the weaver geometry either.
hope this help man
Mike, this may help.
most of the "pressed in" side clamp bolt designs (badger leupols mk4 NF etc) will work in the weaver rail design. The Leupold MK4 evolved from the Leupold Ultra series designed for the initial M24 and earlier US Army SWS. that SWS used the Leupold Ultra mount that is to Weaver spec's not 1913 pic since that came later (99% on that) and without giving a technical explanation as to why, the pressed in design has a shallower protrusion into the crossbolt depth.
I can tell you factually that rings that have integral recoil lugs ie FNH, USO, MFM, S&B PSR ver and some others WILL NOT work on weaver geometry rails, nope not one bit. (unless you want to file)
Badger makes a great ring in this design that went forward where Leupold stopped. they also have made the design in alloy.
you need to assess what OCL you require based on the glass your looking at and the objective bell dia.
also 99% of QD bases that have 2 recoil lugs will NOT work on the weaver geometry either.
hope this help man
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
I have Vortex Precision Match rings which are made by Seekins and are their precision match rings but with a Vortex stamp. They are not lapped. They were torqued to spec. They have not slipped what so ever. I went from a set of Weaver 6 hole tactical rings to these. Huge difference. Seeing the two next to each other and then using the Seekins rings made me a believer. Get the Seekins buddy.
I have Vortex Precision Match rings which are made by Seekins and are their precision match rings but with a Vortex stamp. They are not lapped. They were torqued to spec. They have not slipped what so ever. I went from a set of Weaver 6 hole tactical rings to these. Huge difference. Seeing the two next to each other and then using the Seekins rings made me a believer. Get the Seekins buddy.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: clj94104</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have Vortex Precision Match rings which are made by Seekins and are their precision match rings but with a Vortex stamp. They are not lapped. They were torqued to spec. They have not slipped what so ever. I went from a set of Weaver 6 hole tactical rings to these. Huge difference. Seeing the two next to each other and then using the Seekins rings made me a believer. Get the Seekins buddy. </div></div>
Yea, see again, not made for Weaver mounts.
Thanks to the other guy above. I knew that Weavers could go to 1913, but I wasnt sure what the deal was to make it go the other way around.
Still again, does anyone have any insight on TPS TSR rings? They seem to be the best rings I can find for Weaver mount, thats what SWFA told me too.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: clj94104</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have Vortex Precision Match rings which are made by Seekins and are their precision match rings but with a Vortex stamp. They are not lapped. They were torqued to spec. They have not slipped what so ever. I went from a set of Weaver 6 hole tactical rings to these. Huge difference. Seeing the two next to each other and then using the Seekins rings made me a believer. Get the Seekins buddy. </div></div>
Yea, see again, not made for Weaver mounts.
Thanks to the other guy above. I knew that Weavers could go to 1913, but I wasnt sure what the deal was to make it go the other way around.
Still again, does anyone have any insight on TPS TSR rings? They seem to be the best rings I can find for Weaver mount, thats what SWFA told me too.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
If you widen the cross slots on your base a Picatinny based ring <span style="font-weight: bold">WILL</span> work. We do it all the time for odd ball stuff. We dont make any weaver stuff because there just isnt much call for it.
The way we make our rings is proprietary to us in the way of how we fixture them. Every cut that truly matters, how the rings mount to the rail and where the scope tube contacts is done in 1 setup on a new high end matsurra cnc. Tools are measured with a laser for length and diameter and we pair the ring bottoms together. The ring caps don't need to be paired to the ring bottoms. Where the scope touches is as round as its going to get on both bottom and cap. The holes that go thru the ring cap are slightly larger than the screws that hold it on. This allows the scope tube to center the cap, so its exactly where it needs to be when you tighten it down. Caps are built on the same machine, at the same time with the same tools and same exacting tolerance. For inspection, its 90-100% for key areas. The ring bottoms are pulled off the machine (in pairs) serialized and go back on one more time for the last cuts. Threads are roll formed (forged in place) material is 7075 (US grade, not china crap), screws are US made High tensile and Torx, and coating is mil-std hard coat. We are also very picky on the appearance of our parts. If there is a anodize blem, the black isn't perfect or a tool mark somewhere (very very rare) they go in what we call the "friends" bucket. Its amazing how many friends a guy gets when you make gun parts
Hope that sums it up for you, The best?? We try, but others do a great job as well so picking from the top is kind of like what color of new corvette you want.
If you widen the cross slots on your base a Picatinny based ring <span style="font-weight: bold">WILL</span> work. We do it all the time for odd ball stuff. We dont make any weaver stuff because there just isnt much call for it.
The way we make our rings is proprietary to us in the way of how we fixture them. Every cut that truly matters, how the rings mount to the rail and where the scope tube contacts is done in 1 setup on a new high end matsurra cnc. Tools are measured with a laser for length and diameter and we pair the ring bottoms together. The ring caps don't need to be paired to the ring bottoms. Where the scope touches is as round as its going to get on both bottom and cap. The holes that go thru the ring cap are slightly larger than the screws that hold it on. This allows the scope tube to center the cap, so its exactly where it needs to be when you tighten it down. Caps are built on the same machine, at the same time with the same tools and same exacting tolerance. For inspection, its 90-100% for key areas. The ring bottoms are pulled off the machine (in pairs) serialized and go back on one more time for the last cuts. Threads are roll formed (forged in place) material is 7075 (US grade, not china crap), screws are US made High tensile and Torx, and coating is mil-std hard coat. We are also very picky on the appearance of our parts. If there is a anodize blem, the black isn't perfect or a tool mark somewhere (very very rare) they go in what we call the "friends" bucket. Its amazing how many friends a guy gets when you make gun parts
Hope that sums it up for you, The best?? We try, but others do a great job as well so picking from the top is kind of like what color of new corvette you want.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
Just as above the following is not meant to call anyone substandard or for that matter get on any soapbox. its technical reference regarding the question. I'm not trying to post a list of who's stuff is better worse or plain S*$t, so if you take it that way you need to read again.
While what Glen says is very true you can file (as i stated) or open up the crossbolts to make a ring that has an integral recoil lug, however going from .150 to .203 (rings stated above) is some work and the part of your mount is in the white and you now have some choices to make about how to address that.
The rings mentioned above in my post, have a .108 recoil lug protrusion that will often contact the bottom of the crossbolt slot on some weaver rails so you gotta go deeper as well.
<span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">lets get this straight out of the gate</span></span>, this is not meant to cause a pissing match with glen so I hope it is not perceived that way, but boring the rings as a single pc in sets and then machining the rail contact area together assures concentricity of the bore for the entire tube surface area and makes true matching sets.
again not getting into a pissing match with glen or anyone else since companies all make things in a differrent manner and some take more pride in thier work as glen clearly stated. making the ring in 2 halves can in fact cause non-concentric bores based on draft caused by tool deflection. some 2 pcs rings have this some dont. not saying Seekins do or don't but I doubt it based on his attention to detail.
just as glen says and i stated initially in the post above the debate on who makes the best will go on for ever but in the top tier its very difficult to say who has the upper hand and I dont think glen can disagree nor marty.
to sum it up in a meeting with some decision makers within SOCOM last month, "there are 100 compaines making rings and mounts, 1/2 a dozen of you do it very well"
Just as above the following is not meant to call anyone substandard or for that matter get on any soapbox. its technical reference regarding the question. I'm not trying to post a list of who's stuff is better worse or plain S*$t, so if you take it that way you need to read again.
While what Glen says is very true you can file (as i stated) or open up the crossbolts to make a ring that has an integral recoil lug, however going from .150 to .203 (rings stated above) is some work and the part of your mount is in the white and you now have some choices to make about how to address that.
The rings mentioned above in my post, have a .108 recoil lug protrusion that will often contact the bottom of the crossbolt slot on some weaver rails so you gotta go deeper as well.
<span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">lets get this straight out of the gate</span></span>, this is not meant to cause a pissing match with glen so I hope it is not perceived that way, but boring the rings as a single pc in sets and then machining the rail contact area together assures concentricity of the bore for the entire tube surface area and makes true matching sets.
again not getting into a pissing match with glen or anyone else since companies all make things in a differrent manner and some take more pride in thier work as glen clearly stated. making the ring in 2 halves can in fact cause non-concentric bores based on draft caused by tool deflection. some 2 pcs rings have this some dont. not saying Seekins do or don't but I doubt it based on his attention to detail.
just as glen says and i stated initially in the post above the debate on who makes the best will go on for ever but in the top tier its very difficult to say who has the upper hand and I dont think glen can disagree nor marty.
to sum it up in a meeting with some decision makers within SOCOM last month, "there are 100 compaines making rings and mounts, 1/2 a dozen of you do it very well"
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
I'm not worried
With today's manufacturing techniques and machinery there is more than one way to skin the same cat. The way we skin ours works very well and its as accurate as the machine can repeat which is in most shops un-measurable. In our setup tool deflection isn't a issue. When we started out i could not find a shop to make the rings with the quality we wanted and that's why all of our products are made in house.
Another thing that most don't consider is that
1, your action in most cases isn't perfect, so the "perfect" base (that's an entirely different subject for some day) you put onto it isn't a perfect platform on which to mount the worlds best scope rings.
2, most scope tubes are not as round as most think they are nor are the diameters from front to back as good or as consistent as the diameters on the rings. Not on the outside anyway where the rings touch them.
I'm not worried
With today's manufacturing techniques and machinery there is more than one way to skin the same cat. The way we skin ours works very well and its as accurate as the machine can repeat which is in most shops un-measurable. In our setup tool deflection isn't a issue. When we started out i could not find a shop to make the rings with the quality we wanted and that's why all of our products are made in house.
Another thing that most don't consider is that
1, your action in most cases isn't perfect, so the "perfect" base (that's an entirely different subject for some day) you put onto it isn't a perfect platform on which to mount the worlds best scope rings.
2, most scope tubes are not as round as most think they are nor are the diameters from front to back as good or as consistent as the diameters on the rings. Not on the outside anyway where the rings touch them.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
you are correct sir. I think the the initial discussion can go in many directions. you can make perfect rings and have a horribly out of spec rail as stated.
since its a technical discussion what glen brought up is a point worth discussing. most big rifle manufacturers actually have very loose tolerances and front and rear reciever bridge dia can vary greatly which will "bow" the rail cause the rings to pitch up and down.
99% of guys have huge faith in how they do things. some do it for quality some for quantity. there should be a magic star or something when someone is selling top quality products..... nah that never works so take advice, hear opinions and think about what you are spending you money on.
i will say if your mounting to weaver dont pick the rings I named above ref the integral recoil lug (look at my 2nd post) that too wont end well.
remember more often than not you get what you pay for. running a mazak or matsurra with highend tooling solid operators inspection processes materials coating etc doesnt come bargin basement nor from offshore for the most part (ref sub contracting)
and to clarify the statements pertain to some but not all and I dont think glens direct replys were meant that i was pointing the fat finger.
your not alone I sub'd the very 1st and then realized "this aint gonna end well" so now i'm the chip maker, just so happens I'm extremely good at it.......
how about this "buy American products made by Americans, in America with American materials and sub-contracted components" if not ask that overseas company for a bailout or you unemployment ck since US based manufacturing makes products that exceed what you will get with imports. theres plenty of comapanies that will prove it
yea off subject but it fit.
you are correct sir. I think the the initial discussion can go in many directions. you can make perfect rings and have a horribly out of spec rail as stated.
since its a technical discussion what glen brought up is a point worth discussing. most big rifle manufacturers actually have very loose tolerances and front and rear reciever bridge dia can vary greatly which will "bow" the rail cause the rings to pitch up and down.
99% of guys have huge faith in how they do things. some do it for quality some for quantity. there should be a magic star or something when someone is selling top quality products..... nah that never works so take advice, hear opinions and think about what you are spending you money on.
i will say if your mounting to weaver dont pick the rings I named above ref the integral recoil lug (look at my 2nd post) that too wont end well.
remember more often than not you get what you pay for. running a mazak or matsurra with highend tooling solid operators inspection processes materials coating etc doesnt come bargin basement nor from offshore for the most part (ref sub contracting)
and to clarify the statements pertain to some but not all and I dont think glens direct replys were meant that i was pointing the fat finger.
your not alone I sub'd the very 1st and then realized "this aint gonna end well" so now i'm the chip maker, just so happens I'm extremely good at it.......
how about this "buy American products made by Americans, in America with American materials and sub-contracted components" if not ask that overseas company for a bailout or you unemployment ck since US based manufacturing makes products that exceed what you will get with imports. theres plenty of comapanies that will prove it
yea off subject but it fit.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
as stated above Seekins rings are flawless in appearance and that extra touch lets you know youve made the right choice. i wouldnt think it silly to buy a set of seekins rings just to put in a glass case. you couldnt keep that glass clean enough to do them justice. and they work amazing, never slip or leave marks even when torqued to minimum recommended spec. one thing youll notice is there arent any negative comments from people who have actually owned seekins rings. if there are ive never seen them.
as stated above Seekins rings are flawless in appearance and that extra touch lets you know youve made the right choice. i wouldnt think it silly to buy a set of seekins rings just to put in a glass case. you couldnt keep that glass clean enough to do them justice. and they work amazing, never slip or leave marks even when torqued to minimum recommended spec. one thing youll notice is there arent any negative comments from people who have actually owned seekins rings. if there are ive never seen them.
Re: What actually makes rings "good".
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kentactic</div><div class="ubbcode-body">as stated above Seekins rings are flawless in appearance and that extra touch lets you know youve made the right choice. i wouldnt think it silly to buy a set of seekins rings just to put in a glass case. you couldnt keep that glass clean enough to do them justice. and they work amazing, never slip or leave marks even when torqued to minimum recommended spec. one thing youll notice is there arent any negative comments from people who have actually owned seekins rings. if there are ive never seen them. </div></div>
The first heavy duty base/rings I ever bought were Seekins. After several more sets I see no reason to ever change. They have always done exactly what they were made to do, and I have never seen a single mark on any scope I've ever mounted in them.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kentactic</div><div class="ubbcode-body">as stated above Seekins rings are flawless in appearance and that extra touch lets you know youve made the right choice. i wouldnt think it silly to buy a set of seekins rings just to put in a glass case. you couldnt keep that glass clean enough to do them justice. and they work amazing, never slip or leave marks even when torqued to minimum recommended spec. one thing youll notice is there arent any negative comments from people who have actually owned seekins rings. if there are ive never seen them. </div></div>
The first heavy duty base/rings I ever bought were Seekins. After several more sets I see no reason to ever change. They have always done exactly what they were made to do, and I have never seen a single mark on any scope I've ever mounted in them.
