weaver style rings interchangeability?

[stude283]

Hello all,
I asked a question about ring slippage a while ago and received many responses(Thanks to all for help!) Unfortunatelly this created another question I need help with.There seems to be 3 types of bases available,weaver style, picatinny and tactical.Will weaver style rings work with any of these, or are there differences?If so what are they?
thanks for help!

[craigf]

Yes they will. Weaver rings will fit on picantinny and tactical, which are picantinny as well, but picantinny/tactical will not fit on weaver bases. In order to use weaver rings on picantinny/tactical bases the rings must be pushed all the way forward.

The difference is the width of the key space. Weaver is smaller than the picantinny/tactical.

[stude283]

So It looks like there is no way to use burris tactical rings on an older non accutrigger 10ml2,no base available,correct?

[craigf]

Is the rear of your action round or flat?

[fishhawk]

Midway sells Burris tactical bases for both receiver styles. If you gun has a flat rear receiver plug in Midway#386929 (in stock) If it is round in the rear use #665735 (currently out). These are two piece with tactical width slots. These are not listed under 10ml in Midways listings but will fit. They will reach the recoil lug so watch for lug/base interference. If your rings are not the insert (signature) style burris, alignment should be checked due to receiver taper issues with Savage bolt guns.

[davidfoor]

If you want the best , Ken Farrel is it.

www.kenfarrell.com/SAV-NS-1-0.html

There is really no standard with the "Weaver Style" bases. I have numerous Weaver style bases made by Weaver, both aluminum and steel, Warne and some unmarked. The slot width varies from about .146 to .156 depending on who makes them. The Weaver aluminum bases I have measure between .155 and .156. I tried the Burris Tactical rings on all the bases I have and the only ones they fit correctly on were the Weaver aluminum bases.

I use Warne steel bases and Burris ZEE rings on my 10 ML II and several other rifles, including a couple of magnums that recoil more than the Savage and don't have any issues.

P.S. Did you try the friction tape I sent you?

[fishhawk]

The Burris Tactical bases I mentioned above have .200 wide slots. Farrell bases are nice but are quite tall which is fine if you are mounting a scope with 50mm. or larger objective. Also due to the receiver taper (at least on round receiver guns) Farrell bases require a precise bedding procedure to mount properly (stress free). I bed all bases but with 1 piece bases it is more important.

[stude283]

Now I'm even more confused!My gun is a non accutrigger so from what I gather it is a flat top.I actually found burris tactical bases(I was thinking tactical had to be 1 piece for some reason)in midsouth catalog for the non accutrigger on my own.The confusion started again when I went to the burris website.Their tactical rings say they work with any tactical or weaver style bases,but their tactical bases say they work with any tactical or weaver style rings??I guess it can't be that close of a fit.Is there no way to know what fits with what without buying and trying?Will burris tactical rings fit warne weaver style bases as their website indicates?

[fishhawk]

The slot width is the issue with interchangability. If your rings have a lug or screw that is wider than the slot in the base it wont work. The only other problem I've seen is interference with a sharp machined tip on the bottom edge of the ring with a radiused cut on the sides of some bases. Filing the sharp edge off the ring cures this. If your gun is non accutrigger it probably has a flat area where the rear base mounts. This is refered to as a flat rear receiver.

[rossman40]

You can get a picatinny one-piece for the older flat top receiver.

A picatinny rail should be military spec. The dimensions are carved in stone at the Pentagon.

www.biggerhammer.net/picatinny/

The problem you run into is not everyone follows the spec so instead of calling it a picatinny MIL-STD-1913 mount they call it a "tactical" mount. I have already seen guys dump a lot of money into LaRue or ARMS hardware and find out they can not use it on their made in China "tactical" mount. As in the military if all your weapons had picatinny rails you could easily swap optics and just re-zero and be ready to rock.

With a weaver mount there is no industry standard so the maker can make the cross slot anywhere from .180" to .150", no rules on spacing or depth. About the only rule everyone follows is 7/8" wide. If you wanted to swap optics you would have to re-adjust the rings.

Rings are the same problem, the big giveaway is when they say the ring will fit a picatinny or a weaver mount. That means the recoil lug or crossbolt is .140" or less. On a true picatinny ring the recoil lug or crossbolt should be at least .190" to fit into the .205" cross slot were as on a quality weaver style ring the recoil lug or crossbolt will be like .140" to fit into a .150" cross slot. On a 10ML or any rifle with heavy recoil you can not trust the ring to clamp onto the mount and not move. You can make sure and push the rings forward on the mount but if it comes loose and you have excessive clearance you end up "slamming" the scope with recoil spikes that can be easily 10 times above normal when it starts bouncing around in the cross slot.