|
Post by Jed on Oct 13, 2010 20:08:05 GMT -5
Can anyone steer me in the direction of a thread(s) discussing the pros and cons of a one-piece scope base on the Savage?
Or has anyone tried both and come to some conclusions about which they like better and why?
Thanks a lot!
~ Jed
|
|
|
Post by whyohe on Oct 14, 2010 9:24:12 GMT -5
jed i have both. I dont see a bennifit of one over the other but some say it stiffens the recever. I cant say wethere it does or doesnt. I knoe i have a little easier time loading primers in the one with 2 piece base cause I have big (fat) fingers and it gives me some more room.
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Oct 14, 2010 10:49:06 GMT -5
The one piece base will definitely stiffen your action. It only stands to reason that by filling that big gap on top that it will increase its rigidity. Now is this critical ON A MUZZLELOADER? . Definitely on a center fire it is. My reasoning is that all your pressures occur within the barrel and forward of the breech plug. There is little pressure being exerted on the bolt. Whereas on a center fire, a lot of high pressure is exerted by the case pressing against the bolt face trying to "spread" the action apart....so to speak! Therefore the overhead reinforcement definitely helps. The more critical aspect is the alignment of your scope rings. With the one piece base, it can be assumed that it is machined perfectly straight and hence your rings will be parallel to one another (provided they are quality rings). With the two piece deal, you never know if the front is parallel with the rear due to manufacturing tolerances (with both the bases and action). With two piece mounts I always lap my scope rings to assure the scope tube is not being "pinched" due to misalignment. Set up properly, both will work fine. If I have my "druthers", I would go with the one piece base. I personally, don't really find it much harder to install or remove primers. Richard
|
|
|
Post by mike3132 on Oct 14, 2010 12:14:15 GMT -5
Two pieces bases give you better access to the bolt other than that Ive seen no difference. I perfer two piece bases for the Savage. Mike
|
|
|
Post by jeremylong on Oct 14, 2010 19:11:59 GMT -5
I really like the burris signature rings with inserts. I have had good luck with them and using burris standard two piece bases. I dont really like the double screw on the back, but have never really had a problem once tightened down.
I was thinking of trying the QR rings. I am interested to see what the guys here think on weaver style bases with the QR rings. I have always been too scared to try. thought is if its quick to release, maybe happens when you dont want it too or comes slightly loose etc, but I have 0 experience with them
|
|
|
Post by dannoboone on Oct 14, 2010 19:45:08 GMT -5
Over the past few years since getting the 10MLII, I have very much become a fan of stainless Savage/laminate stocks. The three CF's are VLD's in Models 12 and 112. They are all very good and accurate rifles. However, the receivers do have gaps when using a straight edge to check for straightness where the scope mounts get installed. Because of this, I have also become a fan of Burris Signature rings with the nylon inserts (don't care for lapping) for two piece mounts. For the one piece mount, I bedded them just as one would bed a stock, to ensure a complete and tight fit when the screws are tightened.
I haven't noticed any difference in accuracy with either setup. It has made much more difference with the load/bullet combination accuracy wise with the CF's as well as the 10MLII.
|
|
|
Post by rexxer on Oct 14, 2010 20:33:43 GMT -5
I had both and my choice would easily be the one piece mount. I would take it one step father and have it bedded to the action. The Savage action on my rifle is not parallel to each other on both sides of the opening.Mounting a two piece base in those conditions would create stress in scope tube. I'm sure some of Savage scope breaking reputation is due to this condition. I like the idea of the extra strength with the one piece base. I have the Ken Ferrel one piece base. Its a tad high but extremely flat and seems well made.
|
|
|
Post by mike3132 on Oct 14, 2010 20:39:13 GMT -5
I always lap my rings no matter what bases I use. Doesn't take long to do and really helps with scope slippage. Mike
|
|
|
Post by rexxer on Oct 14, 2010 20:44:05 GMT -5
Mike- I agree that would be a good idea!
|
|
|
Post by Jed on Oct 15, 2010 6:55:32 GMT -5
Thanks for the replies, guys! I might have to try a one-piece base here soon. (And it better be quick, because ML season is right around the corner!) I like the flexibility of mounting the scope...I will make sure to bed it though.
|
|