Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Aluminum scope rings

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    20

    Aluminum scope rings

    I am about to mount a NF 5.5-22◊50 on a 300 winchester magnum heavy barrel Remington. The gun is equipped with Warne steel picatiny rail base. Would NF ALUMINUM RINGS be a good idea? Or am I better off with steel? Also , what about Mark4 rings? Thank You.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    577
    sideways answer
    i like burris insert rings, they now make a heavy duty tactical set.
    they never damage the tube and allow tilting for elevation adjustment.
    i have the tactical 6 screw on my 300 win mag with a 5.5-22 nf

    here is midways listing
    https://ads.midwayusa.com/product/1548235656
    Last edited by rsmithsr; 04-21-2021 at 01:31 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    357
    Quote Originally Posted by ap3572001 View Post
    I am about to mount a NF 5.5-22◊50 on a 300 winchester magnum heavy barrel Remington. The gun is equipped with Warne steel picatiny rail base. Would NF ALUMINUM RINGS be a good idea? Or am I better off with steel? Also , what about Mark4 rings? Thank You.
    If you decide to use Burris insert rings and youír base or front base extend over the front of youír receiver make sure to use steel. A while back I put a 375 Rem ultra mag to gather on a rem 700 using these rings with weaver aluminum bases. The front base extended a short distance beyond the front of the receiver. Customer came back a short time later and claimed he had run out of adjustments and was shooting into the ground a few feet in front of his bench. It didnít take an MIT graduate to figure out what had happened. The recoil was severe enough to bend up the unsupported part of the front base as the ring inserts acted like a couple of ball joints. Put steel bases on an problem was solved.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    577
    steel BASE/BASES, not rings.
    rings come both ways but not in al configurations.
    Quote Originally Posted by martin zuck View Post
    If you decide to use Burris insert rings and youír base or front base extend over the front of youír receiver make sure to use steel. A while back I put a 375 Rem ultra mag to gather on a rem 700 using these rings with weaver aluminum bases. The front base extended a short distance beyond the front of the receiver. Customer came back a short time later and claimed he had run out of adjustments and was shooting into the ground a few feet in front of his bench. It didnít take an MIT graduate to figure out what had happened. The recoil was severe enough to bend up the unsupported part of the front base as the ring inserts acted like a couple of ball joints. Put steel bases on an problem was solved.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    357
    Quote Originally Posted by rsmithsr View Post
    steel BASE/BASES, not rings.
    rings come both ways but not in al configurations.
    Maybe I didnít make myself clear. It would have made no difference the material of the rings. The unsupported aluminum section of front base with the ball joint action of the inserts made for the perfect storm. A steel base would not have allowed this to happen. In other words base material would not have been a concern with out the ball joint action of the Burris inserts. In a lower recoil rifle this problem would not have existed.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    577
    well not you have me confuse( easy to do some days)
    it was ALLOWED because of the burris insert ring ??
    wow
    Quote Originally Posted by martin zuck View Post
    Maybe I didnít make myself clear. It would have made no difference the material of the rings. The unsupported aluminum section of front base with the ball joint action of the inserts made for the perfect storm. A steel base would not have allowed this to happen. In other words base material would not have been a concern with out the ball joint action of the Burris inserts. In a lower recoil rifle this problem would not have existed.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    washington.........STATE that is.
    Posts
    11,168
    Martin, I'm with you.

    Most folks have never dealt with a 3-5lb scope on top of a rifle generating 7-10,000 0r even on some of mine 15,000lb KE

    Swivels are NOT your friend although Charlie's AL swivelers will hold twice't as much as them plastic Burris things..... I've had to use Hysol Epoxy inside degreased/lapped 3-screw rings before on hunting rifles

    It's like when you start running BIG fish, strapped in and 30lb drag pressure that'll lift a 250lb man up on the rail and you learn what a Bimini Twist is because ya HAVE to, normal stuff just doesn't get 'er done.

    To the op, that Rem 300WM will be well served by either choice you've mentioned. Absolutely no issues. I would lap them, but I put that !ap on ever'thang

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by alinwa View Post
    Martin, I'm with you.

    Most folks have never dealt with a 3-5lb scope on top of a rifle generating 7-10,000 0r even on some of mine 15,000lb KE

    Swivels are NOT your friend although Charlie's AL swivelers will hold twice't as much as them plastic Burris things..... I've had to use Hysol Epoxy inside degreased/lapped 3-screw rings before on hunting rifles

    It's like when you start running BIG fish, strapped in and 30lb drag pressure that'll lift a 250lb man up on the rail and you learn what a Bimini Twist is because ya HAVE to, normal stuff just doesn't get 'er done.

    To the op, that Rem 300WM will be well served by either choice you've mentioned. Absolutely no issues. I would lap them, but I put that !ap on ever'thang
    Ok, I'm ignorant, Al - what are these? RG

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ca.
    Posts
    904
    At the end of the description on Midways site what the hell is this warning supposed to be referring to? And its for Ca. of course and my state.

    WARNING: Cancer and Reproductive Harm - www.P65Warnings.ca.gov.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    washington.........STATE that is.
    Posts
    11,168
    Quote Originally Posted by R.G. Robinett View Post
    Ok, I'm ignorant, Al - what are these? RG
    I've got a set of finely machined rings with a ball-n-socket style swivel that I REMEMBER as being made by Charlie Hood.... I was really into stress-free scope mounting at the time and had some enlightening convos with him......He was also making rings where the rear one was a rubber insert so that the scope was unaffected by the action stretch connected with temperature change.

    This all occurred in the absolute infancy of the scope freezing era when everyone was looking for a way to get a scope, ANY scope to hold zero and I got hands on all sorts of flex mounts.

    Never did though manage to get a set with the rubber rear ring, still pi$$es me off

    Maybe Charlie will come on to confirm/deny

    Schucks, maybe he'll come on to let me know he found me some rubbers......

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    577
    well i have a 300 win mag running 230 bergers at 2900 fps in a 26" bbl.
    i use the rings listed and have the larger/heavier version of the scope he has( mine is the 56mm vs his 50)
    i have no issues, no failures. consistent hits at one mile.
    my opinion based on my experience is the rings will work.
    side benefit, no lapping, no ring marks

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Augusta, Maine & Palm Coast, Fl
    Posts
    6,428

    I had this issue

    Quote Originally Posted by martin zuck View Post
    Maybe I didnít make myself clear. It would have made no difference the material of the rings. The unsupported aluminum section of front base with the ball joint action of the inserts made for the perfect storm. A steel base would not have allowed this to happen. In other words base material would not have been a concern with out the ball joint action of the Burris inserts. In a lower recoil rifle this problem would not have existed.
    with a couple of Handi Rifles I had years ago. The overhanging base would bend with each shot, never mind leaning the rifle against something. Neither one of them shot well enough to keep so they moved on.

    Pete

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Lower Dakota Territory
    Posts
    2,160
    Quote Originally Posted by alinwa View Post
    I've got a set of finely machined rings with a ball-n-socket style swivel that I REMEMBER as being made by Charlie Hood...
    You may be thinking about the aluminum live center gimble ball rings made by Arnold Jewell.

    I believe the rubber insert ones were made by Gene Bukys...and maybe others.

    Good shootin'.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    arkansas
    Posts
    320

    jewell rings

    i have 2 pairs of the jewells. one set was made to have some added elevation, which is handy.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    washington.........STATE that is.
    Posts
    11,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Al Nyhus View Post
    You may be thinking about the aluminum live center gimble ball rings made by Arnold Jewell.

    I believe the rubber insert ones were made by Gene Bukys...and maybe others.

    Good shootin'.
    You are exactly right, I stand corrected..... I misspoke when I ref'd Charlie Hood

    Thank You Al

    al

    (no arabic pun intended)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •