Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 8/5/2001 1:37:00 PM EST
Thought this would get a bit more exposure in General rather than the Optics forum. Mods: If you need to move this thread, no sweat. Have been looking at the LR series Leupolds. The 6.5-20 for my 22-250 and the 4.5-14 for my .308 are what I am interested in. Not sure how important the larger Obj lens really is. I use a 4-16x50 Elite 4000 which seems a tad brighter at dusk than my buddies Vari-X II at the same magnification. I chuck and deer hunt with the guns. The 30mm tubes have more travel internally from what I've read. The taller scope bases are not uncomfortable for me with the Elite 4000 so it shouldn't be much different with the LR's. Is the slight difference in height above the boreline from a larger objective going to make a difference downrange? Have heard that it takes alot more come-ups with taller rings. Was looking at the mildot for the 4.5-14 and not sure how effective it will be for ranging. Am sure it would be difficult to range a chuck with it so am not concerned with that. My rational is having it just in case it would ever be needed. And anyways, the scientific part is interesting. I couldn't find any Leupold 1pc Bases that lock both rings into the base. Is the Badger a good deal? Thanx.
Link Posted: 8/5/2001 2:24:09 PM EST
Badgers are excellent rings and bases. One of the best made period. As far as the height difference making a difference downrange...no. Your comeups may change a small bit vs a smaller objective at close range but it will not affect the bullet path at all. Also- before going with a 50mm objective, make sure you have an adjustable cheekpiece or a solid way to raise your cheekweld height. Good luck-Mike T
Link Posted: 8/5/2001 2:35:55 PM EST
The 30mm tubes do offer alot more windage and elevation adjustment. How much you will need depends upon the ballistics of the round you are going to use. If the loss of the # of clicks is a major concern, get a tapered 1 piece scope mount. As for rings "locking" into the base do you mean like dual dovetails? They are ok but most people go with weaver or picatinny type rings and mounts. Badger makes very good products. As for using mildots to range chucks, how tall are they? The 3/4 mildots are mostly calibrated to range objects about 1 yard in size.
Link Posted: 8/5/2001 3:08:34 PM EST
Thanx for your responses. These questions are for bolt rifles. I have a 1pc Leupold base on the .308 and am led to believe that it only dovetails-in the front ring. The rear is held between the windage screws. I want a base that dovetails in both rings. Am thinking this would be a stronger mount and the scope would keep its zero better, rather than using my current 1pc base. In my post I mentioned that I would not be ranging a chuck because of difficulty (they're a bit short). Am using the 4.5-14 for a .308. The 22-250 will probably not be shot past 600yds around here. Avg range we shoot at is 300 to 400 for chucks but I like the idea of side focusing instead of reaching up front to adjust the Obj lens.
Link Posted: 8/5/2001 7:24:19 PM EST
You want strong? Get either Nightforce (actually they're made by Bruce Baer) tapered bases, 2 piece, or Nightforce 1 piece tapered base (actually made by Badger Ordnance). Either will give you 20 MOA, instead of using up your clicks. Then get a good set of weaver type rings. Either Badger Ord. or Luepold Mark 4. I've been using the 2 piece NF bases and Luepold QRW rings. I had a problem with the rings losening up, I'll be switching to Badger Ord rings soon.
Top Top