Warning

 

Close
Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Cancel Confirm
AR15.COM
1/27/2016 12:54:39 PM EDT
Should the base clamping piece of the rings be fully closed after torquing the nut down on your base?
I would assume no, as that would limit the clamping force on the base itself?



Thanks!
1/27/2016 12:57:31 PM EDT
[#1]
Another test i made was I torqued the nut down to 65 inch/lbs without the base inside and marked the nut with a pen at the 6 o' clock position.
Then torquing the rings down with the base, the pen mark is at the same location as it was without the base.

The base I a using the rings on is a badger ordinance 20MOA for my remington 700 short action.

I tested the rings on an Aero precision AR15 upper...and the fitment is pretty loose. Tightening the nut by hand, the rings will slide around on the base quite easily.
After torquing the nut down, i am able to shift the rings on the base with light/moderate strike via rubber mallet.
1/28/2016 12:42:42 PM EDT
[#2]
nobody?

will try asking this question in another group.

i called Leupold, and they are willing to swap the rings for new ones if i send mine in.
1/28/2016 3:21:11 PM EDT
[#3]
There should definitely be a bit of a gap once torqued down. If they are clamping to the same position both on and off the base, there is something wrong. Either the base is too narrow, or the ring clamps aren't closing far enough.
1/29/2016 11:40:18 AM EDT
[#4]
thanks for confirming Lennyo3034...having a small gap only makes sense.

I tried it on three different rails with the same outcome; I am sending the rings to Leoupold for replacement.

the rings have been sitting on my 700P LTR for the last 14 years...wouldn't think so, but perhaps steel can warp over time + pressure?
1/29/2016 8:00:48 PM EDT
[#5]
This situation happened after 14 years mounted to the same rail/base?
1/30/2016 7:08:16 PM EDT
[#6]
ICU,   i dont know if there was any space between the rings and the clamping part..when i first assembled.   But yes, the rings have been on the same base for the last14 years.

I only recently took them off to get my barrel threaded.
1/30/2016 8:27:57 PM EDT
[#7]
What base are you using?  









edit:  Now I see you have a Badger base.  Go directly to the next line.




You may want to just switch to Badger, Seekins, Larue, or any other rings.




 







I dislike the quality of bluing on the Leupolds.  I love their glass but their 'tactical' rings just hit me in the cheap feels.






Post a photo of the ring torqued on the base.  I can't get shit from your photo other than propaganda.  

















 

 
1/31/2016 1:24:27 PM EDT
[#8]
KCCO,

Mark 4 rings in the mail to leupold...and i have some badger rings on order.

Will see if the replacement M4 rings are any different and report back
2/3/2016 1:10:08 PM EDT
[#9]
I got the badger rings in...which behaves way differently as far as the issue i am experiencing with the Mark4 rings.
On all of my bases, the rings lock up tight...showing some gap between the base clamp and the rings themselves.

These are the max 50 (with 6 screws for the rings)...which are super burly.  I think i just added a pound to my rifle.

3/24/2016 11:12:39 AM EDT
[#10]
just reporting back...Leupold sent me new rings, they are an updated version of the rings i bought over a decade ago; and do not exhibit the issue i am referring to.

The new rings have a "L" stamp on top of the rings FYI.

I already have the badger rings now, so i suppose i post the mark 4 rings in EE.