Ash
Member
Fundamentally, there are two basic styles of scope mounting on bolt action rifles (or, the two most common), the Weaver style and the twist-in style (Leupold, Redfield, and Burris, to name the most common) with the rear secured by side screws.
Generally, the Leupold method seems to be the more high brow, as it is the method generally employed when doing shooting evaluations or when showing an idealized photo of a rifle. But, in talking reality, what advantage does the Leupold method truly have over the Weaver?
Lets assume steel Weaver bases and rings versus the steel Leupold or Redfield base with steel rings. What are pros and cons of either method?
Curently I own a Savage 111 (back when the 111 was the deluxe model) with a Leupold single piece base and rings) and a Savage 110 with a single piece Weaver (actually made by Tasco in the 1970's) base with steel rings. Ditto for two Mossberg 810's I own.
Ash
Generally, the Leupold method seems to be the more high brow, as it is the method generally employed when doing shooting evaluations or when showing an idealized photo of a rifle. But, in talking reality, what advantage does the Leupold method truly have over the Weaver?
Lets assume steel Weaver bases and rings versus the steel Leupold or Redfield base with steel rings. What are pros and cons of either method?
Curently I own a Savage 111 (back when the 111 was the deluxe model) with a Leupold single piece base and rings) and a Savage 110 with a single piece Weaver (actually made by Tasco in the 1970's) base with steel rings. Ditto for two Mossberg 810's I own.
Ash