Rings And Bases

[johnny blaze]

I have been using steel bases and rings on some rifles, and aluminum bases and aluminum rings on other rifles. (Weaver style)
I have not shot any of them very much.
I have been told not to use the aluminum rings as they will not hold the scope in alignment properly, and that they are not strong enough. Even Leupold is selling the aluminum Rifle Man bases and rings now.
I am asking for some advice from some of you that shoot a lot.
Is there anything wrong with the aluminum bases and rings?
Any input would be appreciated.

 

[General Geoff]

I don't have enough experience with scope rings and such to be sure, but I do know that the only steel set of rings I have has been the only set that hasn't loosened itself after a long range session.

 

[Slugless]

What about for .22LR vs. centerfire?

 

[johnny blaze]

Thanks for the replies.
I should have mentioned that these are on a .223 and a 22-250.
I would imagine that a 30-06 or 300 mag would be much harder on the components than the calibers that I am shooting.
The 22 rim fire would not be nearly as likely to loosen up the components. I had a 22 years ago with a scope, and it never did loosen anything up.
Anyone with a .223 or 22-250 that has had trouble with the aluminum scope mounting components messing up?

 

[ArmedBear]

Isn't the rail on a flattop AR made out of aluminum?

The scope tube itself is, also.

The thing about aluminum is that there are modern alloys that are much stiffer than steel (ask a serious mountain biker), but aluminum is also used to make cheap metal parts. Soft aluminum is easy and cheap to machine.

So I think it has more to do with the quality of the rings than the metal. Steel is probably always good enough; aluminum has to be the good stuff.

It seems that Leupold would be reluctant to wreck their reputation over some scope rings.

Then again, I bought Warne QD sintered steel rings, and they're utterly PERFECT. They have a repeat customer, no doubt.

 

[YodaVader]

I have been told not to use the aluminum rings as they will not hold the scope in alignment properly, and that they are not strong enough.

There are plenty of rifles out there with steel rings that are grossly misalinged. That is why you see used scopes with all the time with ring marks.

Sinclair Int. specializes in catering to sanctioned benchrest/precision rifle shooters and the Kelbly and Jewell rings they sell made specifically for benchrest rifles are made of aluminum. The Davidson bases that Sinclair Int. sells for the Kelbly rings are aluminum.

Benchrest shooters are the most accuracy obsessed shooters out there. So if shooters competing in sanctioned benchrest with their 6mm PPC are willing to use aluminum mounting components I would not worry about it using them for my .223 or .22-250 .

 

[jhansman]

The only aluminum I have bought have been one-piece setups like BKL or Dednutz. Once fixed to the receiver, these mounts are going nowhere, and hold the scope excellently.

 

[45crittergitter]

I don't mind aluminum bases at all, but insist on steel rings only for hard-kicking calibers (say .375 and up). One thing to keep in mind is that although an aluminum ring may be plenty strong, the halves are joined by steel screws, which are easily capable of stripping the aluminum threads if you try to tighten them as much as you could in a steel ring.

 

[johnny blaze]

Thanks for the replies, some good thought information here.
I am going to shoot the heck out of these aluminum rings, and find out if they really will be a problem down the road.

 

[Omaha-BeenGlockin]

The only aluminium rings I use are the Talley one piece ring mounts----otherwise I prefer steel.

Unless you're talking a 10/22 or something like that----then most anything will work.