Guys,

I replied the comment under Scope mount and rings ?? for Omega(http://www.huntingnet.com/forum/tm.aspx?m=1367513) and Encoreman thinks I should post new threat for this. He is corrected!!! I think it will be good subject.

The subject will be “What is Pros and Cons between Detachable and Fix mountings?” I cleaned my ML last night and wish I could removed the scope. The dirtiest of barrel is right near where the breech plug is. That is where I want to putbarrel into hot soapy water. Any comment?

Thanks...

Pros:

1. Ability to remove scope for cleaning.

2. Ability to carry a backup scope on an expensive outfitted hunt (in case the airlines break your other one).

3. Ability to use multiple loads per gun with just a scope change. For example, you coul have a hot fast load dialed in with one scope for hunting open fields and a slower load with a lower powered scope for hunting brushy areas all with the same gun.

4. ? These are the uses I can think of, there may be more.

Cons:

1. POI shift if not remounted correctly. Also cheaper QR rings will not return to zero. I've never had the Warne Maxima Quick Release rings fail to return to zero.

2. Cost. A good set will cost more than an equivelent fixed ring.


Conclusion:

I use em on all my muzzleloaders. Warne rings and bases on 3 of them and Leupold QR (the ones with the posts) on my ML pistol. I've been using them since 2002.

Wow,

Excellent report Wolfhound76!!

Great points, I'm earmarking funds for the Warne quick releases today!

Or you could go with a fixed mount with a good scope and throw the whole thing in hot soapy water. Most good good scopes will be 100% water proof.

I only had one QR scope mount and I couldn't get it to shoot accurately between mount and dismount. I was using a leupold scope with the leupold QR set up on a 30-30 Marlin.

Tom

Leupold QRs return to zero, Warne QDs return to zero, Leupold QRWs return to zero but I don't like them much because of the ring split, and even my Burris QDs are doing a good job. Might see a half inch shift after removing/reinstalling at 100 yards. Patrick qualified his remarks with an "if not remounted correctly" which implies they need have been properly mounted initially - a source of problem for some. If you go with QR/QD rings, the choice of going with a particular type should be made with a realization that all the cross-slot Weaver types have their mechanics in the rings, the QRs from Leupold have their mechanics in the bases. Weaver style bases are comparatively cheap, Leupold QR bases are expensive. Possible trades of a rifle(or switching scopes between rifles)using the QR bases would leave you in need of more expensive bases for the rifle -lessa problem with the cross-slot types.

There are other styles of detachables out there - the B-Square Lynx peg types come to mind.I think shying away from those might be a good idea since there seems to be very little real-world feedback on how well they work and there are more readily available proven models available. There are other rings available marketed as "tactical", most of which would be quick detachable types. Most of the tactical rings are also very solidly made and fit Weaver cross-slots. They are surely a good choice but generally much more expensive. Be aware that many rings claimed to be quick detachable are not, nor are they are very repeatable. Weaver seems totally confused about this issue.

Patrick's reasons are all sound but far and away the most significant for me is his #1 - cleaning. Some rifle/scope combos benefit more from that conveniencethan others.

The most negative thing is cost compared to fixed systems. If a person shoots pellets instead of loose powder, cost must not be that much a factor. Each of us must determine our own level of economy.

So far as dumping the whole thing in hot, soapy water......is there anyone here that actually does that? Not me!

There is nothing wrong with good non-detachable ring/base combos - nothing at all. But the convenience of quick detachables is worth the price for me.

Boy!!! I was afraid to put my BRAND NEW Leupold scope (only two days old) into HOT soapy water. I would not do that cuz I don't feel confidence yet. Is anyone doing that??? Geez! [:-]You must be over confidence!!! I wish I have your gut!

You mentioned that you could not get your Leupold Scope and QR… could not get them to shoot accurately between mount and dismount. Could you tell us how much inches difference? I have been reading that they returned zero. It is hard to believe!!!

Thanks…

I bet the problems I was having with my QR system was specific to my setup or installation. I threw this question around with some friends of mine and they haven't had as many problems as I had. My differences were as much as 2" at 100 yards.

As for putting a new scope in hot soapy water. The product is made to take that level of abuse so would you rather find out that your shiney new scope is malfunction while it soaks in your bathtub or one day when you're out in the field and the rain gets in it. Either way it is under warranty but the one way ruins your hunt.

Good Luck with your decision.

Also I agree with the above. I don't know too many people that put their rifles in hot soapy water. I just clean mine in a rifle rest.

Tom

The only ones I have had were the Burris and I did not like them. I tried them a number of times and they would not return to zero. They were usually around an inch off...

I do plan on getting another pair but this time will go with Warne or Leopold.

DFhunt-I use a Leupold QD mount on my omega.I remove to clean every time and have never had zero change.I know of no con's except price.If you pay over $400.00 for a rifle,another $100.00-$200.00 or more for a scope,What difference is another $100.00 or so for quality mounts? A wise man told me one time "Always buy the best equipment you can afford"

Charlie

I sure hope my wife doesn't read #3. I'll be buying scopes instead of new ML's
My vote is for theLeupold QR's. I like to completely strip my ML's down at the end of day. Keeping the scope on during the cleaning process is cumbersome for me. I tried it and it's not me.