|
Below is a couple of picture of rifles with Picatinney rails. The rail in no way impedes the shells. And notice how much farther apart the rings are. That makes the mount considerably stronger. And because both rings are monunted on the same rail it takes the "torque" out of the scope. Look at the true tactical rifles. They all wear Picatinney's. Tom.
   |
Originally Posted by HEAD0001
(Post 3464466)
I looked at the picture again and I see what you mean about the back base hitting the bolt if you turn it around. The more I look at it the more I like the Picatinney rails I have went to on all my rifles. The rails are easier to install and put less torque on the scopes, while they are consideraly stronger.
|
..........Hey Tom....Hate to tell you this, but the bolt is on the wrong side of the action.....
|
Did some more shooting today.
I am impressed. 3 shot groups at 200 yds were in the 3/4" range, 5 shots were at 1 1/4 to 1 3/4 range 5 different loads, 3 shot great. the worst was 3" at 200yds several one holers burned 40 rounds. Didnt even shoot 100 yds |
i like that gun
|
Originally Posted by zrexpilot
(Post 3464486)
ya I think the raill would be better and was actually thinking about going that way. A friend praised leupold rings and to tell you the truth I think theyre junk. I dont like the way the front twists on and very hard to get square, the rear is held by a small pinch in between those to screws , not very good in my opinion. The rear has windage adjustment coupled with the front spinning around, these were the hardest rings and bases to install and get all squared up and trued down the barrell. I wont buy these ever again. I thinkg the picanny rail would add to the tactial look of this rifle, do you have enough room to load shells or does it hinder it some.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:54 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.