Are the weaver and millet rings and bases good quality?

I prefer leupold to both but prefer the millet over weaver.I like my mounts to be all steel and weavers are part aluminum.They also twist when the ring screws are tightened(screws on one side only) making it difficult to align the crosshairs straight up and down.

leupold or redfield. burris makes good rings and bases. i dont like weaver .

Millet

..Millet rings and bases are good they have been making rings and bases for years they know whats going on...

..JESUS IS COMING BACK BE READY...

I prefer Leupold dual dovetail rings and bases whenever possible. But when I need a "Weaver Type"-scope ring I'd pick Millet over Weaver anytime; better quality and design in my opinion.

"Lord, make me fast and accurate."

For the most part I have always used Redfield. I did put some Millett base and rings on one rifle and I would say are equal to Redfield.I would stay way from Weaver rings.Redfield and Millett are all steel construction.So are Leupold.Ruger Redhawk

from those choices you listed

Millet

I use Leupold or Redfield

Weaver rings have, over the years and in MANY applications, proven to be quite strong enough. However, they are ugly, and as Stubblejumper noted, the scopes rotate as you tighten the ring screws, making it a real pain to TRY TO keep the reticle properly levelled. This is the main reason I quit using the Weavers eons ago. Have had real good results with the Millets, particularly when mounting scopes on the 3/8" dovetail of the.22-type "tipoff" bases, which I use with great satifaction on octagon barrel sidelock muzzleloaders!!

Larry