egw picatinny base with warne permanent rings?
#1
egw picatinny base with warne permanent rings?
should warne fixed/permanent rings work on a egw picatinny base?
this is for my savage 220 slug gun.
the warne rings appear to have a narrower slot than the base of the egw base and when tightened up the can slide forward and back quite easily. I can't believe this is how they're suppose to be...?
it's as if the base has a 1/4" slot and the base on the rings use a 1/8" slot.
thanks.
this is for my savage 220 slug gun.
the warne rings appear to have a narrower slot than the base of the egw base and when tightened up the can slide forward and back quite easily. I can't believe this is how they're suppose to be...?
it's as if the base has a 1/4" slot and the base on the rings use a 1/8" slot.
thanks.
Last edited by salukipv1; 04-01-2011 at 02:42 PM.
#3
Yes there is a little bit of space between the recoil lug on the rings and the shoulders on the base. It is suppose to be this way. When you install the rings push them forward so that the recoil lug on the ring is touching the base and tighten. Make sure both rings are pushed forward.
#5
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Clermont Florida U.S.
Posts: 4,970
I believe the Warne fixed rings are sized for either Weaver style or Picatinny bases. Weaver slot widths = 0.18" (4.572mm) and may or may not be evenly spaced. Picatinny slot width = 0.206" (5.232 mm) and all slots are spaced at 0.394" (10.008 mm). Picatinny slots often are numbered to make replacement (at the same position) easier.
Last edited by bugsNbows; 04-02-2011 at 01:41 PM.
#6
Typical Buck
Join Date: May 2003
Location:
Posts: 920
Yes there is a little bit of space between the recoil lug on the rings and the shoulders on the base. It is suppose to be this way. When you install the rings push them forward so that the recoil lug on the ring is touching the base and tighten. Make sure both rings are pushed forward.
Simply put, this is how the recoil lug works by making contact with the foward slot in the base. With full contact, it will keep the rings from slipping to the rear.
#7
I'm gonna have to give them both a call, that recoil lug on the rings of the warnes is quite a bit smaller than the gap between the shoulders on the egw picatinny base.
Last edited by bigbulls; 04-02-2011 at 07:24 PM.
#8
Well the recoil lug being quite a bit narrower isn't the only problem now.
With the scope mounted to the rings and then to the rail, it still slides, even when tightened all the way.
doesn't make much sense either to me that the recoil lug on the rings would be that much smaller than the gap between shoulders on the rail.
may just end up buying a warne rail, but at over twice the price of the recommended EGW that's a tad annoying.
With the scope mounted to the rings and then to the rail, it still slides, even when tightened all the way.
doesn't make much sense either to me that the recoil lug on the rings would be that much smaller than the gap between shoulders on the rail.
may just end up buying a warne rail, but at over twice the price of the recommended EGW that's a tad annoying.
#10
Well the recoil lug being quite a bit narrower isn't the only problem now.
With the scope mounted to the rings and then to the rail, it still slides, even when tightened all the way.
doesn't make much sense either to me that the recoil lug on the rings would be that much smaller than the gap between shoulders on the rail.
may just end up buying a warne rail, but at over twice the price of the recommended EGW that's a tad annoying.
With the scope mounted to the rings and then to the rail, it still slides, even when tightened all the way.
doesn't make much sense either to me that the recoil lug on the rings would be that much smaller than the gap between shoulders on the rail.
may just end up buying a warne rail, but at over twice the price of the recommended EGW that's a tad annoying.
Last edited by liquidorange; 04-03-2011 at 06:02 AM.