Would appreciate those with experience -- comment on the strength and plus/ minus issues between these two types of detachable ring/base combos on a DG rifle. I have been using the Talley system but am thinking about switching over to the Leupold system -- comments on the two would be appreciated.

For keeping the scope from slipping and return to zero, I would use Talley. They are a little harder to set up at first, but worth it.

I have used both systems extensively and prefer the talley system on anything in 300 mag up. I believe them to be much stronger. I have had some issues with the leupolds loosening which has taught me to tighten the tiny levers very tight. The design of the Talley is just better all the way around IMHO. I use the Talleys on 375's, 338. 9.3 and 416 rifles and to date have no issues. They are somewhat harder to properly adjust but if the directions are carefully followed and if you use a little patience the effort is well worth it. The Talleys are more expensive but minor in cost compared to almost any hunt.

I use Talleys on my 458 Lott with no problem. Leupold QD rings I had on a 375 H&H Mag. soon shot loose; I'll never use them again.

I have Talley. Haven't had any issues with them.

I would never trade Talleys for the Leupold!

Not only do the lupies shoot loose, but are high, and interfere with the iorn sights on most rifles! Talleys or Warnes origenals,(like the old Kimbers,) are much better, IMO!

I too prefer the Talley for a few reasons. First off Dave Talley's customer service is second to none. He has halped me with a few different issues and was a great person to deal with. He backs his product 100%. Second I prefer the look of the Talley rings over the Leupold. Last is that the levers on the Talley are larger and easier to operate. Some may find this a problem because they tend to catch on clothing easier than the Leupold...but for me I like them better. Having said this I still think the Leupold system is a good one and is very strong. In fact I was told by the folks at the factory that this is there most rugged mounting system of all their mounts. I think both brands will work well but I recomend the Talley.

Ok, maybe I just got lucky but I have Leup. QRW on my .404jeffery & they have given me zerp problems after 350+rounds. I've had them on & off a couple times, returns to zero fine. As long as you tighten the levers, mine haven't shot loose. My only complaint is the sharp edges on the levers but that was taken care of w/ a dremel & some cold blue.

You guys have confirmed my own thoughts/observations and experience -- will stay with the Talleys and change the scopes around a bit to solve my issues. I would also comment that Dave Talley is an exceptional individual to work with.

Stay with the Talleys. I had a set of Leupold QD's that literally broke. Leupold replaced them and I still have them. They were made of what appeared to be pot metal at that time, not solid steel. I don't know if Leupold has changed their manufacturing process with them since then. That was in 2004 or early 2005.

I have been using the Leupold QRW rings for many years and thousands of rounds of ammunition. This is on a variety of bolt action rifles and 2 AR's. They have never once given me anything but satisfaction, HOWEVER, I have not used them on severe recoiling rifles, so I would not claim them to be the Holy Grail of QD's. Additionally, I have been using them on other manufacturers bases known to be solid steel. They do however meet my requirements for better than average performance.

Woodmnctry,

Be sure you can see your express sights over the Leupold bases.

Buliwyf

I've heard from a number of people I trust about problems with the QR Leupold system. On the other hand, the QRW has had good luck...this with Weaver-style bases. I've got this system with steel bases on my .375H&H Mag. Have fired (or grandsons fired) over 400 full power rounds and double that with lesser loads. QRW system is still going strong. I may try the Talleys on a new rifle just to see, though.

There is just a huge amount of BS on this thread. The LATEST PRODUCTION Leupold QRW rings and bases are as good as it gets.

Leupold QRW bases can also be lower and more streamlined than Talley bases in some cases, and more soothing to the hand carressing the receiver top.

I have a half dozen Talley setups and 4 times that many Leupold QRW setups, and am well versed in both.

I am sure the BS here is partly due to old experience with the horrible early QRW that had a round cross-bolt (ring) in a square cross-slot (base).

The latest QRW are square peg in square hole and are indestructible by the hardest kickers if applied and tightened properly against the recoil stop.

Fredj338, you did good.

There is some unwarranted prissiness about preferring Talley over Leupold QRW. They are both great.

I really do like the QRW better, but I tolerate Talley's just fine if they happen to be on my rifle. I do hate those peculiar Leupold "QR" mounts though.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but, I do not think that "Dave Talley(company founder)" has anything to do with Talley rings today. I believe that "Dave's" old Talley Ring place of business no longer exists. I believe everything was sold and "Gary Turner" now makes the rings using the "Talley" brand name in South Carolina. I have older "Dave Talley" products that are excellent but I've never compaired them to the new "Turner-Talley" rings.

Also, as already noted, LEU QRW rings made today are head and shoulders above the older LEU QRW rings. The newer version are hell for stout and if installed correctly have as much bearing surface for recoil and as much clamping strength to hold as anything.

GVA

I agree with Rip, I have used the QRW's on several .458 Lotts and .375's with complete satisfaction. I like the Talleys, they are more attractive, but I don't believe they are ultimately as strong as the Leupold.

Shot long range prone/sling matches for many a year and various matches/stages require going from micrometer/peep sights to optics and best system I ever found is the Leupold QRW for not only return to zero aspects, but durability as well.
At ranges from 600 to 1000 yards, with no option for sighters, ring/base system and the switching from metalic to optics must work very well to keep you in the 10 ring at such ranges. Don't ever recall seeing Talley's at the ranges but a great deal of Leupold QRW's.
60-100 rounds of 300Win Mag is a lot of continuous recoil. Good Luck with whatever you select.

RIP,

Do the QRW hang over the ejection port on the m70 Safaris as the QR model do? I have the QR. I have not yet had problems with them, but have not tried removing and returning to zero. I have had the scope off, but was just testing, foudn that I had the front ring not tight enough and it had shifted under recoil (my 375).

The way I load I don't have a problem fuctionally with the rear base hanging over, cosmetically though it is ugly.

Red

I called Talley Manufacturing not too long ago and spoke with Dave Talley himself so it would appear that he is still involved personally in the manufacturing of Talley rings.

You are correct. For the 2007 Shot Show, Talley representatives are listed as:

President:Gary Turner; Vice Presidentavid Talley; Deborah Talley

GVA

Talley, Hands down... If you pop things off and on as much as I do you will agree...

I also have the problem of not knowing my own strength... The leupold studs snap pretty easily though leupold has stood behind them 100%...
I leave my leupolds on my every day shooters/plinkers and talley systems on my seroius hunting rigs with exception of my custom lever scouts.

The new qrw's mark up scopes a little more than the talleys do also.

As a 07/02 ffl I reccomend the best system that my customers can afford but, most stick with the weavers... Though I will only stock their 4x4 quadlock rings...

I have used these for 3 safaris...But they return to absolute zero...Taking off they are a breeze and no turning, push a button and off..

Mike

http://www.talbot.us/

Some of the confusion and misinformation stems from the fact there are two lines of Leupold quick detach rings. There is the "QR" and then there is the "QRW" line. They bear NO resemblance to each other in terms of design or reliability.

The Leupold QRW are licensed from Warne. That's what the "W" at the end stands for. Not sure if they were originally pot metal or not, but the QR's I had certainly were. RIP says the new QRW's will handle heavy recoil, and his word is good enough for me.

The QR's are a totally different kettle of fish and I regretablly bought a set back in the late 90's. These are the kind that have little nubby ears for release levers and only take a quarter turn to detach. Horrible design and something that does not belong on any rifle, much less a DGR that you are potentially betting your life on.

The QR's are too easy to get bumped a little, and loosen the scope just enough so that the shooter may not notice it, but the accuracy will go haywire. This caused me some grief on the rifle range in Darwin on the day before packing out to Murwangi station. Never again. I gave the goddam things away to a prairie dog shooter.

Warne's and Leupold QRW's go for around $100 and Talley's are around $200. I have used Warne and Talley, but not the QRW. I have never had the Warne's or Talley's fail me. So unless you are one of these people who complain about the price of premium bullets, then an extra $100 for Talley rings and bases amortorized over the rest of your lifetime isn't too much to pay.

Gary Turner is Dave Talley's stepson. I talked at length with both of them and Mrs. Talley at the SHOT show in 2004.

Also, I never had any issues on Warne's or Talley's causing any ejection or feeding problems on either Winchester, Remington, Weatherby, or original Mauser actions.

Your mileage may vary.

Cheers,

Alan Bunn is right on. The Leupold QR's that busted on me and that I returned to Leupold were pot metal. The lever itself broke off, and when I discussed this with the Leupold rep over the telephone in coordinating the shipment back of the broken QR, he informed me that the lever was cast metal (pot metal). Now, if they have changed that since then, that's wonderful. And if they have another version, even better. No BS from my experience, just the actual facts as to what happened and what I did. I immmediately removed the QR's from my .375 H&H and mounted regular rings and bases on the .375 H7H for that hunt and subsequently shot cape buffalo, elephant and lion. That was 2005. I still have the replacement QR set, unopened, that Leupold sent to me free. I also noticed that the original set that I had break on me loosened up as has been stated here by others. Just my experience, not BS. I have no beef with Leupold as I have 30+ scopes of theirs on some of my rifles and most of them have Leupold scope bases as well.

I have both and have used them in Africa and America. In function I cannot tell much difference although the talley's seem much nicer made and make my husqvarna seem SWEET. They seem like a custom made mount compared to warne or leup. My vote is Talley!

Dago Red,
The rear QRW base on M70's can be reversed so it either hangs over the ejection port a little or not at all. How much hang over depends on Pre-64 vs. Classic and 30-06 vs. .375 H&H length setups in their various combinations.

If you have enough scope tube length, you can make the QRW not overhang at all on any of them by various means, such as reversing the base and even cutting the base shorter in length if necessary, or drilling new holes in the base. where there is a will, there is a way, and a way much easier with the QRW. Custom steel Weaver style bases abound, from Warne and others, for gunsmithing customizations. Even Weaver makes steel bases that will fit the NEW QRW rings now. Some of mine overhang and some do not. I don't recall specifically. There are several different rear bases, in both lengths and hole spacing, for the various M70's old and new. I would have to go look at them.

Leupold QRW's are a whole lot better than either the QR or the Talley or old Kimber in this regard, across all models of M70.

Another benefit of the QRW is that I can use Badger 34mm rings ($200 US for the rings alone) with a Schmidt&Bender scope, or the cheap Weaver's (which are good but too ugly even for me to love) or any of the various mounts that fit a standard picatinny rail, that has the same contour as the QRW base. I like Talley, but I am not totally gushy/prissy about them. Yep Talley is good.

Alan Bunn,
Thanks for reminding me to renew my AH subscription.

Hey RIP,

Just in case you may have misplaced it.

African Hunter subscription

Cheers,

Alan

I beat you to it. Already done.

The QRWs that I bought about 5 years ago were made out of cheese, as they bases mooshed under the recoil of a mere 458 win mag.

Warne makes a great QD. I have them on my 458 Lott and 375 H&H CZ 550's.

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
The QRWs that I bought about 5 years ago were made out of cheese, as they bases mooshed under the recoil of a mere 458 win mag.

Your previous comment 5 years ago was that they were as soft as a "dog turd." And you were using the inferior round cross bolt in the square cross slot. Admit it.

The new QRW made by Warne for Leupold is as good as it gets.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
The QRWs that I bought about 5 years ago were made out of cheese, as they bases mooshed under the recoil of a mere 458 win mag.

Your previous comment 5 years ago was that they were as soft as a "dog turd." And you were using the inferior round cross bolt in the square cross slot. Admit it.

The new QRW made by Warne for Leupold is as good as it gets.

OK, maybe it was dog turds and not cheese. I have not sniffed them lately.

As for the current version of the QRW, I have not seen them.

quote:

There is just a huge amount of BS on this thread. The LATEST PRODUCTION Leupold QRW rings and bases are as good as it gets.

RIP,

I agree on both counts. Talleys may be just as good or better, but so what? I've never had a problem with Leupold QRW bases or rings.

Will,
Thank You! Pondoro has spoken!
I am going to have Stuart Satterlee machine a picatinny setup from the square bridges of a stainless Mauser 98 Magnum action. Then I can use either Leupold QRW, Warne, Badger, or even some Weaver rings.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

I am going to have Stuart Satterlee machine a picatinny setup from the square bridges of a stainless Mauser 98 Magnum action. Then I can use either Leupold QRW, Warne, Badger, or even some Weaver rings.

You ain't right!

quote:

Originally posted by Charles_Helm:

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

I am going to have Stuart Satterlee machine a picatinny setup from the square bridges of a stainless Mauser 98 Magnum action. Then I can use either Leupold QRW, Warne, Badger, or even some Weaver rings.

You ain't right!

The same was said about many bold pioneers of the past, mostly said by those whose greatest accomplishments were limited to making not so witty comments.

I been using Talleys mounts on my .340 weatherby one set is 30mm QD holding a
3.5x14 LPS leupold and the other is 1 inch
Talleys rings mounts holding a 1.5x5 leupold scope ....and i have very good result with the Talleys mounts ...

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

The same was said about many bold pioneers of the past, mostly said by those whose greatest accomplishments were limited to making not so witty comments.

It was at least half-witty!

I picked up two rifles Saturday, one with Talleys and one with QRWs -- relying on your advice about the quality of the new QRWs.

But I did not request a quote on a double-square bridge to picatinny conversion...

Onward through the fog as they say down in Austin.

quote:

Originally posted by Charles_Helm:

I picked up two rifles Saturday, one with Talleys and one with QRWs --

Talley good.
New QRW good.
No hornswoggle, as we say in Kentucky.
Miss Kentucky/Miss USA: she been swogglin' some horn. Donald Trump fire her or turn her into a reality TV series?

RIP,

I have Talleys on my CZ550 and it has stood up to 600 rounds of full power 450 Dakota, but they only approximately return to zero when removed. (About 6 inches at 100 yards).

My PH Myles McCallum used them on his 375 CZ550 and he could take it off an on with no meaningful change to POI.

Any idea whats wrong with my setup?

The Talleys were recommended to me by Ed Plumber who thought they were the best fit to the CZ bases.

Andy