I rebuilt one of the Savage 7mm-08's and it was a tack driver with 1.5 holes for 2 shots.
Scope died on the last trip to all over the paper.

The scope was the cheap Nikon 3-9x40 that cam with the gun. It will go out today to Nikon Friday. Yes all the screws were tight.

I have an Remmington 700 in 270 with an old VariX 3 scope from the 80's that works just like it did back in the day.

Leopold is a little pricey. Rifle has Ar style mount with two small AR connectors and not the solid ar base. Savage is the 110 model and not the Axis.

What is a good base and rings for the Savage would work for this rifle? What size rings for this scope?

Thanks, Jim

What's this got to do with a Leupold scope? Did I miss something here?

Just so you know Nikon is quitting the rifle scope business. May not get your old scope fixed. Why not a 3-9 Leopold.

leupold or Burris is what I use on a lot of my Savages.

I would call Leupold. I have nothing but praise for there customer service.

sent a nikon pro staff in to be repaired thanksgiving, got a new pro staff p3 back last week no problems customer service can't be beat. minox terrible customer service fyi.

I contacted Leupold last week about repairs and service... there shop is closed temporarily, but they said it will re-open... but not when.

What I forgot to mention the two varix 3s are on two old Chet Brown fiberglass stocks from the early 80’S in 270 and 7 mag. The Leopold scope is great

I never use the 270 so I was going to take the scope off the 270 and put it on the savage 7mm-08 and wanted to what rings would be best for the price. I like the short action.


I was asking what was a good set of rings would work best with the ar type bases. Not sure what size for this scope Factory sent me a new one for the old one few years ago

Sorry to hear your scope died, Jim. Could I be so bold as to ask what caused its passing?

Though I don't the like tunnel vision on mine, several guys here who shoot big rifles reckon Nikons are the toughest. Since the company will still make cameras, I doubt that it could repudiate warranties any time soon. So, if you can bear the thought, see if you can pick up a smallish Nikon Monarch to replace the old one.

As to mounts, my new favorite is the Burris Signature, where you can use eccentric nylon inserts to get your scope straight. The rings are a great help in mounting the old reticle-movement scopes I prefer, but even scopes of the modern decadence should be put on straight and strain-free if you want them to perform well.

I'm confused. But I have been switching all of my mounts and rings to WARNE or a Picatinny style over the Leupold std bases and rings (Windage adjustable).

Burris do make the Universal bases (with windage, like Leupold STD) for Savage 110s, but which ring height you need would depend on how big the scope is. If it is a small variable, the medium rings would probably work but a 3-9x might need high ones.

Whichever you get, ask for the Signature rings with the swivelling Nylon-type inserts, which save you having to lap the rings to relieve stress. Then, if you need more or less elevation, get a set of their eccentric inserts, which will achieve that without winding your turret knobs so much you're looking through the lens periphery and possibly twisting the erector spring(s) to a point where breakage might occur. (Is that by any chance what happened to your old Nikon?)

To begin this exercise, of course, you should make sure the reticle is centred in the scope. Counting clicks is less reliable it seems than setting the scope in V blocks (or loose rings) and turning it though 360 degrees, adjusting the turrets until the crosswires cease to move around the target.

Why it died? Good question. Shot it in 3 times this year. Two times vertical 2 shot and 1.5 size hole touching. Did not seem to need a third. This trip two gimme shot cripples and a miss hogs and 3 shot group was 3”h3”r/4”h.5r/5”h1”r. Interesting pattern from 2 shots together.

It was the cheaper Nikon that came with the 10 package and not the axis package

Bottom line is what size rings fit the old
Leupold vex-3I. 2.5-8 x 36 mm. Scope? I have the old Leupold solid 1 piece base with the twist in rings


I really just need to know what size rings fit this scope with the p rail which seems fine.


I have access to 15000 acres on 4 different ranches both high and low fenced ranches with 200 class deer, Buffalo,elk,red deer, axis, assorted sheep, black buck, and so on. I tend to hunt more with a camera since most of these animals are about half pet. Still a challenge to ease up on these big bucks on two of the ranches and get good pictures. plus all the exotics

I shoot all the hogs and coyotes that I can shoot no charge no problem just do not leave them under a feeder or in the middle ofthe roads. Not very sporting on them I take any safe shots that I can.

Well Jim, pending info from those better informed of issues regarding your rifle and components, I'd say medium rings should work, considering the 36mm objective is pretty average these days and intermediate in the general 21mm-56mm range.

As long as you can avoid fouling the bolt handle and any rear-sight leaf, a 40mm objective housing should sit ahead of the rail, adding extra clearance.

AS to your old scope going off, I don't suppose any mount or action screw could have come loose? On the other hand, if the scope rattles when you shake it, that might indicate a broken erector spring, as explained earlier.

I have had much better luck with one piece bases on Savages. Although said rifles and ML are higher recoil than the 7mm-08.

As far as ring height goes, buy cheap rings of various heights. Spend some time trying on the different height rings until you find the proper height for your face on your rifle stock. Then buy better rings. Please note that manufacturer A's medium probably is different than B's medium rings. Go by the decimal height as provided by the manufacturer

Leupold rings and bases are pretty good.

I have a grand old Vari X III 1.5x5. I compared it to a newer VX III and it was not as clear. 'Send it back' was the consensus. So I did. It was returned with 3x9 stamped on the windage/elevation adjustment. It was no clearer. It will not 'shoot the box' any more. I did rereturn it, the adjustment does say 1.5 to 5 now. Still not clear and will not 'shoot the box'.

In my experience, Leupy customer service is over rated.

Go buy a used Leupold at a pawn shop or sproting goods store, where ever, most of my scopes were purchased second hand..If there is a problem Leupold will fix it, many times at on charge as they have a lifetime guarantee, weather you bought it second hand or new makes no difference...ONe of the reasons I have been using them for 60 plus years. maybe longer..

After 60 plus years of Leupold I find that hard to swallow..Ive sent too many back for one reason or another including broken in half scope and binocs, got an new scope and pair of binocs no questions asked...

I shot the old 270 with the Chet Brown fiberglass stock and it still is on the money.
I was gong to pull the old Leupold 2.2-8 varix 3 scope but it may be more problems than not with having to get new mounts for both this Remington and the Savage 7mm-08 that I use as my fun gun.

I had two of these scopes from the early 80's and Leopold has replaced both over the years. The question is are the new scopes as good as the old one.

Sent the old cheap Nikon back but I need a better or more dependable scope for the Savage.

Probably should just shoot the old 270 but I like the feel of the Savage after I reworked the stock.

Got any ideas for a scope in the 2 to 9 range that might fit the old Nikon rings that came with the Savage package?

For the most part Leupold scopes have improved with better coatings and internals over time. Technology improves and gets incorporated into the newer models.

quote:

Originally posted by Cougarz:
For the most part Leupold scopes have improved with better coatings and internals over time. Technology improves and gets incorporated into the newer models.

This is true, however their recent shifting of model names, the lower quality engraving on the gold rings and some feedback I have read seems to indicate they are chasing “something”, but I don’t know what. I own one VX3, the rest older VX-IIIs. The older scopes are finished better, work just as well, and are my preference.

From a hunters view, Most techknowledgy has more to do with dollars than anything else, most of my scopes are old 3X, 4X , and 2x7x"28" now discontinued...Ive never had a problem killing whatever under any circumstances, Ive sent some scopes back, Leupold fixed them or replaced them no questions asked...Ive never seen the need to put a $3000 scope on a $1000 rifle..The cheapest model of Leupold works fine for me, in fact the new Weavers are a good hunting scope..Scopes like hearing aids, can be a racket IMO!! wroght with advertisement and false advertisement..

quote:

Originally posted by BaxterB:

quote:

Originally posted by Cougarz:
For the most part Leupold scopes have improved with better coatings and internals over time. Technology improves and gets incorporated into the newer models.

This is true, however their recent shifting of model names, the lower quality engraving on the gold rings and some feedback I have read seems to indicate they are chasing “something”, but I don’t know what. I own one VX3, the rest older VX-IIIs. The older scopes are finished better, work just as well, and are my preference.

Yes, I'm in the need of another 2x7 but am a little leery of the new VX Freedom models. They may as good as the old VXII's but look a little cheap to me.

I'm waiting to see how people like them before deciding.

quote:

Originally posted by Cougarz:

quote:

Originally posted by BaxterB:

quote:

Originally posted by Cougarz:
For the most part Leupold scopes have improved with better coatings and internals over time. Technology improves and gets incorporated into the newer models.

This is true, however their recent shifting of model names, the lower quality engraving on the gold rings and some feedback I have read seems to indicate they are chasing “something”, but I don’t know what. I own one VX3, the rest older VX-IIIs. The older scopes are finished better, work just as well, and are my preference.

Yes, I'm in the need of another 2x7 but am a little leery of the new VX Freedom models. They may as good as the old VXII's but look a little cheap to me.

I'm waiting to see how people like them before deciding.

The use of “freedom” is a bit much, rhetorically, for me.

I have a question for Sambarman, I am anti lapping scope rings to almost any extent other than perhaps a edge that was missed in the process...

Most Ive seen were over done and ruined as best I could tell...To keep a scope straight and inline, the rifles rings, bases, barrel and action must all be straight to the world..I do this by having my actions surface ground and bases hand fitted to the point that with the scoped adjustments set in the center of focal plain (plane) whichever!~ boresighting as you go, so that when you shot that first shot your real close to zero, and only make a minor adjustment or two..This works especially well with QD scope rings returning to zero..The number of shooters that do not do this amazes me, even gunsmith. When your sighted in this manor the cross hairs are in the focal center of the scope giving you room for more adjustment but more importantly maintaining its zero..If your cross hairs are at the edge of the scopes focal plane, it won't hold its zero for long periods of time and I better add as a rule, since there are always possibilities in such things, especially on the internet!

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
I have a question for Sambarman, I am anti lapping scope rings to almost any extent other than perhaps a edge that was missed in the process...

Most I've seen were over done and ruined as best I could tell...To keep a scope straight and inline, the rifles rings, bases, barrel and action must all be straight to the world..I do this by having my actions surface ground and bases hand fitted to the point that with the scoped adjustments set in the center of focal plain (plane) whichever!~ boresighting as you go, so that when you shot that first shot your real close to zero, and only make a minor adjustment or two..This works especially well with QD scope rings returning to zero..The number of shooters that do not do this amazes me, even gunsmith. When your sighted in this manor the cross hairs are in the focal center of the scope giving you room for more adjustment but more importantly maintaining its zero..If your cross hairs are at the edge of the scopes focal plane, it won't hold its zero for long periods of time and I better add as a rule, since there are always possibilities in such things, especially on the internet!

Well, Ray, you're way ahead of me in these things. I had been happy to trust my gunsmith, who lived across the creek from me, and for many years did not know how he got it all so reliable. Then, when I started mounting serious scopes myself, they were either steel or German dural ones with rails, which had enough strength not to bend like a willow stick. I would adjust and shim the scopes until they were on the bore sight without the reticle going out of centre.

Recently, however, I've read Bill Hambly-Clark's book and gained a new buddy who is a fitter and turner and loves to do things right. The trick seems to be shim one mount until you get it level and on the boresight, then mill a similar amount off the other one and remove the shim.

Burris's Signature rings seem to be the best easy solution I've seen, though, possibly my favorite in a world without B&L 'Custom' scopes and mounts that fit modern rifles. Getting the right eccentric inserts may need a couple of trips to the range but, considering how much time people spend working up handloads, I do not begrudge the time required.

Claw mounts are the bee's knees, as you know, but not for the financially humble. Though I have a bunch of old claws and bases, the chances of my ever getting them to work a second time is pretty slim, unlike Australian and American mounts, which I have reused on several occasions. Some of the old Redfield windage mounts can even be used in conjunction with Leupold and Burris ones of the same design.