Does anyone have any advice on a Quick Release scope set up for my Whitworth .458WinMag?

Is anyone using one now?

Thanks for any help you can offer!

Les

Mine has Talleys.

Charles ,, I like how yours is set up ,, it looks like the thumb would fit under the scope for luging it ........My interarms Alaskan has the scope a bit low so I will give Talleys a try ...Thanks for posting the picture...

Nothing wrong with Talleys.
When I had a Whitworth in 458 and 375 H&H I had the Leupold QD with the lever on the base. They held zero just fine.

NE 450#2

Do you recall which Leupold bases you used?

I found a one piece base for Mauser FN but it lacked about 1/32" in height of fitting the rear bridge!

Les

I'm using the Leupold FN two piece QR bases for both a MarkX and a 1908 Brazilian (with the hump ground down) and they work great.

If, like me, you cannot afford German Claw Mounts for everything (I have only one marvelous set on a Waffen Frankonia Mauser 30-06 Favourite), then get some Leupold QRW steel bases with the latest QRW rings. Talley rings and bases are O.K. too, but I really prefer QRW and do not like the Leupold QR at all (QR's are the ones with the goofy little levers attached to the bases instead of the rings.). When going without scope, the QRW is sleek and unobtrusive better than any other make. With scope installed, they are as good as anything for rugged and dependable.

Stay tuned for developing opinions on the next generation of Leupold QD mounts.

Les
Mine had two piece bases.

RIP Nothing wrong with the Leupold QRW either, I have used those rings on other cross slot bases as well.

Kimber/Warne:

Recoil forces will work to loosen the levers in that setting.

This, along with the absence of a rear recoil shoulder on the Kimber bases (I have one set for a Pre-64), in summation, I find a bit unsettling.

I would be constantly checking to see if the levers were still tight. Better to move the levers to a position where recoil forces will keep them tight.

quote:

Originally posted by fla3006:
Kimber/Warne:

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
Recoil forces will work to loosen the levers in that setting.

This, along with the absence of a rear recoil shoulder on the Kimber bases (I have one set for a Pre-64), in summation, I find a bit unsettling.

I would be constantly checking to see if the levers were still tight. Better to move the levers to a position where recoil forces will keep them tight.

Nah, can't happen . The levers in that setup turn in opposite directions


Terry

Oh yea, Talley's on mine. I don't have the levers on in the pic though.

Terry

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
Recoil forces will work to loosen the levers in that setting.

This, along with the absence of a rear recoil shoulder on the Kimber bases (I have one set for a Pre-64), in summation, I find a bit unsettling.

I would be constantly checking to see if the levers were still tight. Better to move the levers to a position where recoil forces will keep them tight.

Nah, can't happen . The levers in that setup turn in opposite directions


Terry

If the levers turn in opposite directions to tighten then one will loosen and one will tighten with recoil, if they are both set to the same position. Then you will end up with problems too. And then the fidgeting to constantly check them for tightness could get confusing to boot.

Like I said before, idle hands make idle minds, and are the tools of the devil.

I'll betcha 2 bazooka joe bubble gum wrappers when Forrest replies again he'll confirm he hasn't had any trouble with the rings loosening up.

Terry

Terry should know, I bought those rings/bases from him. No, they haven't come loose either, and I shoot that rifle a fair amount. By the way, there is a shoulder on the front of the front base.

Yes, a recoil stop/shoulder on the fronts of the bases, and no motion stop on the rears of the bases, so I have to set my levers so any recoil induced momentum will inertially tighten both levers ... or I get fidgety, especially if I am idle, or stir-crazy.

I've used the Kimbers on a 375 H&H and a 375 Wtby for 20 yrs and never had a problem with them shifting or loosening. I've shot them a lot and carried them on bear hunts with complete confidence. I buy them when I can find them at gun shows!

There are a couple sets of old Kimbers on ebay. I'd post the links but it's against the rules now.

Thanks for all this information, I really appreciate it.

I'm looking for the Leupold systems. QR or QRW but even after you figure out which one you want, finding it is equally as difficult!

fla3006, are we not allowed to post links any longer? Did I miss something recently?

Les

From the Classified Forum, maybe it doesn't apply everywhere? NewAuctionLinkPolicy

I dunno, I hated to see it happen. You posted some very nice finds.

Seems kind of dumb to me. The posts clearly say link if you didn't want to look at a link you simply shouldn't open it. Some people just like to whine and cry though.

Terry

quote:

Originally posted by fla3006:
From the Classified Forum, maybe it doesn't apply everywhere? NewAuctionLinkPolicy

As I read it, the problem is people posting on the classifieds just to give a link to their eBay or Gunbroker auctions, and thought it only applied to the classifieds.

fla3006

I don't read Saeed's request as strictly as you I guess.

I read it as if he did not want people "doubling up" posting stuff on AR as well as ebay etc. Or using AR Classifieds as and advert for their ebay auctions.

Maybe one of our moderators will be able to clarify the intent.

It seems short sighted to cut everyone off from finds that we make elsewhere, that we can not use ourselves! I thought we were here to help each other!

Meanwhile if anyone wants to PM me the location of Whitworth QR scope mounts. I'd sure appreciate it.

Les

Les, check your PM.

I confess to having used Kimber QD's on a Pre-64 M70 .375 H&H custom that weighs 6.75 lbs. bare/empty. I took it to Botswana for two weeks, and it performed well. 8x40-ed base screws of course.

But I used the slotted-nut rings instead of the lever rings, so I would not be tempted to fidget with the levers.

I had two sets of the lever rings for the Kimber bases, but somehow, along the way one of the 4 rings got boogered, so now I have one complete set and some spare parts for posterity (not for sale).

I do not recall if the Kimber levers turn in opposite directions or not. I just know that between the three I have left, I can make sure that the two I use are the ones that turn in the same direction for tightening, clockwise, and I have the levers pointing down, so that recoil impulse will work to keep them tight instead of working to loosen them with each shot.

Of course, if the levers both tightened counter-clockwise, then having them pointing into the 180 degrees above the centerline horizontal plane of the scope would be the thing to do.

Vice versa if the rings are flipped so that the levers are on the right side of the rifle. All of above assumes levers on left side of rifle.

I prefer QRW's on anything that they can be made to fit. Those levers can be set properly for no fidgeting, same direction tightening, and they have a motion stop in both directions which is beefier than the Kimbers. Ditto Talley. But I prefer a horizontal split to the vertical split of the rings.

End of pontification.