Grumble. I'd never used a Talley mount before. Ordered a base for the second Caprivi rifle and it looks nothing like what the .375 Caprivi is wearing. The auction house said Talley QD mounts.

Actually, the rifle has the Leupold QR Weaver bases and rings. On a hard recoiling rifle like these two, I suspect their other QD system with dovetails would be better.

What do you experienced big-bore shooters think? Is the Leupold QR Weaver up to the challenge? Or, should I junk the bases and rings and set up both rifles with Talley bases and rings? I would like the QD system so the scope could be easily removed or switched to a backup.

Many thanks!

My .450 Watts wears a Griffin & Howe side mount. More expensive, but absolutely solid, and the lowest possible scope mount, virtually on the same plane with the iron sights. No clutter on the receiver ring or bridge when it's removed.

If you have the Leupold QRW bases and rings, rejoice.
The only thing better (all things considered) is an integral base on the reciever (like Ruger or CZ).
So if the QRW base is attached to the rifle with 8x40 screws and/or epoxy (removable by heat, no worries), you cannot do better.

This applies only to the Leupold "QRW" mounts of latest make, not the early ones with round crossbolts on the bottom of the ring.

The recoil stop on the bottom of the ring must be a "square peg" for the "square hole" of the Weaver/Picatinny-style cross slot.
Yes to the "QRW" or "QR Weaver."
Not the Leupold "QR" with funky little levers on the bases. No good.

I have broken Talley QD rings for the CZ, which is a partcularly bad design on Talley's part.



Above crack becomes ...





Or ...




Others have busted Talley rings for the standard Talley-style bases, on heavy kickers. Poor installation or material failure?



I have never busted a Leupold QRW ring or base with square peg in square hole.

I use them with confidence on .500 and .510 caliber rifles that do kick a bit: 9 to 10-pound rifles with 500 NE or better ballistics.
The QRW rings and bases give excellent durability and accuracy on lesser kickers with bigger scopes also.

Michael McCourry of B&M fame uses Leupold QRW rings and bases exclusively on all his rifles,
even if he thinks Nikon scopes are tougher than Leupold scopes.
The QRW rings and bases work on his .50 and .500 B&M rifles, as well as his lesser kickers.

It is hard to find a cleaner profile when scope is detached, for use of iron sights.
Especially for a reasonable cost, etc., etc.
Return to zero is as good as any also, though I discourage off-and-on with any system other than toys, and will re-check my zero if scope is removed and replaced, with any system out there, on a serious rifle.

I could post many pictures ...

Talley base and rings on my mkv 460wby, dont even look like moving, its had over 70 rounds so far, scope is aimpoint.

Well, I broke Leupold QD rings on a 375 H&H Magnum.

I've had no problems with Talley QD rings on a 458 Lott and with Warne QD rings on a 460 Weatherby Magnum.

quote:

Originally posted by Grumulkin:
Well, I broke Leupold QD rings on a 375 H&H Magnum.

I've had no problems with Talley QD rings on a 458 Lott and with Warne QD rings on a 460 Weatherby Magnum.

Round crossbolt on bottom of ring as with first iteration by Leupold or latest QRW?

Leupold QRW:




Talley:



The Talley I busted was on a .375 H&H CZ 550 Magnum, re-chambered to .375 Wby. Gentle in such a heavy rifle.

I like the Talley on their standard-type dovetail, but not on a CZ! Bad Talley design there.

I still use about a half-dozen sets of Talley stuff, came with rifles, etc.
Like this 20-gauge:


I will keep using the standard Talley rings on the Talley dovetail base,
especially if it came with a slide-on rear-base peep sight like on this 404 RIP Dakota M76:





Here is the Leupold QRW base on steroids, comes with 8x40 screws, all you add is JB Weld between base and rifle:



Above will fit the Weatherby Mk V 460 WbyMag and be better than any Talley setup possible.
You can use standard QRW rings or any tactical rings that fit a Picatinny.
Swapping scopes is easy.
Use two rings or four!
This 500 Bateleur (.510/.338 Lapua Magnum Improved 2.7") could easily be re-barreled to the 460 WbyMag:









But here is my favorite QRW proof machine, the same 500 Bateleur cartridge in a lighter rifle, a standard Mauser 98 type, FN:





The 7-pound .458 B&M equals the .458 WinMag with a shorter action and shorter barrel. Nothing beats the QRW on this. Ask Michael McCourry.
My apologies for the 2.5X Leupold scopes instead of Nikons:

Thanks, happily the current mount is the Leupold Weaver QR with the square "pin" in the rings. And the Kimber is set up for 8x40 Torx screws.

Tell me about the JB Weld?

My main goal is for both Kimbers to have the same QR system, so the scopes could be shared in the event of a disaster. I appreciate all the advice!

Accuracy with QRW rings and bases?
I am still trying to beat this 3-shot, 100-yard group shot with QRW rings and bases (and a Leupold 2.5-8x36mm scope) almost 12 years ago:

quote:

Originally posted by England:
Thanks, happily the current mount is the Leupold Weaver QR with the square "pin" in the rings. And the Kimber is set up for 8x40 Torx screws.

Great! No worries! 8x40 Torx and QRW bases. You can get by with LocTite only or better still use JB Weld.

Tell me about the JB Weld?

De-grease screw holes, screws, and bottom of QRW base and rifle surface covered by the base. Coat the bottoms of the bases with JB Weld epoxy. Place base on the rifle (rifle in vice/holder on work table/bench) with screw holes lined up and torque it properly on each screw.
Epoxy will squeeze out all around bottom of bases.
Use paper towels and Q-tip/cotton applicators wetted with vinegar or Gun Scrubber to clean up any extruded epoxy. Coat any exposed metal with lubricant as soon as you get it clean. I use BreakFree CLP. Let it harden for 24 hours before shooting.
If you ever need to remove the bases, take the barreled action out of the stock, wrap the metal in wet towels, and use a propane torch to heat the base and screws until the epoxy softens, then unscrew and scrape off any epoxy with a wooden popsicle stick, steel wool, Hoppes No.9 on a rag.
Some get the heebie jeebies over epoxying a base to a rifle, but I don't. Every rifle of mine gets the JB Weld epoxy if the scope mount base is not integral to the rifle.
All of the above did, and more ... except for the mouse guns ...


My main goal is for both Kimbers to have the same QR system, so the scopes could be shared in the event of a disaster. I appreciate all the advice!

Yawohl! Definitely the QRW is the way to go if you want to be able to use 2 or 3 scopes interchangeably amongst 2 rifles, or 100 scopes amongst more than 100 rifles.

Even this little "400 Whelen Berry" Winchester M70 Classic Stainless got JB Weld on the QRW bases with 8x40 screws:



And it shot like this with GSC HV bullets, even in the original factory Tupperware stock from Connecticut.
Along with the bullets used, maybe those QRW rings and bases from Leupold are OK too:



Above was shot with a Leupold 2.5-8x36mm scope.
Here is the easily switched-to back-up scope, a Nikon 1.1-4x24mm "African" Monarch scope with 30mm tube.
It is a heavier scope I trust with QRW 30mm rings, easy swap:









BTW, above rifle started life as a 270 Win, had its box lengthened to .375 H&H length for my long-nosed version of the 400 Whelen Petrov.
It also has a 35 Brown-Whelen barrel to go with it.
3-barrel set.
Had to "un-epoxy" those QRW bases for the re-barreling.
It is a really slow switch-barrel system.
But a really fast switch-scope system.

I have posted before, the recessed heads on the clamp screws in Talley rings is flawed engineering and a positive candidate for breaking as shown in RIPs photos.

Look at the ridiculously thin metal left on the fixed dovetail around the recessed scope clamp screw heads where the very act of tightening the opposing dovetail to clamp the rings to the bases is making its best effort to snap off the fixed dovetail which it does very nicely. Been a few of these shown in photos.

I repeat poorly engineered.

On the other hand look at the Leupolds or genuine Weavers, the base clamp system actually works to pull both the fixed and movable dovetails together, they cannot possible break off.

Nicely engineered.

RIP,

In your photos above they seem to indicate you have Rem 700 bases for Mark V Wby.

That does not apply to models Made in USA, about 1995 on. The Made in USA Mark V has a rear receiver ring that is bout 20 thou thinner (or might be thicker, forget now). Apparently there was a fuckup in translation from Japanese.

If you check say Leupold or Talley then you will see bases for the Mark V are listed.

Edit: The contour of the rear receiver ring is the same as jap Mark V

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

quote:

Originally posted by Grumulkin:
Well, I broke Leupold QD rings on a 375 H&H Magnum.

I've had no problems with Talley QD rings on a 458 Lott and with Warne QD rings on a 460 Weatherby Magnum.

Round crossbolt on bottom of ring as with first iteration by Leupold or latest QRW?

I believe it was the round crossbolt but, since it happened about 10 years ago, I can't swear to it.

Grumulkin,

Might have been those round cross bolts in square cross slots. They did indeed have a reputation for problems. I scrapped all of those old ones.
Just like I scrapped any "poorly engineered" Talley CZ rings, agree with eagle27.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael McGuire:
RIP,

In your photos above they seem to indicate you have Rem 700 bases for Mark V Wby.

That does not apply to models Made in USA, about 1995 on. The Made in USA Mark V has a rear receiver ring that is bout 20 thou thinner (or might be thicker, forget now). Apparently there was a fuckup in translation from Japanese.

If you check say Leupold or Talley then you will see bases for the Mark V are listed.

Edit: The contour of the rear receiver ring is the same as jap Mark V

Mike,
I am confused now. Will keep it in mind in future. But whatever, the bases I used seemed to work OK.
I did not run out of elevation adjustment but will re-check how much I have left ... easy to shim if needed ...
No shims used either. Just JB Weld and 8x40 Torx screws that came with bases.

First shots to get on paper and start of load development:




This shows what a difference in accuracy may occur between two different loads,
with the bullet being the most likely contributor
(says Captain Obvious):




The old Barnes Original 600-grainers (RNSP copper-jacketed lead) at about 2300 fps sprayed all about.
The Barnes TSX 647-grain monometal copper at about 2100 fps shot well.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

Mike,
I am confused now. Will keep it in mind in future. But whatever, the bases I used seemed to work OK.
I did not run out of elevation adjustment but will re-check how much I have left ... easy to shim if needed ...

Ron,

Think of tension on the scope. Fuck shims when you can buy the proper bases.

Mike,
Clarify for me please:
If I have the wrong base for the Wby Mark V, how much is the error at the rear base?
I used a lot of elevation clicks getting the POI close to POA.
That would suggest the rear base might be too low.
Is that correct?
.020" too low?
Or I did a lousy job of initial eyeball bore sighting at the range ...


The Sightron scope survived and moved on to a 6.5 Creedmoor with no dramas.
I did not keep track of the elevation clicks there to zero to the next rifle.
So I will have to try again with another scope and see if I have a problem with the bases on the Wby Mk V.

Conditions are primitive here but improving.
I have better bags and front rest now than those used for the initial Weatherby 500 Bateleur range check:

Ron,

From memory the rear receiver ring is about 20 thou to high or to low but I think it is to low, in other words on USA made Mark V it is thinner by about 20 thou.

As I said above if you check Leupold, Tally etc. then bases are listed for Mark V whereas they used to list Rem 700 as they do for the Vanguard.

For a surefire answer ring Weatherby.

Thanks:

Weatherby Customer Service representatives are available to assist you Monday through Thursday 6:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. (PST) at (800) 227-2016 or by emailing info@weatherby.com.




https://www.leupold.com/tactic...-4-mounting-systems/


Highjack off: Which QRW base fits the Kimber Caprivi? One of these does?:


https://www.leupold.com/huntin...rw-mounting-systems/


http://www.talleymanufacturing.com/

Ask for the custom shop.

While there you might also ask about what they do, that is, stuff that is not ordered by the custom shop part of the website. But get your wallet out

They are tops to deal with.

Wby has always been the prized agency in Australia. One of the reasons is they don't fuck about with other distributors etc. and are so responsive and accurate in what they say will and won't happen.

They do a lot of stuff for Hendershots as Winchester used to do.

quote:

Originally posted by Grumulkin:
Well, I broke Leupold QD rings on a 375 H&H Magnum.

I've had no problems with Talley QD rings on a 458 Lott and with Warne QD rings on a 460 Weatherby Magnum.

i broke two times Warne quick detach on a ruger 375 left hand. warne tech never figured what happened. i think breakage can happen with any mechanical device.

Been using Leupold QR and QRW rings and bases for over 20 years on all my African rifles, and last 15 years even down to .223 rifles. I have never had a problem. I really liked the QR rings I started with but changed to the QRW for more applications when I began using red-dots. Have had them on .375H&H and RUM, .416Rem(2) and .458Lott and B&M as well as many lesser calibers. I often fire over 100 rounds prior to departing on my annual safari.

They do return to zero, or close enough to make no difference in hunting scenarios. I have proven this to the doubters more than once when shooting at public ranges. They also make cleaning much simpler and more effective. And I have had cases where an optic problem arose after arrival in Africa which mandated removing the optic to use the open iron sights. Try doing that quickly without tools on a non-QR set-up.

Mike,

Will telephone Weatherby Custom Shop when "live person" possible, though I sent an email last Friday "after hours" and will see if that gets a response.

If my Leupold base is not tall enough on the rear, I have tension now on the scope, but shimming it will fix it, relieve tension.
If I cannot find the base I want (Leupold Mark 4) specific to Weatherby Mk V, I will shim.
Current holes and contours match well, just that rear base height needs fixing.

Meanwhile another QRW ring testimonial even if in a small bore 6.5 Creedmoor:
Ruger American Rifle Predator model comes with a Picatinny base that fits QRW rings. Glorious price of $366.99 at the local emporium for rifle.
Nikon M-308 scope and Leupold QRW rings are extra.
Hornady factory ammo is $27.99 per box.
I stop at 3 shots if they are in one hole.
I am still trying to beat 0.138" with a handloaded .375 Wby ...

Ron,

When you talk to Wby you might ask them if the Mark V (in respect of bases) has changed back to Rem 700 since I think the actions are now made in house.

One annoying part of the Mark V (since inception) is Rem 700 bases have screws that are to long for the rear base. This occurs because of the thin upper section of the rear receiver ring. The Mark V is essentially Rem 700 dimensions but of internally it is different due the full diameter bolt, .875 from memory as compared to .7 for Rem 700.

But no action is perfect

Weatherby custom shop kid did not know anything about it, tried to sell me some Talley mounts.
I called Leupold and was 63rd in queue so I hung up.
Now looking for either QRW/Mark 4 or Talley bases for both (Wby Mark V and Rem 700, Magnum/LA) and will measure for myself.

Email response more helpful than telephone call, but research is still up to me, by hook or crook:

"I don't have the data on the receiver differences. I have heard of people who use them with no problem. I have also heard that some people have had to result to shims. Our bases and rings are made by Talley Manufacturing and are guaranteed to fit. As A resource you might try asking other users or searching the blogs at weatherbynation.com.

Hope that helps.

Thanks for shooting Weatherby!"


Weatherby Sales
Tel: 800.227.2016 | Fax: 805.237.0427
Address: 1605 Commerce Way, Paso Robles, CA 93446
sales@weatherby.com | Weatherby.com
facebook twitter youtube Instagram

Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Information, Weatherby <info@weatherby.com>

BTW,
I just last night took a torch to an old Ruger M77 Round Top and removed the old epoxied-on Weaver aluminum bases and replaced them with the Leupold Mark 4 to accept Leupold QRW rings.
Piece of cake.
Yes, the old Ruger M77 Round Top of circa 1975 also has the same hole spacing and contours as a Remington M700.
Just had to cut off the rear base and reverse it so there is no overhang at either front or rear, reciever ring/bridge.
Now off to www.weatherbynation.com ...

I do own a set of Talley rings and bases for the Wby Mark V.
However I would not use them on the 500 Bateleur.
I trust QRW rings and bases for strength, more than I do Talley.

Still looking for a Talley base for the Remington M700 long action, to measure myself.
Still waiting to get info from Leupold on any QRW base rear heights for those two actions.
Same for Talley.

Leupold does not make a Mark 4 base for the Wby Mark V far as I can tell so far.

Weaver lists the same rear base (36) is used for both the Wby Mk V and Rem 700 actions.

Shim the Mark 4 Leupold base on the Wby Mark V rifle as needed is still my plan.
This may require some trigonometry before next session of triggernometry ...

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
I do own a set of Talley rings and bases for the Wby Mark V.
However I would not use them on the 500 Bateleur.
I trust QRW rings and bases for strength, more than I do Talley.

Agree 100%

Have you ever looked Near mounts in Canada. Expensive gear but very well made.

http://www.nearmfg.com/

You will see they use Mark Vs in a lot of their photos. My guess is they do that because the big diameter bolt and bolt shroud make the mounts look better.

There is a Denmark run forum for Weatherby (but mainly American posters)and heaps of those blokes use Near mounts. On that forum a load that does not flatten and crated primers is regarded as a reduced load.

I run talley base and talley rings on my mkv 460wby, they have the cross bolt in the base of the ring, to mate with the slot in the base, so far 80 rounds later, using aimpoint 9000L, they have not moved, i was looking at putting a scope on shortly, will probably use 25 mm talleys on current bases, they seem to hold well. Was looking at leupy 1-5 scope, hope it lasts. I used standard leupold mts on my 378wby mkv, has not moved either.

I like the Leupold QD mounts and have used them on a couple of my go-to African rifles -- a .416 and a .30-06. I like Talley's too, but I find a .458 Lott to be: 1) rather hard on scopes; and 2) hard to get enough eye relief.

I already have a peep on my .458 Lott and I'm thinking about abandoning a scope altogether and putting a Doctor or other red-dot on the front base.

quote:

Originally posted by England:
Grumble. I'd never used a Talley mount before. Ordered a base for the second Caprivi rifle and it looks nothing like what the .375 Caprivi is wearing. The auction house said Talley QD mounts.

Actually, the rifle has the Leupold QR Weaver bases and rings. On a hard recoiling rifle like these two, I suspect their other QD system with dovetails would be better.

What do you experienced big-bore shooters think? Is the Leupold QR Weaver up to the challenge? Or, should I junk the bases and rings and set up both rifles with Talley bases and rings? I would like the QD system so the scope could be easily removed or switched to a backup.

Many thanks!

I am using the new Leupold QD mounts on my 404 Jeff. They are working just fine.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael McGuire:

Have you ever looked Near mounts in Canada. Expensive gear but very well made.

http://www.nearmfg.com/

Mike,

No I cannot consider Near, great as they may be.
A riflecrank with many rifles needs to use something just as good, properly installed, like the Picatinny base or Weaver-style cross-lot base.

Then use the Leupold QRW rings or whatever robust tactical style rings like the Burris Xtreme Tactical rings,
just so there is a square cross-bar on the bottom of the rings to fit the square cross-slot of the base.

A primary base screw or nut torqueable to 65 inch-pounds puts me in heaven (Burris), so I do not need the expense or bother of switching to Near.

So I like the Leupold QRW base or a Picatinny with a Burris Xtreme Tactical ring best of all I have tried,
for rifles not having integral bases.

I can switch scopes until the cows come home with my system.


Now a pet peeve:

Some say "Leupold QD."
That is not good communication.
Leupold does not call it that.
It is not perfectly clear whether they mean "Leupold QR" as opposed to the "Leupold QRW."
Both are "QD" but there is a world of difference between the Leupold QR and the Leupold QRW:

This is a 2-piece Leupold QR:



This is a 1-piece Leupold QR for a RH short action Remington 700:



"Our QR mounts allow you to remove and reattach your scope and return to within 1/2" of the original point-of-impact. The patented lever mechanism, machined with precision tolerances, engages the steel base to the ring, pulling it down and forward and locking it into its “zero” position. You get ease, convenience, and field-proven, repeatable accuracy."


Leupold QRW:



The QR uses precision machined investment cast parts. The little lever rubs against a little round post (precision machined with a divot to accept the camming of the little lever) on the bottom of the ring that goes into the little round hole in the top of the base,
to lock the ring into place.

QR rings:



I would only use Leupold QR rings only on a 22 rimfire and then would never want to take it off and put it back on as metal rubbing on metal has got to do some galling and loosening.
Rube Goldberg comes to mind.

QRW rings, medium height:



Now there is a "new" Leupold "PRW" ring that goes on the same QRW base.
The no-lever PRW rings:



I can only guess that "PRW" stands for "Pocket-tool Release Weaver," eh?



Riflecrank Internationale Permanente
NRA Life Benefactor

I've used PRW over QRW - sturdy but not too rotund. Held together fine on my .458" Brontoclunker.