I have noticed that there are many on this forum who really like Talley rings and bases.

To me, they don't look like anything special, however they are really really expensive, like well over $100 for Rings and a Base.

I just wanted to know the rationale for the popularity of these rings. So in other words, what makes them so darn popular?

-Spencer

they are strong, simple, look good and are well made.

if you don't want to spend that much, then you can probably get a set of weavers for about half that... which look about 1/2 as good.

OK, but do you buy them mainly for their looks or for their strength?

-Spencer

quote:

Originally posted by ShopCartRacing:
OK, but do you buy them mainly for their looks or for their strength?

-Spencer

I bought my detachable Talleys because of their reputation for repeatability and strength for my 375 H&H.

"Looks or strength", kind of like the argument on whether to buy Winchester or Savage.

quote:

Originally posted by ShopCartRacing:
OK, but do you buy them mainly for their looks or for their strength?

-Spencer

well, i guess one has to say looks, as surely there are other mounts as strong.

I mean you could in theory mig weld a set of aluminum rings to the scope tube (which would have to be as strong) but that wouldn't look too good - would it?

I have been using Leupold QR Rings on my M70 416 for years now. Been to Africa Twice, swapped scopes for different conditions, maintained zero, never have a problem. About 1/2 the price mentioned for Talley.

Talley's are not perfect, but they do a darn good job. They allow for a lot of customization via the base setup they employ. Custom bases allow for corection of misalignment (much better than the "bandaid" windage adjustment setup) and an easy way to space the rings where you want them. They are also nice in that you can have an extra scope, set in rings, ready to go in the event of scope failure.

I don't know that they are the greatest thing going, but they're much better than alot of the junk floating around out there.

Chuck

Talley's supposed to have great customer service too.

quote:

Originally posted by ShopCartRacing:
I have noticed that there are many on this forum who really like Talley rings and bases.

To me, they don't look like anything special, however they are really really expensive, like well over $100 for Rings and a Base.

I just wanted to know the rationale for the popularity of these rings. So in other words, what makes them so darn popular?

-Spencer

Repeatability; looks; strength. Nuff said.

I think the main theme here is repeatability.
I have never been one to swap scopes from gun to gun, so I guess this has never been an issue for me.
I guess they look all right, maybe not the super best looking out there.
As far as strength, for me, I would go for Tasco World Class rings and bases, strongest ever.

I guess that about clears things up for me.
Thanks guys.

-Spencer

quote:

Originally posted by ShopCartRacing:
I think the main theme here is repeatability.
I have never been one to swap scopes from gun to gun, so I guess this has never been an issue for me.
I guess they look all right, maybe not the super best looking out there.
As far as strength, for me, I would go for Tasco World Class rings and bases, strongest ever.

I guess that about clears things up for me.
Thanks guys.

-Spencer

You are stating the strongest ever, which are the other brands, and how did you compare the strength?

Regarding:Tasco World Class rings and bases, there are many things I do not like about these mounts. They are steel, which is good. They have windage adjustment, which is also good. The piddly screws which adjust windage and hold the rings in place are not so good, neither is the height factor on many rifles.

Roland

About the strength comparison.
There was an article some years back, when these mounts were recently picked up by Tasco that compared them to other mounts over a period of time.
The actual testing had gone on some years earlier, but still apply today becouse none of the manufacturers have changed their products.

They put a scope on some sort of DGR like a 458 Win mag or Lott or 500 something.
Needless to say it was a tremendously harsh recoiling rifle.

They did Weaver rings and they lasted like 4 shots, Burris I believe was another brand and lasted the same, like 3 or 4 shots and the 2nd best one was Redfield which laster I believe 5 or 6 shots before shearing off the front dovetail.

At the end of the article, the African hunter said that all testing was in the end, irrelevant because he had put on a set of the Tasco World Class on the same gun, and they had lasted for over 5 years and hundreds of rounds.

I think that is pretty damn strong.

-Spencer

Go ahead and use tasco rings then, and tasco scopes too if you like.

I didn't come here to start a fight, I just wanted to learn about Talley stuff.
Roland asked me why I think Tasco World Class stuff is so strong and I told him.

I do use Tasco scopes.
I don't use any new Tasco stuff because it is for the most part garbage.
Plus, Bushnell won't honor any warranties put out by Tasco before Bushnell bought the name.
Their older scopes, the ones made in Japan, are just as good as today's Weavers and Nikons and dare I say on par with some Leupold stuff.
This is because they were made in the same factory and by the same people who today make Weaver and Nikon, and they make Leupold's lenses.

I think the old Tasco made great quality stuff, they just made a mistake by moving to Bangkok or the Phillipines or wherever they are and therefore ruined their reputation.

-Spencer

Hunting is my business and I see all the guns rings and bases out there at work in the field...

The Tascos are good mounts but not that much better than anything else IMO. Talleys are among the best and the non QD are not that much. I sure prefer them to Tasco...

The Tasco scope, on the other hand, is a piece of crap and will crumble under the recoil or a 458 Lott every time, its just a matter of time, usually short time...I have seen many of them come apart...They never were worth much IMO...

However, to each his own and you should use what you like...

Are these Tasco mounts the ones where opposing cone screws put pressure on an hour glass shaped stud and thus pull the ring onto the base.

Mike

Yes.

-Spencer

They were originally made in Australia.

The problem with them is the case hardening on the hour glass section would often crack after a while and then of course the taper was lost and hence no pull down force to the ring.

A gunsmith out here made up some of the hour glass sections with what I thinl was called silver steel and the idea was that the cone screws would only stuff up and that way you do did not have to get the bases off to put the new hour glass sections in, just replace the cone screws.

There use to be a place in Australia called Ausinel that had the bottom of the ring with the hour glass part integral. But they were too soft.

Tyhe Tasco mounts were originally made by a company in Australia called Hillver then Tasco took over when Bruce Hill died.

No offence, but the mounts are shit. An all steel cross slot mount shits all over them although of course the Tasco mounts allow for windage. But if you use Leupold dual dove tails and need windage then you you grind out the inside of the rings so you can swing the scope across into the correct position, then remove the scope and bed the scope in the rear ring.

However, I don't disagree with you on the Tasco scopes of old. Several years ago, about the early 90s I think, I had an association with Tasco Australia. We mounted different scopes on a pair of 6mm/06 bench rifles to initially test the scopes. We then put the scopes on a 416 Wby with the brake removed and a big bag of lead shot behind the rifle and then shot the shit out of the scopes over a few weeks. The scopes were then put back on the 6mm/06 bench rifles. The Tasco Word Class did the best.

But probably the best scope is a Leupold that you fuck up and send back to them. What you get back seems to be the best of all.

Just as a side note, when we were testing the scopes a bloke at the range had a 280 Remington with one of those 2.5 to 8 Leupolds and asked if he could try it on the 6mm/06. We were interested so we did it. His scope was fucked but it was OK on his 280 Remington because compensating errors were making things look OK.

If you want to try tough mounts apart from Leupold dual dovetails try Leupold heavt duty cross slot mounts and Badger Ordnance cross slot mounts.

Mike

Yup, those Max 50 badgers would definately survive a nuclear holocaust, let alone what a 50BMG could dish out. only problem is they are "functional", not shapely in any way to be on a hunting rifle, especially one with a barrel band and hooded fromt sight. I was considering the Badgers for my 375 RUM, but I am going to go with the talleys when the time comes.

Talley rings will hold up to extreme recoil.

Talley rings don't rattle loose when you are driving around.

Talley rings are machined to close tolerances so that your rings do not gouge the scope tube.

Talley rings hold the scope extremely tightly.

quote:

Originally posted by ShopCartRacing:
I have noticed that there are many on this forum who really like Talley rings and bases.

To me, they don't look like anything special, however they are really really expensive, like well over $100 for Rings and a Base.

I just wanted to know the rationale for the popularity of these rings. So in other words, what makes them so darn popular?

-Spencer

I don't think all that much of the Talley products. The "quality" is ordinary at best. The split ring at the top with no filler is back to a primitive cheap design that will collect moisture and junk also.

Their rings have very rough interiors again reflecting the "shoemaker" quality. Also the corners are not broken on the mounts or bases and the finish looks right out of the tumbling barrel.

If you do get a set of these overpriced mounts then the first thing to do is to bend open each ring a little so as not to gouge your scope tube too bad at first. Even then they will mark up scopes.

Also there is no choice of height in the bases or rings nor materials as far as say SS goes. This may have changed. For the life of me I can't see the attraction to these mounts.

On the positive side the customer service is prompt and they are one of the only games in town for Kimber rifles since Warne stopped making Weaver style bases for them.

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
Talley rings will hold up to extreme recoil.

Talley rings don't rattle loose when you are driving around.

Talley rings are machined to close tolerances so that your rings do not gouge the scope tube.

Talley rings hold the scope extremely tightly.

I think Talley rings are some of the worst offenders when it comes to scope tube gouging. Go rings, but they aren't perfect.

Terry

I have Talley's on almost everything that I shoot very much. I have an old Weaver T15 that sits in Talleys and I can use it on all these different rifles for load development. Then the scope normally used goes right back on. I like the ring split at the top and only one visible split. They work, are utterly reliable, great people to do business with. Easey to carry an extra pre-zeroed scope on trips. Without the friction wear with the twist on redfield type. As much as a decent rifle and quality optics cost an extra 40 bucks is not a huge decision. gduffey

Anyone that would mount a scope and not polish the inside of the rings just a tad, is improperly mounting his scope, and many do...

I have a 1" turned bar that I put some very fine compound on and push it back and fourth a little...Not too much or it will be counter productive...then you won't gouge your scope.

I think Talleys are the best on the market today...

Ray,

What do you think a better about Talleys than say cross slot mounts from Leupold.

My immediate reaction against them is the vertical split rings.

Wby is pushing Talleys and the agent out here has them and the bluing matches Weatherby and they have the W emblem.

I got 2 Wbys have arrived and 2 more arrive in 6 mths from their custom shop.

The Wby W and some bullshit adds to the price but from an overall point of view that is not an issue. Four sets of them will cost about 20 to 25% more than a Model 70 Stainless in 270.

But I don't want to screw and glue Talley bases on and then have to remove them and go for another mount. I keep getting conflicting reports on them.

By the way. I have never seen them except in pictures.

They appear to dominate the custom rifle scene but I don't know if that is due to appearance or if those rifles you see have mounts that are Talley or just look like Talleys

Mike

Mike375,
Talley's ARE THAT GOOD. Screw'em and glue'em and lap'em, and no worries. My only gripe with them is that the peep sights are on backorder until July this year.

The new and improved Leupold QRW (cross-slots) with the square recoil shoulder on the bottom of the ring are just as good for function and durability, but maybe not as pretty.

Given my druthers, I'll take Talley, but I'll make do just fine with QRW's from Leupold, when the Talley's I need are back ordered.

I have seen a couple of Leupolds that the levers broke off...The folks said by hand, but I kinda doubt that, probably with a pair of pliers by hand..who knows...I have always liked Leupold products...

I like Talleys looks, fit and finish and return to zero when properly mounted..My close at the top because I know how to mount them to do so...the finish isn't like a licorce stick as some must prefer to say they are not finished well but that I also like, a nice dull finish suits me fine...The have no burrs, but the edges are sharp and one should clean the inside of all mounts before mounting them...

Mostly its in the eye of the beholder, and I like talleys, not knocking a lot of other good mounts like Leupold, Buehler, Redfield, Control and others, then you have the claw mounts and the Griffen and Howes and they are extremely good mounts...Talbot looks like a winner to me, but I have not used them.

Talley rings on a CZ/BRNO/602 in 500a2 will not take the recoil! The design of the rear ring is the culprit.