I just got some replacement square cross bars from Leupold and noticed there are actually two types of them!

One does NOT go all of the way across the slot (into the angled portion of the mount). The other does. The longer bar is the newer design. It does not appear that the newer bar will fit in the older ring.

The two sets of rings that I have that show real damage from recoil are the ones with the short square cross bars. BTW they show damage on both back and front cross bars!

The Leupold QRW ring sets I have on the smaller caliber rifles (264 Win Mag, 338-06, and 9,3x62) are not showing significant damage ... but they are newer ring sets with the square insert that goes all the way across the ring. Only those on heavier kickers were the older shorter ones.

Mike,
I realize you were trying to stick with the type of bases and rings you had, but I had absolutely no problems with the other Leupold QR design - the QR mount which uses a steel base and steel rings with a post. I had these on my .416, 338-378 and 30-378 and they held up well, always returned to zero when taking off and remouting scope. The scopes I used included a 1.5-6X LPS, 3-14X LPS (pretty darn heavy) and 2.5-8x VXIII. I would return both bases and rings to Leupold with a description of what happened and ask for a replacement with this type of mount. I don't think you will be sorry.

CCM Doc,

I use those rings on a pre64 M70 in .338 Win Mag and an SS Classic M70 in .375 H&H. I like them, but they are not as "hurky" as the QRWs.

I suspect they might just work on the light .416 but I really don't think they'll make it on a .458 AR if the weight of the scope gets beyond the lightest.

I think the better solution is the QRW with bases that have a recoil shoulder like the Talleys. Just at the point of milling rails and slots in those. Will let you know how the new bases work.

I have had zero problems with the second generation QRW. They have more recoil stop surface than Talley, but are investment cast steel like the Warnes. Maybe sometimes a batch has inferior metallurgy or heat-treat?

Ditto the QR, and I have broken the post off a QR ring. Luck of the draw.

Anything Leupold can do to increase the bearing surface where ring meets base in a square-flush fit will be a good thing, for a "generation 3 QRW," but will not make me want to get rid of all my gen-2.

Please post a pic if you get one of any new variety of QRW.