Is anyone aware of any rings for Weaver bases that don't look like they belong on a $100 rifle?

These are the only ones that even come close:
https://www.optics-trade.eu/us...-30mm-bh-10-0mm.html

I'd love to know if there are other options out there.

they look a little like leupold QWR or is it QRW

Have you seen the S&K Weaver mounts?

Also:

The V1B Skulptured base screw hole spacing is the same as Weaver mounts.

http://www.scopemounts.com/ind...l?scoperingpics.html

I believe Warne manufacturing makes some all steel rings that fit Weaver bases and are very nice looking. Try googling them up. Good luck...

I like the Leupold PRW.

Dave

+1 on the Warnes.

I have a pair of the Skulptured rings on one of my rifles. Fit & finish is nice.

quote:

http://www.scopemounts.com/ind...l?scoperingpics.html

quote:

Originally posted by Biebs:
+1 on the Warnes.

+2 Strong, easy to install, look good, and fairly economical.

Appreciate all of the replies. The rings are for a WR-style single shot that was unfortunately built with weaver bases. None of these rings are exactly what I'm looking for so I'm likely to removed the soldered-on weavers and use something more befitting of the rest of the gun.

Thanks again.

I have been working on Morris Melani at Alaska Arms to simply modify the based on his QD rings to fit Picitinny/Weaver bases.
I think he is warming up to the idea.he builds great rings.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
I have been working on Morris Melani at Alaska Arms to simply modify the based on his QD rings to fit Picitinny/Weaver bases.
I think he is warming up to the idea.he builds great rings.

Phil,
I have some of his QD rings on my 416 Rigby. Nick Hughes made the bases for CZ rings. Morris is a nice guy to do business with.

Phil-

Appreciate the heads-up, those are good-looking rings.

quote:

Originally posted by Woodhits:
Appreciate all of the replies. The rings are for a WR-style single shot that was unfortunately built with weaver bases. None of these rings are exactly what I'm looking for so I'm likely to removed the soldered-on weavers and use something more befitting of the rest of the gun.

Thanks again.

Weavers are butt-ugly, but they sure do work. I've got Warne Mountain Tech rings on a Tikka T3. They're as elegant as other rings, but they look a lot better than plain old Weavers and they return to zero.


Okie John

quote:

Originally posted by okie john:

quote:

Originally posted by Woodhits:
Appreciate all of the replies. The rings are for a WR-style single shot that was unfortunately built with weaver bases. None of these rings are exactly what I'm looking for so I'm likely to removed the soldered-on weavers and use something more befitting of the rest of the gun.

Thanks again.

Weavers are butt-ugly, but they sure do work. I've got Warne Mountain Tech rings on a Tikka T3. They're as elegant as other rings, but they look a lot better than plain old Weavers and they return to zero.


Okie John

I apologise if this is a slight highjack. How heavy are the Mountain Tech? Steel or alloy?

I use a lot of of Warne Maxima's. They don't move. My complaints would be aesthetically they need to lose a little bulk and the lows are too high!

I like the Weaver rings and bases mostly because they are low enough to see iron sights over the top of the base in most cases..

I dislike the screws that tighten on one side as its so damn hard to level the cross hairs, and even when you get it done they tend, in time, to allow the horizontal wire to tilt towards the screw side. Ive noticed this mostly when the rifle is used horseback or rides too many days in the pickup gun rack..and they are not pretty..

But they are cheap and the work well when installed properly, and checked on constantly. Another attribute is the allow a scope to sit very low on the action, and work very well for me on low comb rifles...

Bottom line is they work, they are ugly, and require maintenance, not a bad trade off..So I use them on "some" guns, but prefer talley with extra low custom bases.

Mr Atkinson

I agree but Weaver is essentially unavailable here (agent does little) and importing is not always easy as the US thinks everything for export needs restriction. I may try that again. There are Weaver rings with screws both side of the strap over the tube. I've seen them on line. They are called "Sure Grip Rings". Weaver is the lowest setup I've come across. I think the new Grand Slam rings look quite handsome but I've never physically seen them.

I have a set of Leupold QRW's, medium,blue, brand new that I don't need any more, $35 shipped if anyone needs them.

Jim

I'll take them, Jim. PM on the way.

The 2+ year old grand slam rings were OK. the new ones are crap. Poor fit, overly bulky.

quote:

Originally posted by AFRICAN LEADWOOD:
Mr Atkinson

I agree but Weaver is essentially unavailable here (agent does little) and importing is not always easy as the US thinks everything for export needs restriction. I may try that again. There are Weaver rings with screws both side of the strap over the tube. I've seen them on line. They are called "Sure Grip Rings". Weaver is the lowest setup I've come across. I think the new Grand Slam rings look quite handsome but I've never physically seen them.

quote:

Originally posted by butchlambert:

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
I have been working on Morris Melani at Alaska Arms to simply modify the based on his QD rings to fit Picitinny/Weaver bases.
I think he is warming up to the idea.he builds great rings.

Phil,
I have some of his QD rings on my 416 Rigby. Nick Hughes made the bases for CZ rings. Morris is a nice guy to do business with.

Morris is not convinced there are enough hunters using Weaver/Picitinny bases to justify him building ring but with a little input from the users here I am betting he will

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:

quote:

Originally posted by butchlambert:

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
I have been working on Morris Melani at Alaska Arms to simply modify the based on his QD rings to fit Picitinny/Weaver bases.
I think he is warming up to the idea.he builds great rings.

Phil,
I have some of his QD rings on my 416 Rigby. Nick Hughes made the bases for CZ rings. Morris is a nice guy to do business with.

Morris is not convinced there are enough hunters using Weaver/Picitinny bases to justify him building ring but with a little input from the users here I am betting he will

Krikey man - the off-the-shelf offerings for Weaver are about the only reason I DON'T use them. A more svelte option would be very popular, I should think.

EAW, MAK etc. Made in Germany.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
I have been working on Morris Melani at Alaska Arms to simply modify the based on his QD rings to fit Picitinny/Weaver bases.
I think he is warming up to the idea.he builds great rings.

Morris has a great product. I need to pick up a set for my #1.

I have several sets of the warne QD rings. They work well and are steel, but the finish is paint. Nightforce makes some lighter rings out of 7075 aluminum and titanium that have a black anodize finish. These split horizontal vs the vertical split for the warne. The nightforce rings are not QD but in my experience the scope can be taken off the rail/mounts and re-installed with no shift in the zero.

Ken Farrell base(s) & rings & don't look back.

I much prefer the old Redfield bases and the split rings of yesteryear and drill and tap the low one piece base for the Redfield "little bow peep", they are steel, they are pretty, compact and sit low, and the Little bow peep is adjustable and all works just fine..Just an option, mostly on my SAvage 99s and my 6x45 Sako custom L-461. Making a weaver pretty is like making a silk purse out of a sows ear.

My all time favorite is custom low bases by Jack Belk for Talley QD or old Lynn Brownell rings.