Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply |
one of us |
Gentlemen, I read the 8-40 thread with great interest, especially Mr. Atkinson's endorsement of the Talley system and Mr. Rick's endorsement of the Leupold QRWs. I'm curious as to what are the relative merits of both systems. I like the look of the Talley system, however, form follows function and if the Leupold QRWs are stronger, etc., I could live with that. Your commentary would be most appreciated. Regards, Matt in Virgina. | ||
|
one of us |
I've used them both and I came to the following decision because; (Understand that both are good and you can't go wrong either way....) I personally decided that the Leupolds because of the roll over pin, like claw mounts will wear in time, the Talleys will not due to a non frictional design...I like the looks of the Talley and I know of several instances where the levers on Leupold broke off, now I don't know the circumstances as folks that break levers probably won't admit they were using a hammer which could have been the case in the instances I'm speaking about, who knows..but then maybe not. Just one mans opinnion. ------------------ | |||
|
<Rust> |
Well, I consider Leupold Mk 4 rings to be quick release, albeit with a 1/2" spin-tite. Keeps zero too. For that matter, any scope ring on Weaver style bases can pretty much be considered quick release. The quality of the mounts and rings does affect the repeatability however. | ||
One of Us |
Matt, Leupold has the QRWs and Quick Release Mounts. The Quick Release Mounts are the ones Ray is referring to with the cam system. I am never sure which name goes with which mount. The main argument that will be raised in favor of the QRWs over the Talley mounts will be the use of the vertically split rings on the Talley mounts. The vertical split rings add difficulty to life is the rings are to be bedded or lapped. The Leupold QRWs are like a smaller version of the 30mm sniper scope mounts. Everything about them is smaller and trimmer. Essentially the QRWs are a steel version of the Weaver mounts. Any of these mounts that use some type of vertical (Quick Release Mounts) or horizontal recoil bar or pin are not a problem as to breaking or falling off etc. The difference will come in potential accuracy. My experience has been that the aluminium Weaver mount can have problesm when used on extremely accurate larger calibers. Sometimes the clamp bottoms out and then that becomes like trying to lift yourself up by your own boot straps. The vertical split rings for most people offer a more pleasing appearance to the eye. I would say on target based rifles the horizontal split rings are what you will nearly always find in use. The reason is that they are just easier to deal with. Mike | |||
|
one of us |
I must agree with Ray. I have both and use both. I had the Leupold tight up after shooting several heavy rounds through the rifle. That may be the reason that RAy talked about levers being broken off. I had to get a wrench to get them loose. Steve [This message has been edited by Santala (edited 06-03-2001).] | |||
|
one of us |
Gentlemen, I greatly appreciate your collective opinions. Thank you, Matt in Virginia. | |||
|
one of us |
I had QRW's professionally installed on an ultramag that held on for 9 rounds before braking AND damaging the bases. Last weekend of hunting season, big hunt etc. NO FAN | |||
|
one of us |
Gentlemen, although these mounts are good and reliable, I�d like to put a word for the german pivot mount by Apel. www.eaw.de/English/Products/SME/sme.html Fritz K. | |||
|
One of Us |
I advise you to stay away from the Leupold QRW system. I had it on a 458 and the bases (Leupold QRW bases) smooshed like a turd would smoosh if you stepped in it. I have a few QRW setups and have been satisfied. But I have now started buying Tallys. | |||
|
Powered by Social Strata |
Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia