458 Lott ate my QD Warne rings

[Wyatt Smith]

@Wyatt Smith the second recoil lug integrated into the front ring would help a lot. I will look into that. I may even fabricate something to add onto the existing rings to do the same thing.

I think if a feller had a tig welder he could weld A small piece of metal to the rear of the front ring that would stick down just far enough to catch on the rear of the front bridge. That way the ring could not slide forward on the 19mm dovetail.
If only one ring has a recoil lug the other can slide on the dovetail. So if both rings have a recoil lug it should give you twice the resistance to recoil.
But I’m no engineer, just a farmer, so take it as you will.

 

[One Day...]

Not from what I can see. It is actually the clamp that is breaking away. Also, if you look, the clamp appears to be milked to where it is only half the width of the ring. This is not a characteristic of any Talley ring I own. This failure requires a transverse load or a longitudinal load on the clamp. This is simply not possible with the Talley’s I have.

Pic of a talley that actually ripped the steel, taken a screen shot from another website so I hope it is ok to post. And further up the thread it was commented how the alaskan arms rings failed with the Lott.
The talley pic shows wear into the lug, then the ring failed badly.

Guys, I think that you are talking past each other because WAB I am not sure that you picture correctly how the recoil lug is configured on CZ 550 rear rings.

See here under in a pic of my CZ 375 H&H how there is a notch in the side of the action rear bridge and there is a recoil lug designed to fit in this notch on all CZ 550 rear rings (Talley, Warne, CZ, etc.):

The CZ 550 rear rings are unique due to this configuration and are different from standard Talley rings.

This being understood, machinistbutler is obviously correct when he says that in the following picture, the recoil lug is being sheared off:

I hope this helps

 

[Red Leg]

Guys, I think that you are talking past each other because WAB I am not sure you picture correctly how the recoil lug is configured on CZ 550 rear rings.

See here under in a pic of my CZ 375 H&H how there is a notch in the side of the action rear bridge and there is a recoil lug designed to fit in this notch on all CZ 550 rear rings (Talley, Warne, CZ, etc.):

View attachment 371522

The CZ 550 rear rings are unique due to this. configuration and are different from standard Talley rings.

This being understood, machinistbutler is obviously correct when he says that in the following picture, the recoil lug is being sheared off.

View attachment 371523

I hope this helps

My .404 was built around a 550 action and uses the exact same Talley base. It has displayed no recoil issues, but is the same design as @machinistbutler

 

[WAB]

@WAB Another pic from the other website on the talleyView attachment 371512

This is not the Talley ring I use. The clamp is milled back so it is only half the width of the ring. Look at the pic I shared. It is dramatically different. Also, it is not failing on the recoil surface, it is failing on the clamp. On the design I have, there is nothing in contact with the clamp surface on a recoil load. This is a different product. It may be Talley but it is not the product I use as you can clearly see from the photo.

 

[WAB]

Guys, I think that you are talking past each other because WAB I am not sure that you picture correctly how the recoil lug is configured on CZ 550 rear rings.

See here under in a pic of my CZ 375 H&H how there is a notch in the side of the action rear bridge and there is a recoil lug designed to fit in this notch on all CZ 550 rear rings (Talley, Warne, CZ, etc.):

View attachment 371522

The CZ 550 rear rings are unique due to this configuration and are different from standard Talley rings.

This being understood, machinistbutler is obviously correct when he says that in the following picture, the recoil lug is being sheared off.

I suspect that most detachable rings on CZ 550 in DG calibers are not tightened enough. As explained in a previous post, casual thumb pressure on the ring lever is not sufficient. FYI, the 10-32 Torx screw on rings that do not have the quick detachable lever should be tightened to a minimum of 40 in-lbs (I personally go to 50 in-lbs). That is a fair amount of torque that just thumbing the lever does not provide. This lever should be tightened 1/8th turn past comfortable pressure on the thumb, hence the tip I gave earlier to put a penny on the lever to allow increased thumb pressure without the lever digging painfully into the thumb.


View attachment 371523

I hope this helps

It does indeed, my apologies, I do not like that setup at all. I am an engineer, and I can assure you, that in spite of the need for bases, the Talley system on my M70 is much stronger than that.

 

[Red Leg]

This is not the Talley ring I use. The clamp is milled back so it is only half the width of the ring. Look at the pic I shared. It is dramatically different. Also, it is not failing on the recoil surface, it is failing on the clamp. On the design I have, there is nothing in contact with the clamp surface on a recoil load. This is a different product. It may be Talley but it is not the product I use as you can clearly see from the photo.

However, it is the Talley base specifically designed for the 550. All my other Talley bases are exactly as you describe.

 

[WAB]

My .404 was built around a 550 action and uses the exact same Talley base. It has displayed no recoil issues, but is the same design as @machinistbutler

Nice rifle Joe! However, I can see why folks have issues. This setup requires a lot more care to ensure full engagement of the recoil surfaces. Any misalignment caused by poor milling or installation will increase point loads dramatically. I’m betting that AHR trues these surfaces up when they work over a rifle. Yours is obviously in a class where the action and rings have been properly tried up. Nothing at all wrong with the system as long as everything mates properly.

@machinistbutler, my apologies for the confusion I’ve caused!

 

[One Day...]

...Nothing at all wrong with the system as long as everything mates properly.

Which is exactly what we have been discussing

I suspect that most detachable rings on CZ 550 in DG calibers are not tightened enough. As explained in a previous post, casual thumb pressure on the ring lever is not sufficient. FYI, the 10-32 Torx screw on rings that do not have the quick detachable lever should be tightened to a minimum of 40 in-lbs (I personally go to 50 in-lbs). That is a fair amount of torque that just thumbing casually the lever does not provide. This lever should be tightened 1/8th turn past comfortable pressure on the thumb, hence the tip I gave earlier to put a penny on the lever when tightening it to allow increased thumb pressure without the lever digging painfully into the thumb.

I do not have the equipment to measure the amount of recoil force that proper tightening absorbs, but it is considerable. I know because when I learned all of these issues with my own rifles years ago, I tested forcing the front ring that does not have a recoil lug to move at various torques. When tightened as I describe, a decent hammer blow does not move it...

Tightening the rings is less of an issue with standard Talley bases and rings, where both front and rear bases have a full width recoil shoulder.

 

[machinistbutler]

@One Day... Thanks again for your explanations, it is obvious you have a lot of experience with these rifles, and know what you are talking about. Very much appreciated along with everyone else who is contributing in this thread. I am new to the heavy kickers , spent years with 375 , 45/70, 338's but the 458 Lott is in a different league in recoil and stresses on the rifle. I am quite certain if I had tightened the warne more I would not be having this conversation. Hopefully it may help someone mounting a scope on a CZ in a big caliber, or any rifle for that matter with QD rings

@Red Leg that 404 is one beautiful rifle, just wow! .

@WAB definitely no apologies needed. The talley design is different on this rifle than yours. I very much appreciate your contributions you make. I have no idea why my font changed.

I will try and mount up a lighter scope tonight. It is our Canadian covid Thanksgiving with just our household enjoying a nice turkey dinner tonight.

Thanks again to everyone who is helping find a solution !

Craig

 

[machinistbutler]

@Wyatt Smith I just found the EAW cz rings you were mentioning, that is a.nice set up for a recoil lug integrated into the front ring like you were mentioning. Kind of like what I had in my head to rig up . The extra lug on the front ring would help a lot. Thanks so much for sharing this . Not sure how hard they are to get in Canada but would darn sure help with a heavy scope!

 

[Philip Glass]

Having some trouble with zeroing my set up today. Popped the scope off and there are chunks coming out of the recoil lug of the back ring. Has anyone had this happen before? Scope was on there tight, but a heavy scope in a Vortex Razor 1-6. View attachment 371349View attachment 371350View attachment 371351View attachment 371352

Strange. Those are good rings. Might take a look at the Alaskan arms QD rings as an option.
Philip

 

[Philip Glass]

Never any issue on moderately recoiling guns med bore Win Mags, etc. The only ones I'm familiar with are the steel-I'm assuming the Q/D are steel? Cannot tell from the photo. I think all that debris did it.... 'Not a big fan of the "clamp-to-receiver" system for mounting. Bases and rings work for me in heavy calibers and/or super accurate guns. The only gun I own with similar is a Ruger 22-250 which of course has very little recoil, and a few .22 LR Mags with similar. Not an optimal design. But are they steel?? And, is it cast or machined?? I'm certain they'll be sending you the latest-greatest in Titanium if you promise to clean the gun....Do yourself a favor-when you get your free replacements-sell them and get Alaskan or Talleys.

I vote for Alaskan.

 

[Philip Glass]

I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned Alaska Arms.
Although I've not used them myself, I've heard good things about them.

Machined from solid bar stock, heat treated and carry a lifetime guarantee.
They are not cheap, but you generally get what you pay for.

I have some and they are in a class far above the others mentioned here. Made by real craftsmen. Impressive.

 

[Scott CWO]

I use one for sight in purposes and I suspect I shoot a 40 as well as you do. I certainly own several that I fire a good bit. I even use my lead sled for things like a .275. The accuracy of the load and scope settings are important to me. I get assurance out of no induced variables, and a rifle that shoots exactly where it is supposed to when afield. But I guess you are just a real man.

I’m sorry but I disagree with your thoughts. Perhaps for a DG rifle for minute of buffalo, your accuracy is okay with a lead sled sight-in is sufficient. However, using a lead sled for smaller calibers and thinking you are removing all the variables and getting the best accuracy for those loads and rifles is completely incorrect. I have two guides that build long range rifles and conduct shooting schools. One was in SF for 21 years and was the Sargent Major in charge of 3rd SF Group. He was deployed for 19 years, the last 7 in Afghanistan. Both of them tell me that precision rifles shoot much differently from a lead sled and the differences are quite noticeable with long range precision rifles. They have taught me the proper way to hold a rifle with the thumb beside the stock, not over it, squeezing that thumb and trigger finger toward each other and with shoulder pressure pushing the rifle against the bipod (loading the bipod) for repeatable accuracy that allows the rifle to recoil straight back without your hand or thumb torquing it to one side or the other. They have lots of other tricks to show people. If you or anyone on here wants a lesson, they would be happy to oblige.

 

[Wyatt Smith]

In my opinion CZ was so close to making the perfect scope attachment. They should have milled a “wall” a couple millimeters high on each dovetail for the rings to push against.

 

[Red Leg]

I’m sorry but I disagree with your thoughts. Perhaps for a DG rifle for minute of buffalo, your accuracy is okay with a lead sled sight-in is sufficient. However, using a lead sled for smaller calibers and thinking you are removing all the variables and getting the best accuracy for those loads and rifles is completely incorrect. I have two guides that build long range rifles and conduct shooting schools. One was in SF for 21 years and was the Sargent Major in charge of 3rd SF Group. He was deployed for 19 years, the last 7 in Afghanistan. Both of them tell me that precision rifles shoot much differently from a lead sled and the differences are quite noticeable with long range precision rifles. They have taught me the proper way to hold a rifle with the thumb beside the stock, not over it, squeezing that thumb and trigger finger toward each other and with shoulder pressure pushing the rifle against the bipod (loading the bipod) for repeatable accuracy that allows the rifle to recoil straight back without your hand or thumb torquing it to one side or the other. They have lots of other tricks to show people. If you or anyone on here wants a lesson, they would be happy to oblige.

That is fine that you disagree. I have rather extensive personal experience as well upon which I base my accuracy preferences. I am happy you have acquaintances who tell you about theirs.

I have some small experience as well in the US Army - three decades worth. I was not a SF soldier, but I was an airborne ranger combat arms officer. I have no doubt that your sergeant major friend saw extensive overseas deployment. I honor a fellow soldier's service. In all my years of service, I have yet to meet a soldier or special operator who spent 19 of 21 years overseas. But that is of no matter with respect to this topic, and I have enormous respect for his sacrifice. But I don't believe there is much that either of us could tell the other about the use of a rifle.

I am glad you seem to have learned basic rifle handling technique from him. I would assume everyone on our forum who is an experienced shot would do the same. Thumb placement as you describe has been standard infantry training since WWI.

So with all due respect, I do not believe there is anything you, or your acquaintances, are likely to educate me about with regard to shooting or sight in within the parameters I use a rifle and telescopic sight. I don't use game animals for targets for extreme long range shooting. I do take extremely accurate shots at game animals within the ranges with which I am comfortable based upon the caliber. Based upon my extensive personal experience, use of a lead sled allows me to precisely sight in a rifle to do exactly that.

 

[Forrest Halley]

Is there consideration for the $1000 rifle versus the high dollar gun? What's the game? Speed shooting? Unknown distance? I have this poor beat up looking rifle that cost me less than $1000 and it's feeling slightly miffed that it's not as good as the other rifles. It's just a lowly .375 so I'm not sure if even qualifies to play with the big guns, but I'll sling her up and be your huckleberry...

 

[Scott CWO]

That is fine that you disagree. I have rather extensive personal experience as well upon which I base my accuracy preferences. I am happy you have acquaintances who tell you about theirs.

I have some small experience as well in the US Army - three decades worth. I was not a SF soldier, but I was an airborne ranger combat arms officer. I have no doubt that your sergeant major friend saw extensive overseas deployment. I honor a fellow soldier's service. In SF, he likely would have seen many multiple short term deployments during his career. However, in all my years of service I have yet to meet a soldier or special operator who was deployed 19 out of his 21 years of service or 7 years in Afghanistan. Seven short deployments to Afghanistan, which is typical of SF, sure. 19 deployments in a career? Of course. Those are likely not important distinctions to civilians, but one we notice. In any case, I have enormous respect for his sacrifice. But I don't believe there is much that either of us could tell the other about the use of a rifle.

I am glad you seem to have learned basic rifle handling technique from him. I would assume everyone on our forum who is an experienced shot would do the same. Thumb placement as you describe has been standard infantry training since WWI.

So with all due respect, I do not believe there is anything you, or your acquaintances, are likely to educate me about with regard to the use of a rifle within the parameters I use one. I don't use game animals for targets for extreme long range shooting. I do take extremely accurate shots at game animals within the ranges with which I am comfortable based upon the caliber. Based upon my extensive personal experience, use of a lead sled allows me to precisely sight in a rifle to do exactly that.

Well, it seems they could educate you about lead sleds. And, like you, I have a little more than basic training. However, I don’t pretend to know everything. I am open to other experienced mentors.

As for my friend, you are correct. I had part of his service mixed up with another friend so I just asked him.

He served exactly 21 years, 5 months and 19 days with 9 years, 9 months and 18 days deployed overseas. That’s straight off the form filed when he checked out. He was in charge of the 7th SF Group, not 3rd.

With all due respect, we on AH are often reminded of your service by you. Thank you for it. As for game animals, we don’t use them as long range targets but we do enjoy shooting metal and paper targets for fun out to 1800 yards. The furthest I have ever shot an animal was 550 yards, but thanks for inferring otherwise.

 

[machinistbutler]

Is there consideration for the $1000 rifle versus the high dollar gun? What's the game? Speed shooting? Unknown distance? I have this poor beat up looking rifle that cost me less than $1000 and it's feeling slightly miffed that it's not as good as the other rifles. It's just a lowly .375 so I'm not sure if even qualifies to play with the big guns, but I'll sling her up and be your huckleberry...

I just picked up a beautiful FN browning 375 H&H from the 60's . The rifle looks new, never had a scope mounted on it. I paid $1000 Canadian, so probably about 700 bucks or so american dollars. The action is just a beauty. Nice pairing with my 338 from the same era that I inherited from my father when he passed. I agree the price isn't everything when it comes to rifles .

Although one of the double square bridge Rigbys in 416 would sure be nice.

 

[Red Leg]

Well, it seems they could educate you about lead sleds. And, like you, I have a little more than basic training. However, I don’t pretend to know everything. I am open to other experienced mentors.

As for my friend, you are correct. I had part of his service mixed up with another friend so I just asked him.

He served exactly 21 years, 5 months and 19 days with 9 years, 9 months and 18 days deployed overseas. That’s straight off the form filed when he checked out. He was in charge of the 7th SF Group, not 3rd.

With all due respect, we on AH are often reminded of your service by you. Thank you for it. As for game animals, we don’t use them as long range targets but we do enjoy shooting metal and paper targets for fun out to 1800 yards. The furthest I have ever shot an animal was 550 yards, but thanks for inferring otherwise.

Sigh. Not to put too fine a point on it, but I believe you are the one who jumped into this discussion and essentially said I didn't know what I was talking about with respect to a lead sled - I was "completely incorrect" if I quote you accurately. I believe that you were also the one that said you knew this because you know a couple of former SF soldiers who apparently believe that and told you so. Therefore, by extension, you apparently know better how to sight in a rifle than do I. Or at least they do. That may seem like a compelling argument to you, but I am not sure everyone would agree.

But fine. And sincere apologies for mentioning my military service. But your friends' Army experience seemed important in making your point. Mine has some small bearing on the choices I have made from everything from caliber to sighting systems to the boots I wear. My only point is that whatever they know about precision long range shooting, other than basic rifle handling, is not all that relevant to my experiences or the uses to which I put a rifle. I have no doubt that they have far more experience in setting up a rifle to drop a Taliban, or ring a gong at 700 - 1000 meters than I do - much less 1800 meters. I apologize for implying that your two friends have shot at game animals at extreme range. It seems to be quite in vogue these days, and I jumped to an erroneous conclusion. However, little of that skill set is particularly meaningful to any of the game shooting that I do, or I suspect, the vast majority of the members of this forum.

But I really think we are talking past each other. I personally believe that a lead sled is a great tool for removing external errors for sighting in a rifle that will be used within 400 meters. I can't seem to find anything you have said which points to me being "completely incorrect" in that regard. I have no meaningful expertise in setting up a rifle for long range precision shooting, and would defer totally to a former SF NCO or Army sniper. But for the hunting that I do, a lead sled is just about perfect. If there is some actual aspect about the use of such a device within those parameters that I have missed in the last decade, I am interested in those observations.