QD Rings, Base for Model 70 Safari Express

[USN]

Looks like a perfect solution. Now take her to Africa

 

[JHT]

Looks like a perfect solution. Now take her to Africa

Multiple trips and four Big 5 animals later. I never was one for tire-kicking.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

I started this thread as a neophyte with big dreams. Not much has changed I suppose. To update, I ultimately went with Talley - namely their .330 signature steel base and low, two-screw quick detachable rings with levers. I also chose not to drill and tap to #8 and am glad I did not.
View attachment 565992View attachment 565993

Looks good. How's your eye relief for the big scope? It appears forward compared to mine and I don't think my guns are long LOP. I see the small scope is set up with levers on the loading side. It's what I prefer. On the off side they catch on clothing or poke me when the rifle is slung. Position the levers up and they don't interfere with loading or cycling the rifle.

 

[JHT]

Looks good. How's your eye relief for the big scope? It appears forward compared to mine and I don't think my guns are long LOP. I see the small scope is set up with levers on the loading side. It's what I prefer. On the off side they catch on clothing or poke me when the rifle is slung. Position the levers up and they don't interfere with loading or cycling the rifle.

Thank you. Eye relief is good on both scopes. Both set-ups have the levers on the non-loading side. I like them facing each other and purposefully position this way. To say that I am captious would be an understatement. I've never noticed them catching or poking me but, by nature, I'm pretty much a roll-with-the-punches type fellow.

 

[USN]

Very nice!! Buff and rifle Sir!

 

[Forrest Halley]

Or you can flip it around if your scope doesn’t conflict:
View attachment 565973

Is this okay to shoot like this? The eye relief is still good. I just don't want to trash my scope. Thoughts?

 

[baxterb]

Is this okay to shoot like this? The eye relief is still good. I just don't want to trash my scope. Thoughts?

I never put the ring over the objective lens. Some do with no issues. That looks like a 2.5x so the objective lens is very close (just forward if memory serves) to the gold ring (That is not always the case with Leupolds) - I would consider flipping the front base to extend the ring rearward.

 

[Wyatt Smith]

Is the very end of the scope a separate piece? I believe some are threaded or something and come apart for assembly. I don’t know how to explain it but right where leupold puts the gold ring.
I would probably not want to mount a ring in front of that.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Is this okay to shoot like this? The eye relief is still good. I just don't want to trash my scope. Thoughts?

I think your forward ring is too far forward on the tube. If you can get by without QD, I'd recommend using an extended ring on the front. If you need to stick with QD, I advise a rail like this one.

Both will allow you to mount the front ring further back. Neither will interfere with loading

 

[Forrest Halley]

I never put the ring over the objective lens. Some do with no issues. That looks like a 2.5x so the objective lens is very close (just forward if memory serves) to the gold ring (That is not always the case with Leupolds) - I would consider flipping the front base to extend the ring rearward.

Yeah I have seen it both ways just wondering what the consensus was in this case.

Is the very end of the scope a separate piece? I believe some are threaded or something and come apart for assembly. I don’t know how to explain it but right where leupold puts the gold ring.
I would probably not want to mount a ring in front of that.

I understand what you're saying. I'm not in love with the idea.

I think your forward ring is too far forward on the tube. If you can get by without QD, I'd recommend using an extended ring on the front. If you need to stick with QD, I advise a rail like this one.
View attachment 567042
Both will allow you to mount the front ring further back. Neither will interfere with loading

The whole purpose of the QD was to use the very awesome iron sights if need be. I guess I'm just stuck at this point. I have other rifles to hunt with. I had just been working this one up and now it's looking like we're down to the open sights. I couldn't stand the base being over the loading port.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Yeah I have seen it both ways just wondering what the consensus was in this case.

I understand what you're saying. I'm not in love with the idea.

The whole purpose of the QD was to use the very awesome iron sights if need be. I guess I'm just stuck at this point. I have other rifles to hunt with. I had just been working this one up and now it's looking like we're down to the open sights. I couldn't stand the base being over the loading port.

With my eyes closed I can load either of my rifles no problem. Loading rails that have cutaway over the port is as easy as loading with the scope attached.

 

[Laniarius]

Is this okay to shoot like this? The eye relief is still good. I just don't want to trash my scope. Thoughts?

View attachment 567038View attachment 567039

Last year I asked Leupold tech service what's the minimum set back of the ring from the front of scope, specifically about a Freedom 1-4x which I was using at the time, and their reply was "An 1/8" of space would be ideal." Assuming the same rule for your scope, you should find a way to move the ring back a bit because it looks like you're not quite at 1/8".

 

[Forrest Halley]

Last year I asked Leupold tech service what's the minimum set back of the ring from the front of scope, specifically about a Freedom 1-4x which I was using at the time, and their reply was "An 1/8" of space would be ideal." Assuming the same rule for your scope, you should find a way to move the ring back a bit because it looks like you're not quite at 1/8".

This is an ultralight VX-2 2.5x. I'm going to just run it at this rate. I'll shoot it again next week and barring any irregularities it's good to go afield.

 

[Aaron N]

I may be in the minority here, but I prefer Warne to Talley. I haven’t tested either enough to say one is a stronger, but I like how you can time the levers on Warne better than on Tally’s. I find the Leupold QD’s lever very hard to release.

 

[Forrest Halley]

Last year I asked Leupold tech service what's the minimum set back of the ring from the front of scope, specifically about a Freedom 1-4x which I was using at the time, and their reply was "An 1/8" of space would be ideal." Assuming the same rule for your scope, you should find a way to move the ring back a bit because it looks like you're not quite at 1/8".

Thanks for your reply. Did he give any insight as to the why?

 

[Laniarius]

Thanks for your reply. Did he give any insight as to the why?

Sorry, that was all he wrote and I didn't ask for more detail.

I imagine the reason is to minimize the risk of possibly damaging the end of the tube if the ring and alignment are not perfectly cylindrical. Dents could result regardless if the rings aren't nicely aligned, but the circular section is going to be stronger once you're away from the end of the tube, because the bit of tube outside the ring would support the adjacent portion of tube inside the ring. In a worst case situation, some portion of the end could be bent inwards. I don't know where the recommendation of 1/8" comes from. Perhaps it has some basis in experience from scopes sent in for repair, or maybe even input from their engineers.

I suspect that if you've already mounted the scope and there's no visible deformation, it's probably fine.

 

[Philip Glass]

My new old stock Model 70 Safari Express in .416 Remington arrived yesterday and I now need some education on which QD rings and base to purchase. From what I’ve learned on this forum, I’m guessing low profile rings by either Warne or Talley. Scope plan is either new Swarovski or Zeiss with 24mm objective. I have also been advised to drill and tap the receiver for larger #8 screws. Thank you.

View attachment 384550

The only QD rings I’ve used that were Andy good and held zero are the Alaskan rings. Look at other scopes. The 24mm objective are not very versatile and there are many different choices today.