Jump to content


Photo

Leupold scope base question...


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 Stiff Neck

Stiff Neck

    Big Shooter

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,070 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 28 February 2006 - 10:39 PM

I thought the gun shop guy gave me the wrong Leupold 2-piece base today because the rear base hangs out over the action about half an inch. I thought this was very odd and figured it was the wrong base. But it turns out that's normal? What the heck? Is this right? If it is, then I'm taking them back. :( This picture is not my rifle, but they're the same bases.Posted Image

#2 Guest_coyoteslayer_*

Guest_coyoteslayer_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 February 2006 - 10:46 PM

I don't know but it looks like it would be in the way every time you go to put your shells in. What scope are you going to mount on that bad boy?

#3 Stiff Neck

Stiff Neck

    Big Shooter

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,070 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 28 February 2006 - 10:53 PM

it looks like it would be in the way every time you go to put your shells in

Exactly what I was thinking. Might as well get a one-piece mount if it's going to be in the way anyways. I'm out of money for a new scope after buying a new rifle and a whole reloading setup, so I'm going to use my old Simmons 44Mag 6.5-20x44 AO TT for now. That scope is still on my NEF 223 but as soon as I finish working up a good load for it (this week hopefully) I'll make the switch.

#4 gunnut

gunnut

    Varmint Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 137 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 March 2006 - 01:35 AM

That mount will work fine.You load from the side anyway,the scope will be on top.

#5 ShooterJohn

ShooterJohn

    Admin

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,356 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Northern, CA
  • Interests:Hunting, shooting sports and fishing.

Posted 01 March 2006 - 08:59 AM

Ben, I had the same problem with mine on my Savage and just switched them around. In other words I put the front on the back and the back on the front. It actually gave me more eye relief that way which was better. They are kind of hokey looking though but I wanted silver mounts for the gun. :(

Time waits for no one--
treasure every moment you have.


#6 Cranky Farmer

Cranky Farmer

    smallblockfuelie

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,436 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oxnard, CA

Posted 01 March 2006 - 01:44 PM

That does't look quite right, does it.

#7 Stiff Neck

Stiff Neck

    Big Shooter

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,070 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 March 2006 - 07:23 PM

I guess the base does not extend past the bolt head when the bolt is all the way back, so it really isn't in the way, it just looks like it is when the bolt is closed. You'd think that a big name like Leupold would have designed something that's a little easier on the eyes, eh? :lol: John, I tried swapping them base around so the overhang is in back, but then my bolt won't shut because the base is in the way. I'll just keep them as they are I guess. Thanks for the help.

#8 ShooterJohn

ShooterJohn

    Admin

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,356 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Northern, CA
  • Interests:Hunting, shooting sports and fishing.

Posted 01 March 2006 - 08:46 PM

John, I tried swapping them base around so the overhang is in back, but then my bolt won't shut because the base is in the way.

Ben, you misunderstood my explanation. Take the rear mount off, turn it around and mount it where the front mount goes. That way the overhanging part still hangs over the bolt but it is out front now. Then put the front mount on the rear and there's nothing to hit the bolt. If I'm not explaining it well enough let me know and I'll send you a picture of my gun with the mounts swapped. It really gave me the eye relief I needed doing it.

Time waits for no one--
treasure every moment you have.


#9 Stiff Neck

Stiff Neck

    Big Shooter

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,070 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 March 2006 - 09:40 PM

Oh, ok. Duh. I might try that. Thx.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users