Precision Reflex Sucks!!!

B

Big Bear

New member
What a crock! Precision Reflex...

"precision" my @ss!

I spent big bux on a Savage "Tactical" one piece scope base made by Precision Reflex, Inc. They're marketed by Mounting Solutions Plus, the same company that sells A.R.M.S. and MWG mounts. Bought it from Brownells.

What a piece of crap! My Burris 'ZEE mount' Signature rings wouldn't even fit! One ring fit on the rear of the base but the front ring wouldn't fit. I measured the width of the base and it's .835" wide at the rear and .845" wide at the front, a full .010" difference! The ZEE rings both measured .837"

The machining on the base looks rather crude for a "tactical" scope mount base. I had a similar problem with a A.R.M.S. #1 G3 scope mount that I sent back to Mounting Solutions Plus for a replacement because it was out of spec..

I don't want a replacement for this piece of crap, I want my money back!

I can't believe they want close to $100 for a so-called "tactical" scope base when I would probably be better off with a set of Weaver bases for about $6. Oh well, live and learn. I'll never buy another Mounts Plus, PRI, MWG or A.R.M.S. product again!
 
Big Bear, I've never understood why "just huntin'" or "just shootin" folks--those not in serious competition--need any of this "precision" or "tactical" stuff. (I'm not talking about mounts and rings set up for 1,000-yard shooting.)

I've used Weaver or Weaver-style scope mounts for over fifty years, and never had a moment's trouble. I grant I've never messed much with cartridges more powerful than an '06, but the same set of Weaver mounts have been on Ol' Pet for over 30 years and some 4,000 rounds...

(Conetrols are sure purtier. :D )

Sorry about your disappointment,

Art
 
I've heard that some people have trouble trying to mount Weaver rings on picatinny mounts, but I don't know if that's true or not. (And I certainly don't know if picatinny mounts are the ones referred to here.) One thing's for sure, Brownell's will give you a refund, no questions asked.
 
Big Bear, I bot a set of PRI rings and bases on Robar's recommendation since they mount quite a few on their high-dollar rifles. Alignment was nearly perfect and unlike the Leupold Mk4 rings, these have a square recoil shoulder on the crossbolt. They are UGLY as sin and not as well finished as the Leupolds. PRI advertises them as return to zero after removal and replacement and my limited testing supports that. As written before, send 'em back. Art is right about Weaver bases and rings(he usually is.) I do not like them in heavy-recoiling calibers(say .338 and up) since the current round cross-section crossbolts will peen the upper edges of the base slots.The same is true of the Leupold QRW rings by the way. The old Weaver rings had rectangular recoil shoulders on the crossbolts.Leupold makes steel bases for their QRW rings. Best, Rob
 
time to 'fess up...

Ok, I admit it. I bought into the "tactical" hype and spent more for that mount than I would have if it didn't have "tactical" written all over it. I'll consider this a lesson learned. This is the second PRI product I've bought that was out of specs. Never again. I'll get my $75 back (Brownells discounted price), and spend it more wisely next time.

FWIW, I didn't get "tactical" scope rings, I got Burris Signature rings based on advice I read from some of the members of this board.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top