Scopes and mounting questions

G

guitar1580

New member
I've been playing with revolvers and shotguns for most of my life, and just got my first deer rifle, so I know basically nothing about scopes. The rifle is a used Savage 110, in .270 cal, with a decent but cheapo package deal style scope, an offshore made Simmons 3-9 x 32, model 21017. I'm going to use the gun mostly on the range, maybe a little deer hunting at some point.

First of all, I'm looking to determine if I should upgrade to a better quality scope, and if so, how much would I have to spend to get better than what is on it now. To me, the unexperienced scope user, the existing one actually seems to do well, and the seller had said the gun was very accurate as is.

Second, I'm needing a little education on the ring / mount setup, and what I should look for if I consider a used scope.

In the pic attached, the arrows point to rectangular bases, which measure approx. 1 1/4" x 3/4" which are attached to the receiver with 2 allen screws each, and then the rings clamp to the pointed edges of the base. If I decide to get an American made scope like a Weaver, for example, do I need bases as well as rings? or can I use the existing bases? Are these bases / mounts fairly standard, or vary according to gun manufacturer, etc.?

I have noticed the rings which allow the shooter to look through, under the scope, and that seems useful. At this point, I don't really know what all is out there, or pros and cons of different styles, so I'm trying to look up info online too, as I write this. I'm not looking to spend a fortune, but would like to maybe look for a good used American made scope, but need to make sure it will mount to the existing screw holes on my gun. Any advice at all would be helpful.

Josh

z1-Copy.jpg
 
I'd scope that sucker with a Leupold of VXII, or better quality, with Leupold bases and rings. They make them for that rifle, Savage 110, with flat reciever.;)
 
Stick with what you have, for now. Try it and see how it performs. You might have to try different brands of ammo for best groups, but ask the seller what he used which made him happy.

It's really difficult to find "bad" rings and bases. People have preferences, but there is actually little difference among them insofar as holding the scope in the proper setting. As example, I've been using Weavers for sixty years, and have never had a scope walk around or move from recoil.

The see-through rings commonly make it difficult to have a proper cheek-weld to the stock. Absent really bad weather which could fog the outside of the lenses or a fall which breaks a scope, I don't see the value of them. Scopes, generally, are pretty rugged; I've yet to break one.

From the FWIW department: I have an ancient Weaver 3x9 which somebody managed to drop and chip one of the internal lenses. However, it still functions okay so I stuck it on a .22 rimfire as a plinker. Works fine. :)
 
Congrats on you new rifle Josh, I think you'll really enjoy it.

If you're going to mostly be target shooting I would think about upgrading the trigger first. The only Savage I have shot without and Accu-trigger was horrible, it's pull was about 8 pounds. You'll have a very hard time getting accuracy with that heavy of a pull. Next I would upgrade the scope, rings and bases. I like Leupold rings and bases but like Art points out that's just my preference. I also agree with Art about the see-through mounts. As for optics I have used and like Leupold, Burris, and Zeiss. I have read really good reviews on Nikon's also and would not hesitate to use them.
 
If you're worried about needing a back-up open sight system, just get some quick-connect rings. If you really have a scope failure in the field, you can have the scope off in about 5 sec.
 
Thanks guys. Yes Art, I have some of the ammo that the seller liked, Remington 130 gr. He said he was shooting 1 1/4" groups at 100 yards with the existing Simmons scope. I think I'll try it for a while. A friend of mine just told me that he's had good luck with his.

Allen, I believe you are correct about the trigger, I was going to post a thread about that. The money may be better invested in the trigger, while I'm deciding about scopes. Any suggestions for a good trigger, and what they would cost? Are they available on the used market?

I'm still a little uncertain about the bases. My rear one mounts to a flat surface. The front one to a round surface. Is that pretty standard? Will most scopes mount right to them, or do I need to get new ones which are designed for a particular model of gun / scope etc.? Thx.

JP
 
I have a Savage 111 GCNS in 30-06. I've found that most mounts like the Leupold put the scope too high, and see through scope mounts are garbage, they put the scope way too high, and you have no field of view through the mounts.

You should be able to close your eyes, shoulder the rifle, then open your eyes, and you shouldn't have to move your head to see through the scope. I've found these or this set to be the best option. You can turn the front mount around so it extends about 1/4" over the port to make it work since most scopes are made for short action rifles. I use them in combination with Weaver Grand Slam rings and a Weaver Super Slam 2-10x42 scope.

Also, Weaver scopes are made in Japan.
 
The front one to a round surface. Is that pretty standard? Will most scopes mount right to them, or do I need to get new ones which are designed for a particular model of gun / scope etc.?
Click to expand...
Scope mounts are designed for the specific gun, so you won't have to worry about flat/round/higher one end etc. The only thing you have to look for is height of the mount, they come in low to extra high. Usually a medium height system will work for your standard 40 mm objective, low for small scopes like a 24, and high for 56 mm. Extra high is usually reserved to make up for odd stocks requiring more height to get a good sight picture.
 
If it were me id not worry about seeing under the scope, they raise it up way to high for my liking. Also rings work on nearly any gun but their are a few different styles. For the accuracy on that gun get a set of Leupold rings for it, the bases should still work fine, then get a new Nikon Prostaff scope, for 150 bucks they are very very good optics for someone on a budget, I have 4 of them of various guns and they are just as good as my 500 dollar scopes in my opinion
 
I believe you have Weaver mounts. (Or something very similar, possibly Warne.) These are the "rectangular bases" you described.

The rings could have been made by a number of manufacturers. Weaver mounts are relatively standard now, so a lot of different rings fit them.

The rings come in different heights to work with different scope objective lens diameters. (The front) If you decide to get a different scope, as long as it has a 1" diameter tube and an objective lens that isn't too much larger than the present scope, it should work with your present rings. If not, you will need to get taller rings.

Generally, you want the lowest rings possible for a particular scope, so you can get the "cheek weld" that has been mentioned.

I agree about the "see thru" rings. If I had to assign a benefit to that design, it would be a negative number... :)
 
One of the biggest disdvantages of Savage rifles is the distance between the front and rear receiver bridges. On almost any other gun the red arrows you have included would be an inch or more closer together. It makes choosing your scope and mounts much more difficult.


I'd stick with what you have for now. I'd consider something better, but only when you can truly afford to get something significantly better. The rings and bases you have are as good as any as long as the scope you choose has enough room to mount it. The scope you have on there has zero room to adjust for proper eye relief. Many scopes will be shorter, or have a larger front objective bell resulting in less straight tube to mount your scope on. You will likely need some way to get your front and rear rings closer together to allow for proper scope mounting and adjustment.

You can buy extension rings, but I'd go with DNZ mounts on this rifle.

http://swfa.com/DNZ-Lightweight-1-Scopemounts-C2603.aspx
 
I'll put in another vote against see thru rings. They mount the scope too high and aren't as solid as conventional rings.

I would just make sure everything is tight and use it as is. I also wouldn't woory about the Simmons unless I had a problem with it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
 
I'm not familiar with that Savage trigger, so bear with me: A competent gunsmith can use a fine stone on the sear engagement and then adjust it for best performance.

An alternative would be an aftermarket trigger. Unfortunately, Canjar is no longer in business, and they made a trigger that is far better than the Timney I installed in a Ruger 77. Not that the Timney is bad, but it's not like the proverbial glass rod, snapping cleanly at two or three pounds.

A whine: Canjar once made a single-set trigger that was wonderful. I had one on a Ruger 77 heavy-barrel Swift. The primary trigger was set at three pounds, but when set it broke at three ounces. Made 300-yard feral cats a Pure Pleasure.

I've sorta lost touch with what's available, nowadays...

Oh, before I forget: A trigger shoe makes the perceived force to pull a trigger seem a good bit lighter. Eases consistency at the benchrest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top