Leupold QR mount leaves me confused!

[tpcollins]

Don't have my Triumph yet but I did buy the scope recently so I brought home the Leupold QR rings and mount this morning from Cabelas to see how the overall height is. I measured the height of the QR base and found the rear is .243" thick and the front is .226".

I thought that was odd because the tech from Warne said their WAR978M base for the Encore/Omega/Triumph was .294" at the front and .274" at the rear. With the Warne being thicker at the front, it made sense that this would keep the scope parallel to the centerline of the bore. But the Leupold seems like it's going to be pointing downhill even more than if the base was just plain level. Does this make any sense?

 

[Underclocked]

Which end is the front? Levers on right side or left side?

 

[tpcollins]

The base should mount with levers on the left which puts the (4) mounting holes at the rear over the breech plug area. If it's mounted the other way with the levers on the right, then half of the base will be hanging off the back. This just doesn't make sense - I'll call Leupold tomorrow and find out why the rear is thicker than the front.

 

[choc-dog]

The T-C mounting hole spacing should only let you mount the base "one" way with the levers on the left side.

Chocdog

 

[Underclocked]

Okay, I needed that info as a refresher as it's been a long time since I've had a qr base on a TC. My guess is that difference may work to your advantage as a lot of mounts wind up pointing the scope too high when optically centered (especially Leupold scopes that have more narrow ranges of adjustment). Suggest you try the system before getting excited about that height difference.

 

[tpcollins]

Well I'm going to mount a Swarovski AV3-9x36 on it so I do plan to get a little excited. I'm going to call Dednutz tomorrow (my other option) and see if they're ring heights vary from front to rear on their one piece units.

 

[Busta]

tpcollins,

I think the Warne Tech goofed, I'm pretty sure it would be the other way around.

You will want the front of the base to be lower than the back on the T/C's. Several of them run out of UP scope adjustment with parallel bases. It would be much worse if the front of the base were taller than the back.

I know several guys that mounted Leupold scopes on T/C's with 0 MOA bases, then ran out of UP adjustment. They then had to either shim up the back of the base, or buy a scope base with 20 MOA built in.

IMO you will be better served with the base you have, and will probably keep you from having to shim up the rear or buy one of the 20 MOA bases. If you know how long that base is, you can figure out the MOA with the .017" difference. I'd say you should be about perfect, to keep your scope adjustments closer to the center of the range. Way better than having a parallel base and your up adjustment all the way to the outside of the range.

Only one way to find out! I think you have what you want.

 

[tpcollins]

Thanks Busta - I'll gnaw on that Warne tech rep some more.

 

[Chasam60]

I put the same rings and base on my Omega and had no problem at all.I figured Leupold has enough experience to get it right. I am not anal enough to look for problems until I know they exhist.

Charlie

 

[choc-dog]

I put the same rings and base on my Omega and had no problem at all.I figured Leupold has enough experience to get it right. I am not anal enough to look for problems until I know they exhist.

Charlie

+1

Chocdog

 

[paia]

I put the same rings and base on my Omega and had no problem at all.I figured Leupold has enough experience to get it right. I am not anal enough to look for problems until I know they exhist.

Charlie

+1

Chocdog

+2