Yeah, my fault. I should have listed it.
I had heard the 700 bases “will work.” Called Burris, they said maybe, ask Weatherby. Weatherby said I need to use the correct bases. The rear is either shorter or taller than the 700, can’t remember which. Also rumors the front screws are different...
No base options, I started trying to go that route a year ago as Seekins was my original pursuit. Nada. Vortex precisions matched (Seekins) makes a set compatible with weaver slots, but not in low for 30mm.
Will do when these small humans are put to bed.
Yep. This is the next plan. Going to lock it back down and loctite it. Give it a day to set, and shoot again.
Ok, spent the night disassembling and recleaning/degreasing everything. Every mm of all of the hardware. Reinstalled dry and took it to the shop (not gunsmith. Yet.)
I at least had them look at it, no problems noted other than balking at my 25in-lb torque. They took their torque driver set...
Well said. After spending some time looking through some alpha and slightly under alpha glass, the concept that it’s purely subjective is even more obvious.
Your summary drives a question, curious as to your thoughts. My target is directly in the middle of your examples. Not lucky enough to...
Here’s the best place for this follow up on bases other than Talley.
What are my best options for a Weatherby 6 lug? Due to two piece base availability, the only ones I know of are Talley, Leupold, and Warne PA. Almost ordered the Warne’s, but at $59 they seem like a lower grade option?
Nope. Talley rings were new, new hardware. Leupold new, new hardware. They’ve now been tightened once to 21 in-lb. I think they should be fine to clean up and to go to 25 now.
I was thinking this as a strong possibility until I found the stuff from Leupold saying 28. Flat out loose is my suspect.
Will do.
Agreed. We’ll start over and see if torqued to *correct* spec changes it.
Loud and clear. 25 or 28? I’ve found info from Leupold that 28 should be on the ring screws. I’m hoping that’s it.
Yep, I know lol. The Leupold backcountry rings are on now. Probably doesn’t make much difference. I tried to make Burris bases work, but nothing for a Weatherby action.
Ah...
Acetone. Attempted everything per your thread on 24hr campfire forum. (Thanks for that, by the way.)
No answer yet from SWFA if 28in-lb is acceptable on the scope tube. I assume yes, but I’m not touching anything until it’s fully degreased again and I hear back.
Now I’m down the rabbit hole...
Hm. Just disassembled the rings to start over, either way.
Loctite is still wet. Been sitting for a week in the gun case. Never seen that before either.
Got a possible. (This is why I said “it’s me” in the title.)
I’ve read two different torque values from Leupold on these. Mine are at the lower at 21 in-lb. Waiting on an answer from Leupold on 28 in-lb being correct. (And from SWFA on their opinion on that value.h
@BjornF16 I just noticed the...
Gotta be. Looking that up tonight.
Could be, but man it’s odd. I’ve never lapped a set of rings in my life, never had a single issue. Not sure I personally know anyone that laps rings.
Fair enough. I have plenty of those.
Calling weatherby as well, just to see what they think.
Ugh. I’m having flashbacks to ordering the SWFA in the first place. All I want is a reliable lightweight 3-9 scope. Everyone hates everything except what I have 😂
I had this thought as well. Short of ordering another torque driver, no idea. I would hope it’s good, the only thing it’s been out of the case for is installing scope rings on this rifle. But, mechanical failures happen.
Yup, I have Brian’s email (thanks to you) so I’ve sent another asking...
21 or 22 was in the Leupold spec data, I’ll have to take a peek. It’s at one or the other.
Scope halves have a gap. Not much, but they aren’t touching.