Lightest reliable pic rings?

[ETtikka]

Vortex pmr on eBay are the best ones I could find for 70$ ish or less

 

[BRTreedogs]

R700 La
419 Rail i specifically looked for an action length rail.
Mountain Tech lows
3-10 Shv
Its close if I needed it further back i would of had to go higher.
I find swfa to need to be even further back.

 

[sndmn11]

I can weigh a set when I get home if you wish.

TSR 30mm Custom Low 7075 Aluminum – TPS Products

www.tpsproducts.com

 

[swopie]

I really like my Hawkins hybrids. No pic rail needed.

 

[Balderdash]

Another vote for the SWFA's. They are rugged, low, and light.

If the mounts won't accommodate pic rings, I've used a few sets of Warne Mountain Techs with good results. They are very similar to NF LW's, which are also good.

 

[Dobermann]

Another vote for the SWFA's. They are rugged, low, and light.

I've always been curious about these, given the simple reliability of the scopes - does that then carry across to the rings?

I'm assuming they don't make them themselves; if they get them OEM'd, then surely whoever makes them would also make some other quality rings that are badged differently?

Anyone know where the SWFAs come from? Anyone done any actual tests on them?

 

[Marbles]

NF low rings with an S&B Klassic 3-12x42 on a Kimber 84L.

 

[z987k]

Maybe someone can a help me, why do people put pic rails on light hunting rifles? It's not like you need a 20MOA base to shoot a light gun at hunting distances. It's not a stronger mount as it's held to the action with the same screws that hold a ring base on.

If you're really concerned with weight, take the pic rail off and mount the rings directly.

 

[Castle Rock]

I don’t see the point either, I hate rails
Burris XTR bases offer the best of both worlds

 

[thinhorn_AK]

Maybe someone can a help me, why do people put pic rails on light hunting rifles? It's not like you need a 20MOA base to shoot a light gun at hunting distances. It's not a stronger mount as it's held to the action with the same screws that hold a ring base on.

If you're really concerned with weight, take the pic rail off and mount the rings directly.

Seems like options for direct mount stuff is fairly limited there’s talley, leupold back country, DNZ depending on what sort of rifle you have. It’s not the screws I’m worried about breaking it’s the actual talley lightweight rings. Just too many examples of them cracking, they just don’t give me much confidence. I suppose I could try the leupold back country rings since they are supposed to be stronger, I don’t have much interest in those Hawkins ones with the 20moa elevation either as you can’t reverse the rings to maximize ring spacing.

Honestly not sure if leupold dual dovetails are available for a Kimber 8400 magnum.

 

[Marbles]

Maybe someone can a help me, why do people put pic rails on light hunting rifles? It's not like you need a 20MOA base to shoot a light gun at hunting distances. It's not a stronger mount as it's held to the action with the same screws that hold a ring base on.

If you're really concerned with weight, take the pic rail off and mount the rings directly.

Easy, I can pull my scope and then put it back on without a zero shift. I can move scopes between guns without having to go to the trouble mounting the scopes again. I can also fit scopes that are otherwise too short for the action.

Like the OP, I don't trust Talley rings due to stories of the cracking. Why compromise a system to save a few ounces? If I wanted to do that I would start with a 10 to 14 ounce scope and save more weight.

 

[Dobermann]

Maybe someone can a help me, why do people put pic rails on light hunting rifles? It's not like you need a 20MOA base to shoot a light gun at hunting distances. It's not a stronger mount as it's held to the action with the same screws that hold a ring base on.

If you're really concerned with weight, take the pic rail off and mount the rings directly.

That's what lots of us here have been doing for years on what's humorously what's come to be known as the "Rokslide Special": Tikka T3x .223 (with pistol/upright grip), SWFA 3-9, and Sportsmatch rings ...

Welcome to the party!

But if anyone is in the position of needing a rail for a Tikka ... for example, if you want to run the "Rockslide Super Special" (or whatever we're yet to call it) - Tikka T3X Lite/Superlite/Strata in 6.5 Creed, KRG Bravo stock, Minox ZP5 5-25 x 56 with THLR reticle, and lightweight suppressor ... and don't want to experiment with the Spuhr SCT rings, then here's a list of many of the current rail options: https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/rail-for-tikka.270437/#post-2889799

 

[Dobermann]

PS For those not wanting to use pic rail and rings, and are thinking about the Spuhr SCT (for example, because you have a 34 mm tube scope (did I mention the Minox ZP5 with THLR reticle? https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/minox-zp5-5-25x56mm-thlr-field-evaluation.253283/), here's an image from the spec sheet - this shows the gap between rings as 64 mm / 2.52", so that might help some folks mock it up on their scope to work if this would really work for them.

Of course, it won't show you where the recoil pin will line up with your action, and whether eye relief will still work, etc, but it's a start.

And for anyone experiencing sticker shock at the cost of this mount, it's worth doing the maths - in my case, the Spuhr SCT mount is cheaper than a "good" rail (ie, Mountain Tac, MDT, or Area 419; not high-end, like Ken Farrel, Murphy Precision, or Near Manufacturing) plus Nightforce Ultralites.

THe Sphur is also lighter (at least, in the comparison between the NF 1.5" rings, which I prefer, and the Spuhr 1.35", which is as high as they go. The weight difference will therefore be less with NF 1.35" rings, but the Spuhr will probably still be lighter.

Not saying that's the right way to go; just giving some data points.



For comparison sake (and to see that a 64 mm span is pretty small), here are the specs for the Tier One Monomount - all are 80 mm:

 

[thinhorn_AK]

I use the sportsmatch on my tikkas but this thread is specifically for my Kimber.

 

[z987k]

That's what lots of us here have been doing for years on what's humorously what's come to be known as the "Rokslide Special": Tikka T3x .223 (with pistol/upright grip), SWFA 3-9, and Sportsmatch rings ...

Welcome to the party!

I think most people don't run rails on bolt guns. It's a new thing and it just didn't make tons of sense unless that's your only option given some set of parameters you've set.

Easy, I can pull my scope and then put it back on without a zero shift. I can move scopes between guns without having to go to the trouble mounting the scopes again. I can also fit scopes that are otherwise too short for the action.

Ya, I had a scope in some QD rings on an AR. I never found that you could actually hold a reliable zero when taking them on and off. Always had to re-zero if you wanted something better than 10MOA from where you sighted it. I figured it was for the guys that only bore sighted and said good nuff and went hunting.

 

[SwiftShot]

I went with DNZ. One piece rings and rails less points of failure and pretty light.

 

[ETtikka]

I believe you will save more weight by using a low profile 2 piece rail vs lighter rings

84 Two-Piece Picatinny Bases - Matte Black

Sized for all 84 actions, these two-piece steel bases have Mil-STD-1913 dimensions. Fits Tactical or Weaver rings, matte black.

store.kimberamerica.com

Burris makes nice ones for most guns, only 25$, I don’t think they make for kimber, not 100% sure

 

[DakotaBPNW]

I’ll toss in another suggestion for Hawkins Hybrids. They are outstanding in my opinion.

 

[sndmn11]

Maybe someone can a help me, why do people put pic rails on light hunting rifles? It's not like you need a 20MOA base to shoot a light gun at hunting distances. It's not a stronger mount as it's held to the action with the same screws that hold a ring base on.

If you're really concerned with weight, take the pic rail off and mount the rings directly.

I now have four more scope's than rifles. It is nice to be able to set them up on the same rifle with the same ring spacing and slot number, and know they will be properly mounted on any of the other rifles even with differing LOP.
I can set each scope's level one time, I can sight in multiple scopes before a hunt, I could even sight in two different loads for some reason.
I can diagnose a problem with accuracy in a few minutes on any rifle. I can even do that without losing zero on the parent rifle.

There's a lot of versatility to be had with a pic rail and rings.

 

[Balderdash]

One of the biggest advantages to a rail is optimal ring spacing. You want the rings as distal on the scope tube as possible. Does a scope all kinds of favors. Look up one of the slow motion videos on the flex in a scope during the firing process. Forces on a cantilever (the parts of the scope beyond the rings) are amplified with distance from the point of attachment.

Another advantage is perfect ring alignment. It's not as big of an issue these days with modern machining processes, but there's actions out there on which the mount screws aren't perfectly aligned front to back of action.

My main issue with rails is that they often are thicker than other options and, by extension, result in the scopes with objectives under 50mm being mounted higher than need be. I typically start with 2 piece Burris XTR if available for the action, or Warne 2 piece If they're not. If ring spacing isn't what it could be or if the base hole
alignment is off a little or if I want/need to add inclination, I go to a rail.