To the OP, higher quality rings can justify higher prices by use of better alloy (7075 vs the cheaper 6061) or even moving up to steel rings, better quality hardware including clamps and screws, and various levels of quality control. Kelbly’s uses matched ring and cap sets with orientation markings and serialization, and 419 produces a complete ring with an undersized mounting hole, then line bores them together to final size for example.
Mounting a scope in a quality ring is akin to driving a luxury automobile; the scope can still move freely, but the tolerances are held so tight it kind of sticks in place before the fasteners are even torqued. Makes leveling and tightening a breeze. There is a higher expectation that the rings will not allow movement, will not induce bending or twisting forces, or crush a scope tube, and that fasteners will not strip or yield.
Clearly those attributes are not universally necessary, however the options exist for challenging applications and discerning users, not strictly to separate fools from their money.
People subscribe to philosophies on how much a scope should cost relative to a rifle, but rarely do I hear about mount cost relative to the cost of the scope. Off the cuff I would venture that 10% of scope cost should be spent on the rings in most situations.
As to the Burris inserts, the windage correction does largely address rails or bases that are out of alignment with the barrel, but I have also witnessed sloppy machining of the main rings requiring up to 15MOA to correct the rings themselves.
Mounting a scope in a quality ring is akin to driving a luxury automobile; the scope can still move freely, but the tolerances are held so tight it kind of sticks in place before the fasteners are even torqued. Makes leveling and tightening a breeze. There is a higher expectation that the rings will not allow movement, will not induce bending or twisting forces, or crush a scope tube, and that fasteners will not strip or yield.
Clearly those attributes are not universally necessary, however the options exist for challenging applications and discerning users, not strictly to separate fools from their money.
People subscribe to philosophies on how much a scope should cost relative to a rifle, but rarely do I hear about mount cost relative to the cost of the scope. Off the cuff I would venture that 10% of scope cost should be spent on the rings in most situations.
As to the Burris inserts, the windage correction does largely address rails or bases that are out of alignment with the barrel, but I have also witnessed sloppy machining of the main rings requiring up to 15MOA to correct the rings themselves.
Last edited:
Upvote 0
