Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 35

Thread: Scope bases - 1 piece vs 2 piece

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Dublin, GA
    Posts
    546

    Default Scope bases - 1 piece vs 2 piece

    I am in the process of putting a scope on a new rifle. In the past I have always used a one piece Leupold base. My feeling was that this set up was stronger. Now idea why I thought that, I just did.

    To help educate me, can anyone tell me whether using a one piece base is better than using a 2 piece base? Any advantages or disadvantages to either?

  2. #2
    Supporting Member Amigo Will's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Wrangell
    Posts
    7,600

    Default

    They help keeping the action rigid when the gun is fired but if it was that important to the action I would get a stronger one.

  3. #3

    Default Bases

    1 piece bases are more rigid in that they are held in place by 3-4 screws and offer a minute amount of support to the receiver. They can however get in the way when single loading a bolt action rifle or clearing a jam.
    2 piece bases have a couple of screws in each piece and a gap in the middle. The gap offers a larger port for single loading or clearing jams it doesn't support the action though since it isn't a solid piece.
    " Americans will never need the 2nd Amendment, until the government tries to take it away."

    On the road of life..... Pot holes keep things interesting !

  4. #4
    Member gunbugs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    1,382

    Default

    The primary advantage I see in a one piece base is that it puts the mounting surface for the rings on the same plane. Two piece bases can, and will follow the screw holes more easily, and if the factory doesn't drill them all in a straight line , then two piece bases won't be in a straight line either. I've never found a one piece to be an obstruction any more than the scope for loading or clearing jams. Plus what Amigo Will said, if your action needs a one piece for strength, seek a different action.
    "A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind."

  5. #5
    Member 1Cor15:19's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Dillingham, AK
    Posts
    2,482

    Default

    As it has already been mentioned the slight strength/rigidity advantage that a one piece base may have over a two piece is relatively unimportant and the use of three screws, rather than using all four screws, in many of the available one piece bases makes the advantage suspect IMO. The fact that the scope mounts on a single plane is a good selling point of a one piece base, but IMO the downside is that the one piece base weighs 50-100% more than a similar two piece setup. Not that the extra few ounces really matters, but for me it is simply dead weight. I would recommend that you choose the mount that is most attractive to your tastes and realize that both are more than able to secure your scope to your rifle. Personally I prefer two piece bases for most applications, but I think arguing one style is better than the other is much like arguing which are prettier: brunettes or blonds. Much ado about nothing IMO.

  6. #6
    Moderator Paul H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    5,594

    Default

    My preference is a combination sight base scope ring, paticularly the talley lightweight. I haven't seen any benefit of a one piece base unless you are using a picatinny rail and need to move the rings into a position you couldn't achieve with two piece bases.


  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    5,153

    Default Bases

    With the Redfield type mounts as copied by all the other guys you can adjust the scope position with either a one or two piece base by using extension rings - by using a front and/or a back entension ring with the extensions either the front or back position you get a fair amount of flexiability in positioning the scope.

    You can also loosen one screw and remove the scope for cleaning or replacement. If you don't touch the other screw holding the rear ring you can re-mount the scope danged close to the orginal zero. I've even carried a spare sighted-in scope on occasion - you can't do that with the one intergal mounts and rings.

    I like the extra clearance the two piece mounts provide over the top of the action for a hunting rifle. If you get a jam or something the extra space can be important. For a target gun I'll go with the one piece although the advantages may be more imagined that real.


    Quote Originally Posted by Paul H View Post
    My preference is a combination sight base scope ring, paticularly the talley lightweight. I haven't seen any benefit of a one piece base unless you are using a picatinny rail and need to move the rings into a position you couldn't achieve with two piece bases.
    Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
    ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

  8. #8

    Default

    i like one piece unit for the stengh of the unit to help keep the scope unit in a rigid platform for helping stenghing of the action ..

  9. #9

    Default Strength

    I too am a fan of the 2 piece base setup, specifically the Talley Lightweights. A question I have for those who argue that a 1 piece base adds strength. Wouldn't it actually add stress to the action unless it were perfectly aligned and matted with the action, which would be quite rare considering the tolerances in both the action and the scope base manufacturing? Not that the stress would have much effect on anything, but it would have just as much effect as the supposed strength it adds, right?
    "Everything that lives and moves will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything."

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In an easy chair in Cyberspace
    Posts
    2,316

    Default

    One piece mounts add nothing to the practical stregnth or stress of the action.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wildalaska View Post
    One piece mounts add nothing to the practical stregnth or stress of the action.
    Do you have any data to support your statement? There are a lot of variables and depending on how you describe "practical" strength I think this is a bit of a strong statement and there are a lot of very experienced smiths and shooters who disagree with your statement.

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by boliep View Post
    I am in the process of putting a scope on a new rifle. In the past I have always used a one piece Leupold base. My feeling was that this set up was stronger. Now idea why I thought that, I just did.

    To help educate me, can anyone tell me whether using a one piece base is better than using a 2 piece base? Any advantages or disadvantages to either?
    Despite what some might say, a one piece base will add strength and rigidity to your action. Just how much strength it adds depends on...

    - quality and strength of action
    - quality and strength of base
    - number, size and strength of screws
    - how you bed it to the reciever

    Whether or not you need added strength and rigidity depends largly on the quality of your action and the size and power of your cartridge and what level of precison shooting you're looking for.

    I think one of the biggest benefits to a one piece mount is it will better allign your rings requiring less or no lapping. I find this to be the case with my NF base and rings. Another benefit is being able to remove and remount your scope, leaving the rings on the tube and just loosing/tightening the windage screws. This works great with my setup. I can move my scope around to different rifles or just take the scope off for whatever reason, then remount it and it is back to almost perefect zero. One more benefit, you can mount accessory hardware if you want. I have an ADI (angle degree indicator) mounted to mine to help me in shooting up or downhill.

    Disadvantages, a little extra weigth and tighter ejector port.

    For precision shooting heavy magnums, I would strongly recommend one. For lighter calibers, they can't hurt. If you do a little research you'll find that one piece bases are very popular with precision shooters. I'm guessing there's a good reason for it. But, you could certainly live without one.

    I'll have them on all or most of my rifles.

    Hope this helps,

    Mark

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In an easy chair in Cyberspace
    Posts
    2,316

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MontanaRifleman View Post
    Do you have any data to support your statement? There are a lot of variables and depending on how you describe "practical" strength I think this is a bit of a strong statement and there are a lot of very experienced smiths and shooters who disagree with your statement.
    Sigh...... I bet they are all on the long range forum too

    I think one of the biggest benefits to a one piece mount is it will better allign your rings requiring less or no lapping.
    Bullsh*t. Improperly machine rings will need lapping no matter what base is put on.

    Another benefit is being able to remove and remount your scope, leaving the rings on the tube and just loosing/tightening the windage screws
    More bullpooh. You can do that with two piece bases too.

    If you do a little research you'll find that one piece bases are very popular with precision shooters.
    And you don't know why do you? Hint: it has nothing to do with any of the points you raised.

  14. #14

    Default

    [QUOTE]
    Quote Originally Posted by Wildalaska View Post
    Sigh...... I bet they are all on the long range forum too
    No, you'll find them on a number of forums.


    Bullsh*t. Improperly machine rings will need lapping no matter what base is put on.
    Didn't say they wouldn't need lapping. I did say, "...it will better allign your rings requiring less or no lapping" This will depend a lot on the quality of rings you get. My rings needed no lapping. Chill dude.


    More bullpooh. You can do that with two piece bases too.
    True, if they are a style that use windage screws to attach the rings.... and they are the same length action.


    And you don't know why do you? Hint: it has nothing to do with any of the points you raised.
    Please do share your insight....

    You still haven't explained how you came up with your other post...

    "One piece mounts add nothing to the practical stregnth or stress of the action."

  15. #15

    Default

    [QUOTE=MontanaRifleman;651526][QUOTE]


    No, you'll find them on a number of forums.

    QUOTE]

    Well, if you read it on the internet, it must be true.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In an easy chair in Cyberspace
    Posts
    2,316

    Default

    You still haven't explained how you came up with your other post...
    It makes no difference. It would be like trying to convince someone that the moon is not made of Green Cheese.


    Better alignment indeed.

    Better ask on the net what the real advantage of a one piece base is and report back to us

  17. #17
    Moderator Paul H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    5,594

    Default

    If you look at the winners circle for 100-300 yd benchrest, you'll see either two piece rings, or actions that have dovetails machined into them that the rings attach too. If a one piece base added needed rigidity to improve accuracy, you can be sure the br crowd would be using them.

    The competition forum where you do see one piece bases is F class. The reason for the one piece base isn't to add rigidity, it's to provide a scope base that is machined at an angle to the bore, which typically provides an additional 20 moa to the scopes adjustment. It's possible to machine two piece bases with 20 moa elevation, but much simpler to just angle the picatinny rail and mill the base for the 20 moa correction.

  18. #18
    Member Dan in Alaska's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    854

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul H View Post
    My preference is a combination sight base scope ring, paticularly the talley lightweight. I haven't seen any benefit of a one piece base unless you are using a picatinny rail and need to move the rings into a position you couldn't achieve with two piece bases.

    Yep, Talley's or bust.

    I don't particularly care for the windage adjustable bases (1pc or 2pc) made by Leupold, Burris, or the others. I had a windage screw back out on a hunt, and I will never repeat that mistake. The Talleys are light, strong, and I don't have to worry about windage screws coming loose. Done deal; sign me up!

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    3,568

    Default

    Prefer two pieces as well and Talley lightweights are my go to choice. Like Dan, I don't care for the windage adjustable bases as it is just more to go wrong but if you own a rifle that has the holes drilled off center they can correct a bad problem.

    The only one piece base I own is a pictanny on a target rifle. Not because it is stronger but because it offers more flexibility for mounting the scope. My dislike of the one piece mounts has as much to do with appearances as anything else. They look so "70's" and take away from the graceful lines of a rifle and cover up some of the ejection/loading port as well. Not good in a panic hunting situation. If more companies would build rifles like Rugers with their mounts cut into the action we would be a lot better off.

    Could care less if they offer more strength to the action. If some of you want to debate this like kids feel free but it isnt doing anything to help your credibility on this forum.
    Tennessee

  20. #20
    Member Big Al's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Palmer,Alaska
    Posts
    1,737

    Default

    Could it be that the manufacturers of bases have a real reason for making the kind of bases they make? Could there be a real reason and not the BS ideas that the rest of us come up with as a guess for the differences?

    One piece as in short one piece base have a real purpose. It's all about ring spacing and eye relief. It has not a thing in the world about making the rifle action stronger. There is no way in the world that a scope base is gong to make a rifle action stronger or more rigid.

    What it can do is make the ejection port harder to get into. And give a lot more movement for setting eye relief.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tryants." (Thomas Jefferson

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •