• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

20 MOA Scope Base

Any thoughts on which would be better value EGW 20 MOA base or the Weaver 20 MOA base for my Savage 10 action rifle? Are they same quality or is one better than the other
 
THis might not help much, but I'd pick the EGW if I had to decide between the two. I've handled a few EGWs and they seem to be well made for the price. I'd personally rather have something made by a smaller company that hasn't outsourced a boatload of work if quality is fairly equal.... Just my deflated 2 cents. ETA: seems that some of the Weaver bases are made here, but why not support a smaller company if you can?
 
From what I've seen of the 2, have 1 EGW on a savage and know a few people with Weavers, they are both about the same quality however not up to snuff with the higher end stuff but they are priced to reflect that. I don't think you can go wrong with either but if you can afford getting a Farrell, I also have one of these on a savage and it is nicer than the EGW, or comparable rail might pay off in the long run.
 
Lots of luck trying to find a Weaver base in 20 moa. I had one on order, with my gunsmith, for a very long time. Finally gave up in disgust & bought a one piece Nightforce 20 moa.
 
Bruno Shooters Supply in Phoenix normally stocks the Weaver 20 MOA base for the Savage round top actions. I have bought two from Bruno's.
 
savageshooter86 said:
what are the benefits of paying alot more for a base? Farrel looks to be $117 and EGW for around $43 and Weaver for $33. Big difference

Friend, you're overthinking this. Get the EGW and be done with it. I've spent $100+ for a base, and $15 for a base. Cannot tell the difference in rifle performance.

The benefits in paying more for the base is that you will have less money to waste on something else. :)
 
NateHaler said:
savageshooter86 said:
what are the benefits of paying alot more for a base? Farrel looks to be $117 and EGW for around $43 and Weaver for $33. Big difference

Friend, you're overthinking this. Get the EGW and be done with it. I've spent $100+ for a base, and $15 for a base. Cannot tell the difference in rifle performance.

The benefits in paying more for the base is that you will have less money to waste on something else. :)
I couldnt of said it better. I have many Egw bases and 3 Farrell bases and the guns all go bang and all shoot very well. I think u should put more thought into the rest of the package. A base is not going to make the gun shoot bugholes.
 
Thanks that is what I was wanting to know since I have never had a comp gun or a base like this on a rifle.

Will go with the EGW base and be done
 
savageshooter86 said:
Thanks that is what I was wanting to know since I have never had a comp gun or a base like this on a rifle.

Will go with the EGW base and be done
I just ordered one from Optics Planet for a Savage model 12. They are around $39.00 now. Last year when i bought them they were at $29. Free Shipping
 
I use them and like them, but I don't like the slotted screw they provide for the cross-slot mounting. Too easy to slip and ding the screw/scope/rifle when tightening to spec. They should ship TORX or hex-head screws IMO. Also, you might need to ever-so-slightly bend one of the feet of the ring bottoms to enable it to slip over the base. You'll figure it out. :)
 
NateHaler said:
I use them and like them, but I don't like the slotted screw they provide for the cross-slot mounting. Too easy to slip and ding the screw/scope/rifle when tightening to spec. They should ship TORX or hex-head screws IMO. Also, you might need to ever-so-slightly bend one of the feet of the ring bottoms to enable it to slip over the base. You'll figure it out. :)
I have used many sets of these rings and this week i ran into the exact issue with having to bend it to slip over rail. After installing it i put a level across the top of the bottom section and the one that needed minor fitting was not level with the base. The one that slipped right on was perfectly level with the base. Your correct the mounting screw is a very poor design. It should not be a slotted head and should be a bit beefier.
 
had fun sigting in rifle for first time yesterday with 20 moa base and Burris Signature Zee rings. And was shoot way left(almost 15"). Shots were hitting about 30" high too. Switched out the std insert and put in the "10" inserts in fron ring. **-10 on bottom and +10 on top** Per instructions. Only brought shots down 5"
 
fellas, in case some of you don't understand bore sighting, read on. It will save you time, money, and frustration at the range.

After you properly mount your base (ensure it's pointed the right way, i.e. tilted down towards the muzzle if it's not a flat setup) and your rings (including inserts, if applicable, and understand what they do), then carefully place the scope. Consider eye relief relative to your cheekweld. If the stock is adjustable, adjust it to your favorite setting. Mount the scope.

Okay, now for bore sighting. BTW, this has NEVER failed to get me on paper the very first shot, even if the first shot was taken at 600y.

With the rifle in a vise or positioned solidly with a front rest and sandbag(s), and the BOLT OUT SO YOU CAN SEE THROUGH THE BORE, point the rifle at your target. Let's say it's 100y. Peek through the bore, and align the target in the center of the bore. If you want to have the target a little below center, that's okay because gravity pulls things down, people.

With the rifle held in the position, then peek through the scope. Ideally, you would have mechanically centered the reticle already, i.e. counted the clicks from top-bottom and left-right, and dialed in the midway point for both. So, rifle is boresighted, and as you peek through the scope, hopefully you'll see the reticle somewhere on your target.

If you don't, dial it in. If it requires way too much dialing to get your reticle on target while the muzzle/boresight picture has the target pretty much centered, then you may have mismounted the base and/or the rings.

When the reticle is on target while the rifle is also boresighted on the target, then insert the bolt, load and fire a round. Unless it's right where you want it, then aim exactly as you did on the first shot (presumably on a bullseye or target dot of some kind), and while keeping the rifle steady, dial the windage/elevation to move the reticle to intersect your first bullet hole. Fire again. Should be just about spot on.

Two shots to zero at 100y. If you're burning through a box of rounds trying to get on paper, you're wasting time and money, and people who read this website are supposed to know sh*t from shinola.
 
"86": The 20 moa base is acting against the off-set inserts. The .010"'s just aren't enough to account for the 20 moa base. Replace the base with a standard "flat" base, and use the off-sets to fix the windage problem.

When I sight-in a newly mounted scope, I do as Nate said, remove the bolt, center the bore on the aiming point, then adjust the crosshairs as necessary to center. But, I start at 50 yards, usually have it close to center with my first 2 shots, then move out to 100 yards. I also use a 36" square, plain white, piece of paper. I've seen installations that could not record hits even at that close of a distance, and with target paper only slightly smaller, like 24" square. Now, there were some serious problems there. :(

With that much windage correction required sounds like your base mount screw holes on the top of the receiver are not in line with the bore.

If the off-sets aren't enough to correct it (I wish Burris would make .020" off-sets available for 30mm rings), a Redfield or Leupold base mount with the dovetail Burris Signatures may be required to correct the windage. If so, then you still would have the offsets for more control over elevation.

I like to keep my optics centered, or very close to centered when sighted-in so I have plenty of adjustment remaining in all directions, but more importantly, to keep me centered, or close to the center of the lens.

Just some of the "things" that have worked for me, for many years & scope installations.

p.s.: You can also use the .10" offsets in the rear ring, only in your case the +.10" would be on the bottom.
 
"86"
Here's another suggestion with what Frank mentioned, if you're not in a big hurry .. EGW machined 10 MOA off my base, I had a elevation problem with their 20 MOA base also.. I talked with their Tech, I think it was around ~$20.00..

Steve
 
I am currently having an issue with a Savage BVSS in 223. I installed a EGW omoa base and Burris Signature Zee rings. I could not get her on paper . Shooting way left. I then installed the + & - 10 inserts in the front. Still way off. So i installed the + & - also in the back. This got me zeroed with 69SMK's and there is only 33 clicks left of right windage. With my 55 grain ballistic tip load i again run out of clicks. The scope is a Leupold var X III with the varmint hunters reticle 30mm tube. I took the rings off and turned them around 180 degrees per the Burris tech. I have a total of 20moa in the inserts and the complete windage adjustment used up. Im wondering if something could be wrong with my scope???? :o :o :-\ :-\
 

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
164,759
Messages
2,183,719
Members
78,507
Latest member
Rabbit hole
Back
Top