Picatinny rail

bob_dobalina

Handloader
Oct 6, 2009
343
49
I don't know much about picatinny rails but they seem to be pretty popular. Why would you put one on say a bolt action Tikka T3 hunting rifle? What advantage does that give you over plain old rings and bases? Any disadvantages (like scope height)?
 
From my standpoint they allow me more adjustment for scope placement. My scopes are mounted forward and in the past with a conventional mount, one of the rings would inhibit movement forward. They are stronger than two piece mounts, and may provide a more ridged platform for the scope. They also provide a single platform for various sizes of objective lenses's without having to worry about clearance. I have one on each of my 4 primary hunting rifles.
The downside is that because they are one piece, they do reduce the space available for loading bolt action rifles.
 
They seem most useful on long-range/precision rifles, which is how I've used them for many years. I have a rail on my 308 "Green Machine" which was my SWAT rifle for 12 years, and one on my .300 WSM long-range hunting rifle.

Never really saw any need for the rail on a general-purpose hunting rifle. The rail seems a little bulky to me, on a sleek sporter rifle. There are other, smaller, bases and rings that work very well on general purpose hunting rifles.

But hey, if you want one, go for it! (y)

Regards, Guy
 
Well I decided to try one and I am attempting to mount a scope on a rail myself. I've never done much of any gunsmith work myself before and may end up just taking this to my gunsmith on Monday but want to get this done.

The rail is firmly pushed onto a flat Tikka T3 receiver top, but no screws have been tightened, I can see a sliver of daylight between the rail and the receiver. This doesn't seem ideal. I imagine it will go away when tightened to proper torque specs, but what do you guys think? Does the rail need bedded? Should I go a different direction on scope mounts?

I would definitely consider standard mounts. I'm using Warne Low rings, which are .25" from bottom to where the scope sits. This rail is about .24" thick where the rings sit. So the scope is sitting about .5" above the receiver with this setup. It could come down quite a bit with my 44m scope before hitting the barrel. I compared this setup with Talley LW lows, and they were about the same height - think it's worth trying a different setup to get the scope lower? I wouldn't mind it lower for how it fits me. Not sure what setup would sit lower.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20170930_121651540.jpg
    IMG_20170930_121651540.jpg
    203.8 KB · Views: 833
  • IMG_20170930_121752037.jpg
    IMG_20170930_121752037.jpg
    120.8 KB · Views: 833
From my standpoint they allow me more adjustment for scope placement. My scopes are mounted forward and in the past with a conventional mount, one of the rings would inhibit movement forward. They are stronger than two piece mounts, and may provide a more ridged platform for the scope. They also provide a single platform for various sizes of objective lenses's without having to worry about clearance. I have one on each of my 4 primary hunting rifles.
The downside is that because they are one piece, they do reduce the space available for loading bolt action rifles.

Can't say it better than that.

Just in case you don't want to do much gunsmithing, these screw right on.

http://www.egwguns.com/tikka/
 
I went to a Picatinny rail with steel rings on the 338 RUM. Wow, it's rock solid.
Going with the same setup on the 280 AI. This will cover my long range rifles.

JD338
 
Back
Top