Warne QD scope mounts marking scope

aaronbott

Well-Known Member
Hi all, just bought a new set of warne QD 30mm scope mounts for my new duralyt scope. Mounted the rings using the method outlined by warne ie torque the lower bolts to 25 inch/lbs then finally make small movements to position scope. Once done the torque top bolts to same torque settings. I have even bought the dedicated torgue wrench to make sure i got it right! (sad I know but beer and internet shopping is a bad thing!!!)
Imagine horror when found that one of the mounts had marked the paint on the top of the scope where it joins together. Now have new scope with 2 marks on the top of it where these mounts have left a mark.

Has anyone else had this issue with the warne scope rings ?

Thanks

Aaron
 

bewsher500

Well-Known Member
i personally will only buy two piece mounts with a horizontal join for this reason
they are well made but i find the design fundamentally flawed

email them
 

XYZ

Well-Known Member
The issue I have is that I found it a bugger to get the crosshairs level with the vertical mounts. Why anyone thought it would be a good idea to make them this way is beyond me. I will be changing mine very soon to mounts with a horizontal clamp.
 

DanTheMan

Well-Known Member
Did not have this issue with my Warne QD's and they have had a few scopes in them, will you notice the mark when it's mounted ?
 

devon deer stalker

Well-Known Member
Yep, they did the same to my scope, I was never happy with them and changed them in the end to Leupold, no problems since then.
Cheers
Richard
 

paul o'

Well-Known Member
think QD stands for quick damage ? done my scope no favours scatch the scope! now looks two bob not £600 sightron!! now all for sale new and used gone back to optilocks
 
Last edited:

Brithunter

Well-Known Member
Sadly not all scope tubes are of the same size diameter. Often one can find that they are not even parallel being larger one end than the other. I wonder how many actually measure their scopes tube along it's length?

Although I have never used Warne rings I detest the vertically split rings. As already mentioned they are a PITA to get the scope just right :banghead: . Yes I have tried a couple of makes with the vertical split and simply detest them.

Scopes nowadays all seem to be painted rather than anodised and this paint marks much easier. It seems to me just another cost saving idea yet the cost saving does not seem to have been passed on to the customer!

Another thing to check of course when scope mounting is that the holes for the bases are actually in line. Despite the much vaunted use of CNC machinery this still seems to be an issue on occasions. If the bases are not in perfect alignment then scope tube marking will be inevitable.
 

deerstalker.308

Well-Known Member
I don't understand this issue with vertically split rings? I have Talley mounts and they were no problem at all to get the scope aligned? Can't speak from experience on the warne ones, but I don't particularly like their stuff anyway, always seems over priced and way too chunky for my liking.
 

Brithunter

Well-Known Member
I don't understand this issue with vertically split rings? I have Talley mounts and they were no problem at all to get the scope aligned? Can't speak from experience on the warne ones, but I don't particularly like their stuff anyway, always seems over priced and way too chunky for my liking.

I don't understand why they are such a PITA either but compared to the more usual horizontally splint rings the ones I have tried and those still fitted to rifles that are vertically split have proved far more hassle to get the scope correctly aligned.

​I have to agree that a lot of modern mounts look like blocks of metal added as an after thought.
 

bewsher500

Well-Known Member
I don't understand this issue with vertically split rings? I have Talley mounts and they were no problem at all to get the scope aligned? Can't speak from experience on the warne ones, but I don't particularly like their stuff anyway, always seems over priced and way too chunky for my liking.


you are relying on tolerance of two independent engineers
the clamping force on the dovetail should not be dependant or linked to the clamping force on the tube
you are either clamping one poorly of relying on the flex of the ring...neither is a good design
 

deerstalker.308

Well-Known Member
you are relying on tolerance of two independent engineers
the clamping force on the dovetail should not be dependant or linked to the clamping force on the tube
you are either clamping one poorly of relying on the flex of the ring...neither is a good design

But they aren't on the talley rings, you can remove them from the rifle without loosening the grip on the scope, the clamping mechanism is separate.....?
 

bewsher500

Well-Known Member
But they aren't on the talley rings, you can remove them from the rifle without loosening the grip on the scope, the clamping mechanism is separate.....?

​Are yours like this?

talley-rings-1-inch-low-fixed.jpg


or this?

talley-one-inch-cz-550-screw-lock-detachable-for-dovetail-setup.jpg


suspect the latter
we are all talking about the top design I think
 

User00026

Well-Known Member
I've used a bunch of warne mounts and have never had any issues with them, in fact, I swear by them. get to understand vertical splits and they are actually easy enough to install and adjust.

I have also used the QD's and found them returning to zero very very well indeed!

I have never had any marks from rings, but one thing I have always done different is never to tighten the bottom screws fully first. Warne's are always a bit small for their stated diameter, so need to 'stretch' a bit, hence, when you tigthen the bottom fully and then the top, the top's with struggle to make it over the horizon so to speak, and may leave a scratch. tighten the bottom one's 75%, then the top 75% then both the last 25% to fully tight, and they will work sweet.

the problem here is the instructions are flawed;)
 
Top