OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc. Homepage SWFA     SampleList.com
Forum Home Forum Home > Mounts & Accessories > Rings and bases
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Rings for Savage Mark 11
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials.

Rings for Savage Mark 11

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
ti-force View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: August/28/2008
Location: Georgia
Status: Offline
Points: 195
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ti-force Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Rings for Savage Mark 11
    Posted: December/12/2010 at 16:31
 Does anyone know if the Talley Lightweight aluminum Savage 93R rings will work with a Mark 11? I've recently purchased a Mark 11 chambered in .17 HM2 and I need some rings for it. It's the newer E receiver if that makes a difference. These are the rings I'm interested in.

Thanks!
Back to Top
The Apostle View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: August/20/2009
Location: Adelaide, S.A.
Status: Offline
Points: 409
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Apostle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/13/2010 at 03:49
Yes they'll fit even if you had a Mark II with the old superceded receiver...
John Howard: "We will find any means we can to further restrict them because I hate guns...ordinary citizens should not have weapons. We do not want the American disease imported into Australia"...
Back to Top
ti-force View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: August/28/2008
Location: Georgia
Status: Offline
Points: 195
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ti-force Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/13/2010 at 07:03
Originally posted by The Apostle The Apostle wrote:

Yes they'll fit even if you had a Mark II with the old superceded receiver...


Nice. Thanks for the info my friend   
Back to Top
The Apostle View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: August/20/2009
Location: Adelaide, S.A.
Status: Offline
Points: 409
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Apostle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/14/2010 at 16:24
The only difference between the old and new receiver is the distance between the 2 sets of screw holes on the top of the receiver.
John Howard: "We will find any means we can to further restrict them because I hate guns...ordinary citizens should not have weapons. We do not want the American disease imported into Australia"...
Back to Top
stickbow46 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: January/07/2009
Location: Benton, Pa
Status: Offline
Points: 4678
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stickbow46 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/14/2010 at 18:11
I also think there is a difference in the ejection port size:Old one is 1 & 3/8",the new one I beleive is 1 & 5/8".This would probably only make a difference when you want a 1 piece picatinney rail to use on a 30mm scope!
Pearls of Wisdom are Heard not Spoken
Back to Top
ti-force View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: August/28/2008
Location: Georgia
Status: Offline
Points: 195
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ti-force Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/14/2010 at 19:45
 Again, thanks for the info guys, I really appreciate it. Now I hope my scope fits without issue. I'm planning to mount a Sightron S2 Big Sky, 3-9x42 with the Talley low rings. If Sightron and Talley state accurate dimensions, the objective end of my scope has a diameter of 1.99", the Talley rings are supposed to measure .400" from the top of my receiver to the bottom of the inside of the rings.

 The scope tube diameter divided by 2 = .5", the objective diameter divided by 2 = .995", and the distance from the top of receiver to the inside bottom of either ring is .4", so clearance between the bottom of the objective and the top of the receiver = (.995 - .5) - .4, or .095". My Mark 11 has a heavy barrel, which measures .062" below the top of the receiver, so on paper I should have a total clearance of .157" from the top of the barrel to the bottom of the objective end of the scope. Maybe I should measure my scope to see how close Sightron's published dimensions are.

 I really need to measure the thickness of the scope cap to see if it's going to fit after the scope's mounted Bucky.

 Oh well, if it doesn't fit, that might be a good excuse to try out one of the Vortex Viper 2-7x32's Big Grin.


Edited by ti-force - December/14/2010 at 19:51
Back to Top
The Apostle View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: August/20/2009
Location: Adelaide, S.A.
Status: Offline
Points: 409
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Apostle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/15/2010 at 00:42
Originally posted by stickbow46 stickbow46 wrote:

I also think there is a difference in the ejection port size:Old one is 1 & 3/8",the new one I beleive is 1 & 5/8".This would probably only make a difference when you want a 1 piece picatinney rail to use on a 30mm scope!
 
Such as an Evolution Gun Works (EGW) rail...make sure you get the right one as there's 2 to choose from...one for the old style Mark II receiver (small port) and one for the new style Mark II/93/17 series receiver (large port).
John Howard: "We will find any means we can to further restrict them because I hate guns...ordinary citizens should not have weapons. We do not want the American disease imported into Australia"...
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.110 seconds.