Top Quality at a good price
I put these rings on one of my Marlin 25's and they fit perfectly. These are robust rights with a durable finish. Many .22 rings are lightly made and sloppy. These rings set the standard.
Good Rings
Fit scope & dove tail base perfectly
Nce Quality
When installing a 3 x 9 x 40 scope on a Marlin 22 found that standard .22 rings were not high enough for the scope to clear the barrel. Was pleased to see the quality of these rings as well as the ease of installing. After mounting when checking the boresight only minor adjustment was needed.
Quality Quality
The fact that these rings will fit both sizes of .22 dovetails (do not expect them to fit weaver / picatinny rails, they are NOT intended to do so) makes it so you need only need one stock item on the shelf not two for these jobs. These rings are top quality. A BIG plus is the "clamp" section does NOT foul the bolt handle as some other makes do. The need for windage adjustment should never be a concern, this feature only produces a ring that has a lack of rigidity and strength. Added to the fact they are cheaper than a very similar brand of rings I cannot speak too highly about them.
Fits great looks great.
I have tried two other sets of rings and they did not fit correct, windage was off by six feet at 100 yards. These were dead on!! I installed these on a CZ-USA 455 American 22lr/17hmr combo with 11mm dove tail rail. Shipping was very quick.
High Quality
- Well made - Elegant design - Fits both 11mm and 3/8" dovetails - Does NOT fit a Weaver dovetail and is not intended to. - Very pleased with these ringmounts.
Very nice for all steel rings
Plenty high enough for a 42mm objective. Great holding.
excellent rings
Top quality, adaptable to European 11mm or American Standard 3/8" dovetail dimensions. Finish and fit are precise. Use matted rings on matted receivers and gloss rings on highly polished receivers for best appearance.
The design is flawed
Out of the package they look very nice, good finish etc... When taking the screws out of the rings, one screw was tight, too tight. There was either a piece of metal or the screw was over torqued, and there was a little damage to the thread on that screw. It was no big deal and cleaned up with the touch of a file.
Because the top portion of the rings are longer than 180*, they have to be stretched open around the tube of the scope. They are springy enough, but one of the rings scratched the tube in the process. Therein lies the flaw. They should have chamfered the inside edges of the square corners for accommodating that slide over the barrel, or a thin piece of Teflon strip for the install. I was as careful as I could be realizing the potential for this to happen, but it still scratched it. Other than that, they fit on my model 60 Marlin without any additional tools or parts.
If you have a 40mm. bell on your scope, 1" tube, and you intend to leave the rear sight on, you will need to get the 1.115 variant. To get eye relief correct, I had to remove my sight. I got the .99 height one. That's alright though, because the scope is real low to the bore and seems to fit the rifle very well.
Not so great for my purposes...
Well, I pretty much use Warne rings exclusively; it goes without saying that I'm normally more than satisfied with their products. I bought these rings to use with the supplied rail for a Ruger 10-22. The attachment "legs" of these rings are an odd size. They are far too small to fit a Weaver/picatinny rail. On the 10-22, there's a second smaller rail that they did fit well enough to use the scope on the gun, but they were still too small to attach properly; they tilted the scope, and I don't believe the scope was centered to the bore line. Yes, I was able to use the scope, but I never felt right about it and ended up switching to some Leupold rings that fit the Weaver rail properly. Perhaps these were designed to fit another size of rail that I'm not familiar with? Even with a differently sized rail width, I'd still question whether or not the scope was centered to the bore line. Other than all of that, the materials and craftsmanship were typical of Warne's superior quality. I still intend to turn to Warne as my first choice for mounts; unfortunately, these rings leave me wondering if I missed a memo somewhere???
