Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

weaver / picatinny question

  • 09-04-2014 11:09pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 837 ✭✭✭


    Is there such thing as true picatinny rings??

    I have bought a Warne picatinny rail. Picatinny rails seem to be available in abundance from most base manufacturers. However most rings are listed as "weaver type".

    Now I learned the difference between the 2x systems on here before and I have discovered that my burris signature rings which are listed as weaver; do fit my rail.... However there is a little front to back movement.

    I've been advised to push the rings to the front of their slot before torquing accordingly, but I'm wondering if any of the manufacturers make a "true" picatinny ring with which I'll have no front to back movement? ? Is this even an issue? Is a little movement to be expected?

    Please settle my curiosity?


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,805 ✭✭✭juice1304


    Once they are torqued down there should be no movement at all. They are pretty much the same.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 28,697 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cass


    Makes no difference.

    The reason for pushing them forward is the backward movement of the rifle under recoil. If the rings are pushed forward then they cannot"slip" forward any further. As said above if they are pushed forward and torqued down there won't be a bother.
    Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County

    If you see a problem post use the report post function. Click on the three dots on the post, select "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.

    Moderators - Cass otmmyboy2 , CatMod - Shamboc , Admins - Beasty , mickeroo



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 837 ✭✭✭Robotack


    Cass wrote: »
    Makes no difference.

    The reason for pushing them forward is the backward movement of the rifle under recoil. If the rings are pushed forward then they cannot"slip" forward any further. As said above if they are pushed forward and torqued down there won't be a bother.

    Thanks for the replies. Just purely curious though if rings are available with lugs / pins that fully occupy all of the space inside the picatinny groove? I'm guessing though that the tolerances would have to be minute to make such a ring worthwhile.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 28,697 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cass


    There probably is, but i'd say most manufacturers just make them Weaver as it suits both types of rails. The cost of making, marketing and selling picatinny specific might be more than it's worth.

    As for the actual difference i believe it's in the region of 0.6mm per recoil groove. That is the width of the groove only and not the spacing between them.
    Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County

    If you see a problem post use the report post function. Click on the three dots on the post, select "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.

    Moderators - Cass otmmyboy2 , CatMod - Shamboc , Admins - Beasty , mickeroo



Advertisement