I have been involved in mounting several Farrel bases on friend's long range rifles - the problem I mention is related to the fact that the Picatinny spec cross-slots do not go from one end of the base to the other like Badgers and Nears do. The centeral portion of the top of the base does not have cross-slots, the ones we had all had the Farrel name engraved there on a flat. Unfortunately, the flat space buggers up the matching (spacing) of the picatinny spec slots. If you went from front to back, they are correct initially, (the width, depth and spacing work) then the space in the middle, then the rear set of slots which are slightly out of alignment. If we take off a scope with rings set for Badgers or Nears, liine up the front cross-bolt, the back one will not fit into a slot - they will not match the Farrels. When I do this with Badgers or Nears the fit is perfect every time.
Not a biggie if you stay with Ken's bases, although we did have some discrepancies with matching among older and newer models.
Our Badger and Near bases let us switch any scope, the ring spacing fits the cross-slots perfectly from rifle to rifle regardless of Winchester, Remington, Savage or whatever.
You pays your money and you gets your stuff - Farrels are nice looking bases that work fine, but in our experience they do not let us go back and forth with our Badgers and Nears. His scope rings are nicely made, but do not use the standard 1/2 nut that most other tactical rings use - I happen to prefer the 1/2 nut for torqueing the 65 inch pounds with - we all have our little preferances.
Have had several guys order Ken's bases and flat out got the wrong base - this was fixed promptly but caused some wasted time - possible that the guys blew the order initially too, not sure about that.
In no way do I feel that they are not nicely machined and finished - all of his stuff is and he maintains reasonable pricing. Plus he is a nice person to talk to.