Luepold PRW scope rings!! Anyone used them yet?

drewman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2006
Messages
47
Location
Oregon
Hey all
I'm tooking at bases and rings for my Sendero. I like the Bagder and the Mk4 but they might be out of the budget after the Sendero price tag is taken care of.

So I wondering about the PRW's? But if anyone has any suggestions I am open.

Thanks /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
 
I have a set on a very heavy AR-15 and they work great , they will make some nasty rings on your scope unless you lap the hell out of them. But they are very strong rings.

I would use a base and ring combo from Glenn Seekins , their about halfway between the Leupolds and the Badgers , they will have the Tactical look and function and weigh less because they are made from Aluminum.
 
I have used them on a few personnal guns and i have put them on lots of guns i mount here in the shop. I think they are a great ring, very strong. They have to kinda snap over the scope tube and you can scratch the tube doing this. I like to spray some Rem Oil over the scope tube to minimize scratchs. They are a very strong, sturdy ring.

steve
 
Thats great! I was planning on lapping them but they look like you have to take in a little easy on the lapping or they might not tighten on the scope tube. But thanks for the heads up on the scope ring marks

Drew /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
 
I use them on my Rem 700's as well. They held up on my 300 RUM that was not braked for over 1000 rounds, and now sits on my 7 rem mag with no problems. Very nice, heavy duty rings. I like them. They will leave some marks though when trying to mount, tahts there only downfall. I think there a good compromise between price and durability. I was also looking at the MK4 rings, but I dont think the price will make a difference in performance.
 
I'll second JD, Lap the hell out of them, and they are very good. The lower edge of the top portion of the ring can be lightly rounded so they dont scratch as there slid over the tube.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 18 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top