Tikka shooters- Mount the scope to the factory dovetail, or add a picatinny rail?

I understand that having quality rings is good in this situation, but what exactly do those scope brands provide in this scenario that Leupold, Vortex, or other common scope manufacturers don't? (for the record, I am in fact mounting a NF)
Two things here - some scopes have thicker/more robust main tubes that allow increased ring torque. Not all brands or even models within a brand are created equal.

Separately, and independent of main tube thickness, is the demonstrated ability of those scopes to actually hold zero after repeated drops and even just riding in the back of vehicles. Sadly, Leupold and Vortex and MOST other scopes don't tend to hold zero. I think these viral drop tests are causing the industry to take notice and my hope is that one day most manufacturers will produce scopes that reliably track and hold zero in hunting conditions.

Queue the gold ring fanboy backlash :whistle:
 
UM Rings are bulky. SWFA turrets are massive. That's especially my complaint about UM rings. I'm not sure either will stay on the rifle when I get a new barrel spun on.
View attachment 400559
They’re very good scopes, but I agree with the turrets. Way too bulky for what I prefer in a hunting rifle. I know there’s many who disagree, and that’s fine too.

I do like the rings even if they are a little bulky, especially the 1” micro height.
 
Also, not sure they have fixed it, but despite the bulk Unknown Munitions has stated their rings are only appropriate for 7PRC and lower cartridges. Apparently their recoil pins were bending with 30 cal magnums. Surprising to hear for me as I have several pair and they seem rock solid.

Given that info, I see no reason to not go with Sportsmatch at half the price and less weight.
 
Also, not sure they have fixed it, but despite the bulk Unknown Munitions has stated their rings are only appropriate for 7PRC and lower cartridges. Apparently their recoil pins were bending with 30 cal magnums. Surprising to hear for me as I have several pair and they seem rock solid.

Given that info, I see no reason to not go with Sportsmatch at half the price and less weight.

Torque to UM new torque spec of 55 IP and done. Nothing to do with the design or limitation of UM rings, only torque setting. Sportsmatch are slipping at 38 on some calibers.

For the Tikka dovetail, you need enough (more) torque to prevent slipping. UM hardware is strong enough for that torque.
 
Last edited:
Torque to UM new torque spec of 55 IP and done. Nothing to do with the design or limitation of UM rings, only torque setting. Sportsmatch are slipping at 38 on some calibers.

For the Tikka dovetail, you need enough (more) torque to prevent slipping. UM hardware is strong enough for that torque.
Did they test that as the solution? I lost that thread but they were even talking about a new design with a different mounting mechanism.
 
I was a long time sportsmatch/UM direct mount to rail guy. I'm leaning more towards a pic rail with good pic rings these days. Never had an issue attributed to direct mount rings but the hardware on sportsmatch is kind of lousy and strips easy. And I just like being able to swap scopes on off rifles easier with pic rings.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
118,274
Messages
2,187,547
Members
38,504
Latest member
tom_89
Back
Top