Leupold Mark 4 Steel versus Aluminum rings comparison, Remounting the SWFA SS

I've had Leupold Mark 4 rings in the past, and though I found them to be excellent rings, I'd since gotten used to uni-mounts like ADM, AI, and Spuhr.  Recently though, I've been obsessing over a few clone builds which have brought be back again to the two piece rings again.  It started with the ARMS mounts for my Mk12 build, and recently I had the itch to give my M14 and 700p (I know, not even close to an M24 clone) a little attention.  

The Mark 4s aren't cheap, and for a bit more, you can get yourself into an ADM mount, so $195 was a hard pill to swallow.....twice.  One of these are steel, and the other is aluminum, and I couldn't really find a comparison online, so here are a few pics of them side-by-side.  

The steel rings on the left are marked with the Leupold logo on the ring cap.  The steel one appears different, and my guess is probably a different finish like a blue or park job.  The aluminum ones might be hard anodized?  Just a guess, if anyone knows better, let me know.

I bought one steel and one aluminum not because I had planned on it, but it was what was available for the height I wanted and it actually worked out perfectly.  The aluminum "medium" rings were for my 700P and the reason I say it worked out perfect was because the base I ended up using was aluminum.  I've read that steel rings should be used on steel bases and aluminum rings can be used on both.  The reason is because if you crank down steel rings onto an aluminum base, it may damage/destroy/deform the softer aluminum base.  I haven't heard of problems using aluminum rings on steel bases.

Here's a good read about steel and aluminum.

You should be aware that Leupold's height standard different from other manufacturers.  For example, the steel ring on the left is considered "high" and the one on the right is considered "medium", however I found that Leupold's "medium" is the equivalent to SWFA's "low" rings.

The nuts on the cross screws are slightly different, but the same size.

From the bottom, they look virtually the same.

Under the light, you can see the ribs cut into the inside of the rings.  

Originally, I planned to use these Leupold two piece steel bases, but found that the front base was slightly off and I couldn't get the front base to be level with the rear base.  It's a good thing I didn't crank down on the scope itself while it was in the rings, otherwise it probably would have left some nasty ring marks.

Off came the two piece base and on went the Weaver Tactical aluminum one-piece base.

There wasn't a lot of clearance, but it worked out in the end.

SWFA SS 10x42mm Mil-Quad Reticle and Primary Arms 30mm low rings

My 700P’s been without glass for a while but as I have a few other precision rigs, the 700P wasn’t a huge priority.  I wanted to keep my 700P as plain as possible, and though I didn’t need a huge magnification range for long distance, I wanted to get something that I was used to, something will a mil reticle and mil adjustments. 

My buddy Alex recommended I try the SWFA SS 10x42mm with the Mil-Quad reticle.  Apart from my Elcan C79 3.4x, I’d never had a fixed power scope and I wasn’t sure I’d be comfortable with using one.  But I’d heard good things about it so I decided to give it a try.

The scope was sold by Primary Arms, the same company that sells scopes of the same brand. 

http://93zj.blogspot.ca/2017/08/pa-scope.html 

The entry level Primary Arms scopes are just that, entry level.  Made in China, mushy controls and a very ugly overall appearance.  They might even be clones of the made in China Falcon line of scopes.  It is however first focal plane and the glass is of decent quality.  The reticle is crisp and fine, with a bullet drop built in.

Anyway, the “Super Sniper” 10x42mm has a bit of history, originally designed and sold by Tasco, apparently built for military applications, though I've seen very few pictures of these on military rifles "in the wild".  I found this image, but I'm not even sure it's legit:

Apparently the QC on these went downhill for a few years, along with Tasco’s other offerings, until it was sort of resurrected by SWFA who purchased the super sniper distribution rights and got QC back up to a decent standard.

The scope came in a plain cardboard box, nothing fancy (not expecting much for $299 USD), with the scope wrapped in bubble wrap.  

The scope appears to be decent quality.  According to Primary Arms, these are manufactured in Japan, though I could not find a manufacture stamp anywhere on the scope.  The finish is a matt black and it appears robust enough.  

The turrets aren’t bad.  The clicks are audible and positive, and the knobs are of a decent size and marked clearly.  After you find your zero, you unscrew the three set screws, lift the cap off and drop it back down to zero and tighten up the set screws again.  

The focus ring is where the magnification ring would normally be.  There is a side focus model for an extra $100, but I just got this one.  

I also ordered a set of Primary Arms 30mm low rings, which appear to be the same design as Millet, Vortex and Burris tactical rings.

The rings are of decent quality for what you pay for.  I would say these are better than the weaver tactical rings.  

Anyway, being in the land of perpetual rain and overcast skies, I didn’t get a chance to get some quality pics of the glass, but there’s a shot of the reticle at least.  I’ll update this when I figure out how to take a decent picture of the glass and see if I can capture the clarity I can see with my eyes.

As far as the scope being fixed a fixed 10x, it wasn’t all that hard to get used to.  It was very pointable, and finding the object/target was fairly quick.  The focus ring was also easy to use and I’m looking forward to trying this scope out when the weather gets better.

Some specs from the factory:

Matte Finish

Patented Mil-Quad Reticle

30mm Tube

Rear Focus

OK for .50 cal

.10 Mrad Turrets

Exit Pupil:  4.2mm

Field of View @ 100m:  3.9m

Rear Parallax Adjustment (m):   10m-Infinity

Eye Relief (in): 3.9

Diopter Compensation:  -2 ~ +1 dpr

Click Adjustment Value:  0.1 MRAD

Adjustment Per Revoultion:  5 Mils

Total Elevation Adjustment:   Mils

Total Windage Adjustment  

 Mils

Type of Reticle:  Mil-Quad

Coating:  Fully Multi Coated

Waterproof:  Yes

Fogproof:  Yes

Shockproof:  Yes

Weight (oz):  18.7

Objective Bell Diamater (A):  49.5mm / 1.949"

Bell Length (B):  119mm / 4.685"

(C):  69mm / 2.716"

Tube Length (D):  148mm / 5.827"

Overall Length (E):  357mm / 14.05"

(F):  49mm / 1.929"

Eyepiece length (G):  90mm / 3.543"

Eyepiece Diameter (H):  46mm / 1.811"

(I):  31.9mm / 1.255"

 Tube Diameter (J):  30mm / 1.181"

Remington M24....the real thing

Although I would love to say that this was my first gun purchase for 2018, I am sad to admit it is not.  My buddy picked up this rifle, one of ten ordered from Wanstalls from Gravel Agency for all of Canada.  That's not to say that there aren't more out there, but from what I understand, these were extremely rare before this, and Wanstalls is of the opinion that the outlook for future examples might be bleak.

This isn't a Remington 700 5R, or a 700 Police, or a custom clone, this folks came directly from Remington as a 7.62 M24.  It's not a refurbished one, or the complete deployment package but a "rifle only" deal that is literally that.  No front sights, no rear sights, no sight base, no Mark 4, no bipod, 1903 sling, cleaning kit or hard case with cut foam.  It's just the rifle, and here are a few pics of it and what it came with:

For a $5k rifle, the packaging sure was discreet.  Just a plain cardboard box from Remington with a hard case inside.

I've never heard of this brand hard case, probably on par with Flambeau rifle cases, but definitely not Pelican or Hardigg.  

Not the typical R700 manual.

Note the rifle does not come with a bipod, that's just a cheap Champion I had laying around.

It was a bit disappointing to shell out $5k and not even get the sight bases.  The barrel is threaded to accept the sight base....if we can source one.  These things are pretty rare though, even on US eBay, so finding one in Canada will require a miracle.

M24 crown.

It's hard to tell, but the M24 barrel profile is definitely beefy and it would definitely not fit in a regular 5R milspec or Police stock.  

It's neat to see 7.62 NATO stamped in the barrel instead of 308 WIN like on my 700P. 

Top view of the barrel and barrel channel.

The M24 mark on the receiver, plus holes for the unique rear sight.  

Even though it's chambered in 7.62, the rifle is built on a 700 long action.

The most notable difference is the HS Precision stock.  The one on the M24 is the PST-024, whereas the one that comes on the 700 Police is the PST-011.  The adjustable length of pull is definitely a nice feature, but I understand that this stock costs huge dollars.

I'm not sure if the bottom metal is the Dakota/Sunny Hill unit, but it's definitely different than the standard Remington one that comes with the 700P

I thought even on the M24, the sling swivels were Uncle Mikes or something like that, but these ones had the Remington "R" logo on it, nice touch.

The M24 trigger is supposedly adjustable, though it comes from the factory at a fairly decent setting.  Unlike the 6.5 lb pull that came on my 6.5cm barrelled action, this one felt more like 3 lbs or so, broke like glass, no creep.  Feels like an excellent trigger and I'll have to measure it properly when I get a chance.

I could have sword the issued M24s didn't use the Remington butt pad, but I'll have to dig around a bit to see if this was the case.

A comparison between a regular 700P (top) and the M24

The coating on the bolt handle for the M24 appears to be thicker, maybe cerakoted?  The one on the Police appears to be a plain parker or phosphate finish?

**update 9Jul18**

The M24s are powder-coated apparently:

http://www.snipercentral.com/u-s-army-m24-sws/

The barrel from the M24 on the left is definitely beefier than the Police barrel

I have no idea what the markings mean on these barrels, but I did notice an "M" on the M24 barrel.

Anyway, I'm going to have to track down the sight bases, but have no idea where to begin.  I might just contact Remington directly, but I heard that the Chou Brothers in Canada have built M24 clones and maybe they'll have a source for some of these hard to find details.