http://www.talleymanufacturing.com/Products/Lightweight-Alloy-Scope-Mount/Ruger/1-Ruger-American-Rimfire-(Low).aspx

May work, I believe they have the same screw spacing as #18 Weaver Mount.
No real help but I just superglued a set of #12 Weaver mounts on my 514. They held very well. Took several good hits to knock them off when I decided to remove them.

KM

 

Sir..... I have two sets each of B -Square Sport Series Utility rings with one extension ring. That's two low#21052 sets, and two Medium #21054 sets. They are for Weaver bases. The ring set the scope back or forward about an inch. I can list them in the Trading Post if you are interested.

 

I have the B -Square Sport Series Utility rings #21054 also. I tried them but they would not line up with the rifle barrel. When looking down on the scope from the top, the scope was pointing off to the left of the barrel. I tried remounting the rings several times and as soon as I tried to tighten the rings to the scope it would point to the side of the barrel. I gave up and they're in my "junk" box now. I discovered the problem while trying to boresight the scope with the new rings. The scope was pointing 3 feet to the left at 25 yards. I'm going to need medium height rings as the scope has a 44mm objective.

 

Weaver makes extension rings. They have a sets that either come with both rings being extension or with one regular and one extended ring. Just purchased a set to mount an old Burris on a 541-T.

 

I wonder if the grooves in the Remington Rimfire receivers are aligned with the barrels very well. I've had alignment problems with my 513T, my 541S, and my 581. Ive used Redfield, BKL, Weaver, Leupold,ETC. I now have Burris Signature Zee rings on Weaver bases and use the offset inserts to be centered at 100yds with my .22s.
Just out of curiosity, did you reverse the standard ring on the B-Square set and try it that way?

 

At one time the Weaver extension rings only came in high models. Brownells have (or had) 'em in stock. Here's my 39A with rear extension ring holding an old Bausch & Lomb 1.5-6X scope

 

Try the "BKL" web site,..They might be able to help !!!

 

Finally got new scope bases.

Well, I finally got my 1948 Model 514 back from the gunsmith. I've probably already told the story that the first gunsmith mounted the rear scope mount (split Weaver #13) crooked. So I took it to another gunsmith. He welded the holes and drilled new ones. He said he put Warne #16 bases in it. However, it seems that he redrilled the front scope mount, not the rear. When he sanded down the weld he also sanded off some of the metal from the top of the receiver. Then he told me he bore sighted the scope at 25 yds. The whole idea was to fix the eye relief using this scope (Hi-Lux Leatherwood 4-16x44) on this rifle. Thus the cantilevered scope ring. When I got the rifle back after 3 months, the cantilevered rings were on the front base and the eyepiece was directly over the bolt. At this point should I assume he knew what he was doing.

OK...I took the rifle to the range, as is, to zero the scope (Hi-Lux Leatherwood 4-16x44) at 100 yds. First I tried to check the zero at 25 yds. - I couldn't hit the paper at 25 yds. (8-inch target). I aimed at a stick on the berm (100 yds.) and discovered the POI was three feet to the right and four feet down from the POA. I adjusted the scope until I hit the stick. The turrets were extremely hard to turn. I now placed targets (1.5 x 1.5 in.) at 100 yds and using CCI Velocitors I put holes through all three tiny targets.

O yes, while at the range, an observer friend of mine looked at the rifle and showed me that the front ring was lower than the rear ring. The scope objective was tilted down toward the barrel. That's why the turrets were bottomed out. Thus "hard to turn". I could have damaged the scope if I had kept torquing them.

Since that trip to the range I have remounted and checked the bases to insure they are square. put the cantilevered ring on the rear, shimmed up the front ring (.045 in.), and remounted the scope with the eyepiece further back on the rifle and manually bore sighted it at 25 yds. (see picture). The stock for this rifle has a flat comb and that was the whole reason I needed the scope mounted more to the rear.

So, I believe I'm back in business. I'll take it to the range next week and see if I have corrected everything. I know the scope is parallel to the bore and the scope is 1.54 inches bore to scope centers. I measured it with calipers. And after all this; this is a BDC/Mildot scope and the BDC is intended for a .308 or.223 rifle. And the Mildot is only accurate at 10X magnification. I may end up getting a new scope if I can't make this one work for me.

.

 

Looking forward to hearing the results. I own a 514 on which I've thought about putting a scope.

 

Model 514

I used to collect Remington .22 rifles, and quit in about 1989 when I got divorced ( that is why I can remember the year I quit collecting). There are many different variations of this model 514. I have an early variation made in the second year of production--- 1949. I have what I call the intermediate variety made in 1956. Then there is the late variety made in 1965. The later variety is easy to tell because it has a straight pencil thin barrel. There are variations due to chromed and non- chromed bolts, different trigger guards, different safety shapes etc---. I think I have 25- Rem .22 rifles in my safe, almost all I have not shot. I gave 2 to my son years ago. The only 22 I shoot off and on are a 511 of 1951 vintage and a BDL 572 I bought new in 1977. I promised my present wife of 23 years I would sell some of them when I retired 3 1/2 years ago, I lied. Cant part with the history of them. It is amazing the quality that was put into a single shot .22, that was initially made for the "boys" to use and learn how to shoot. That is why a lot of them are so beat up. I also have a 510 that would pass for "new in box ". The finish from the factory has an orange peel texture.

Almost forgot, I have a model 514 "Boys Carbine". It was made in 1962, the production years for this variation were 1961 to 1964. There was a "Boys Rifle" with a shortened stock, and a standard stock length "Carbine" with a shorter barrel. But the boys carbine has a short stock and barrel. The problem with this boys carbine is that the plastic but plate has a piece missing out of it. That smaller than normal 514 but plate must be very hard to find , as I have ben looking for one for the better part of 10 years. The way I can remember 10 years, is that I bought it for my grandson when he was 4, and he is now 14. Besides he liked my 521 T better, so he got that one instead. I guess it was quite an upgrade for him.