[obgmc]

I will be getting a Win. 52B (re-issue) soon and need some advice on mounts. I don't care for the Leupold/Redfield dovetail type mounts/rings. What would you suggest I go with? TIA

 

[Mac 1]

Mounts:

Bill;

If you don't care for those systems, you might consider Weaver bases and B-Square Weaver type rings.

I believe you can get them in different heights and they are more stylish, cleaner/smoother than the Weaver rings.

Mac 1.

 

[bigdaddytacp]

As the other post suggest the Weaver style with Burris Zee rings or Millet angle adjust will work but the Weaver's look a bit chunky to me on that gun...I found out that Burris made the Browning marked factory mounts on the first Browning 52 reissues and I got some Leupold bases and rings but also looked at Warne Premier bases and rings...they are very nice and I used them on other guns with good results and they are sleek and different....good luck and good shooting!!

 

[Kent Owens]

When I got my first of these 52-B's I didn't get the bases--I used the Weaver bases off my Knight MK 85 muzzle loader and used millet rings and they worked until I could find the ones made for the rifle (Burris). One thing to note about these rifles is the bolt handle will hit a low mounted scope. I just put a 3.5X10X40MM VariX3 Leupold on one of mine, and with medium rings the scope objective was a little higher of the barrel than I liked. I used a set of Leupold low rings instead--the height looked perfect on the rifle but alas, when you lifted the bolt handle it hit the rear objective of the scope--(just barely, 25 thousandths more would have cleared) so I had to go back to the medium rings.

 

[Doc Sharptail]

Standard Weaver mounts for the Winchester marked rifles are #46 front and rear. If those are too crowded, #402 extension bases will help with eye releif.

I got tired of fooling around with high rings- they don't work well for me on this rifle (admitted stock-crawler ) I took one of those 402 bases, and milled a second slot into it- works like a charm, and I have my 4-12X 40mm A/O in Low Weaver Rings- and no more bolt handle scraping the eyebell of the scope. I know I'm taking a chance with only 2 screws holding that big scope on, but it sure beats what I was doing before! I handle the rifle carefully, anyways- it's my baby...

Regards,

Doc Sharptail

 

[obgmc]

Thanks all!

I appreciate your input gents. As it turns out the only thing I found in stock was the Burris bases. So, I ordered them and Burris med. ht. signature rings from Bruno Shooters Supply. They have excellent pricing by the way. Thanks again to all who advised.

ps:
I will initially mount a Nikon Monarch 5.5-16.5X44 AO scope (Yes I know it will look like hell because of it's size) until I decide on the scope for it. I'm leaning toward the Leupold Compact 3-9X33 AO at the moment. Regards!

 

[Kent Owens]

I have one of the Leupold 3X9X33 EFR's on one of my 52's and a 3.5X10X40 on another. I think you'd be happier with the 3.5X10X40 VariX3--I know I am-it looks right at home on the rifle and the clarity and field of view make it seem like more scope than it actually is. The compacts are very good for a little scope but they aren't quite up to the VariX3--then again a 3.5X10X40 AO costs more too. Good luck whichever you choose--you got a great rifle.