Did a quick search and found a few folks mentioning this, but didn’t see a thread that posted a resolution or definitive answer, so…
I have a Cayden I acquired recently from another member, but can’t mount a scope properly. Now, I’m no stranger to mounting optics, I’ve been a PB shooter for decades and never had any issue, but this one’s a head scratcher.
I’m using a set of Leupold MK4 steel picatinny rings. They’ll both mount to the rear rail (behind the breech), but the rail forward of the breech is of a different dimension than picatinny or Weaver, based on appearances. External dimensions of both Weaver and Picatinny are the same, but the slot dimensions are different. I don’t have a problem with the crossbolts seating, but rather the clamp doesn’t fit on the forward rail. I tried both available slots, and with both the ring doesn’t fit properly as the angle edge sits too low. I’ve attached several photos to show what I’m talking about.
The first photo shows that the corner angle of the two rail portions are at different heights.
The second photo shows how that angled corner is lower on the front rail portion than the picatinny rail at the rear.
Here’s a ring properly seated on the rear rail, showing the dimensions are correct.
These next two show that the front rail won’t permit the ring to fully seat because that corner is located too far down relative to the top of the rail. The ring begins to seat on one side, meaning the crossbolt fits tbe slot, but because the angled corner isn’t in the proper location, the ring can’t settle in on the other side. First photo is the rear of two notches, second photo is the forward slot allowing a better view of the ring’s relation to the rail.
And finally, the dinensions of both Pic and Weaver rails. These Leupold rings have a thinner crossbolt that allows their use on both sizes of slots.
Has anyone seen this before? I can’t use just the real rail as the scope isn’t far enough forward to establish a proper eye relief, and a cantilever mount won’t work as it wouldn’t allow the mag to seat fully. Am I looking at a warranty claim from Benjamin here? I’m not the original buyer, so I’m not sure what they’ll do, but either way the rifle is unusable to me in its present condition. Any suggestions would be appreciated, maybe I’m somehow overlooking the obvious and just need another set of eyes to help me figure it out. Thanks!
I have a Cayden I acquired recently from another member, but can’t mount a scope properly. Now, I’m no stranger to mounting optics, I’ve been a PB shooter for decades and never had any issue, but this one’s a head scratcher.
I’m using a set of Leupold MK4 steel picatinny rings. They’ll both mount to the rear rail (behind the breech), but the rail forward of the breech is of a different dimension than picatinny or Weaver, based on appearances. External dimensions of both Weaver and Picatinny are the same, but the slot dimensions are different. I don’t have a problem with the crossbolts seating, but rather the clamp doesn’t fit on the forward rail. I tried both available slots, and with both the ring doesn’t fit properly as the angle edge sits too low. I’ve attached several photos to show what I’m talking about.
The first photo shows that the corner angle of the two rail portions are at different heights.
The second photo shows how that angled corner is lower on the front rail portion than the picatinny rail at the rear.
Here’s a ring properly seated on the rear rail, showing the dimensions are correct.
These next two show that the front rail won’t permit the ring to fully seat because that corner is located too far down relative to the top of the rail. The ring begins to seat on one side, meaning the crossbolt fits tbe slot, but because the angled corner isn’t in the proper location, the ring can’t settle in on the other side. First photo is the rear of two notches, second photo is the forward slot allowing a better view of the ring’s relation to the rail.
And finally, the dinensions of both Pic and Weaver rails. These Leupold rings have a thinner crossbolt that allows their use on both sizes of slots.
Has anyone seen this before? I can’t use just the real rail as the scope isn’t far enough forward to establish a proper eye relief, and a cantilever mount won’t work as it wouldn’t allow the mag to seat fully. Am I looking at a warranty claim from Benjamin here? I’m not the original buyer, so I’m not sure what they’ll do, but either way the rifle is unusable to me in its present condition. Any suggestions would be appreciated, maybe I’m somehow overlooking the obvious and just need another set of eyes to help me figure it out. Thanks!
