Favorite Scope Rings - BKL or Sportsmatch?

What is everyone's favorite scope ring brand and model and why? I use primarily BKL mounts and like them, but wonder if I should expand my horizons.
As for why I like BKL:
- their base mounts are self-centering (single piece instead of separate moving parts) -- although I'm not sure how much of a problem other rings with have movable retainers
- they seem to have very good holding power. I've not noticed any slippage following the recommended torque settings in the months I've used them, but time will tell.
- they are precision-made (I'm told by BKL) and don't need to be lapped
- they are readily available on Amazon and Gritr for quick shipping with good return policies
 
My preference for scope mounts fragments less along the lines of brand names than it does general construction. For springers, a mount with more fasteners = mo’ better. Seldom if ever need to lap them if the caps have 4 screws and friction tape lining. Though for the very heaviest recoilers and gas rams, I agree a quality trusted name brand is a much better bet than the myriad of $15 budget rings on Amazon.

For PCP’s and other pneumatics, the demands are considerably less. Here, my advice is buy based in the features you want without regard for brand. Of course read the reviews for possible issues, but there will almost always be a good substitute at half or a quarter the price of the premium brand.

By the way, a self-centering feature is no prerequisite for properly mounting a scope. What matters is getting the reticle aligned to the bore, something that can be accomplished with any scope mount by merely clocking (rotating) the scope body.

 
I actually like the UTG Pro line made in the great state of Michigan. Quality stuff

 
  • Like
Reactions: Nico5999
I actually like the UTG Pro line made in the great state of Michigan. Quality stuff


Thanks! I'll check these out. Always a fan of US-designed and manufactured!
Do these feel off-center at all because of the way they mount?
 
My preference for scope mounts fragments less along the lines of brand names than it does general construction. For springers, a mount with more fasteners = mo’ better. Seldom if ever need to lap them if the caps have 4 screws and friction tape lining. Though for the very heaviest recoilers and gas rams, I agree a quality trusted name brand is a much better bet than the myriad of $15 budget rings on Amazon.

For PCP’s and other pneumatics, the demands are considerably less. Here, my advice is buy based in the features you want without regard for brand. Of course read the reviews for possible issues, but there will almost always be a good substitute at half or a quarter the price of the premium brand.

By the way, a self-centering feature is no prerequisite for properly mounting a scope. What matters is getting the reticle aligned to the bore, something that can be accomplished with any scope mount by merely clocking (rotating) the scope body.


Sorry I'm not sure I understand the relationship between the two. The center of the reticle can be leveled properly relative to the bore, but still be off center, correct? Or are you stating that it's more important to be level than to be centered?

I think I might just be OCD!
 
IMG_20221114_184940017_HDR.jpg

IMG_20221114_185000214_HDR.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: BOOMBBQ
Here is the affordable UTG non Pro line that is standard with their affordable optics:
IMG_20221114_185203734_HDR.jpg


The difference between the Taiwanese or Chinese variant and the USA made Pro line is visibly substantial and of course in function. You can really tell the quality and difference. The Torx screws are really nice too and won't fall victim to striping.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: BOOMBBQ
Sorry I'm not sure I understand the relationship between the two. The center of the reticle can be leveled properly relative to the bore, but still be off center, correct? Or are you stating that it's more important to be level than to be centered?
The vertical bar of the reticle needs to intersect the bore. Adopting your phrasing, centered is what matters...not level. I was just calling attention to the fact that centering the scope over the receiver (using a self-centering mount like BKL) and then using a spirit level or a plumb line to clock the scope does not ensure the scope is oriented properly.
 
The vertical bar of the reticle needs to intersect the bore. Adopting your phrasing, centered is what matters...not level. I was just calling attention to the fact that centering the scope over the receiver (using a self-centering mount like BKL) and then using a spirit level or a plumb line to clock the scope does not ensure the scope is oriented properly.

Ah yes I get you : )
I actually do exactly what you describe with the same 2 Wheeler levels. I am surely leveled. I like BKL because they are also automatically centered. I was wondering if other mounts also center perfectly or if they are by nature off-center a tiny bit.
 
Actually the popular scope mounting approach that involves 2 levels, one on the gun and one on the scope, is subject to a variety of potential sources of error. To give just one example, the reticle in the erector tube can be out of registration with the turrets and scope body by a couple of degrees, even in some high end scope brands. If you're interested, more examples are present in the thread I linked earlier.

A couple of scope mounting methods that circumvent these errors are the mirror method and a laser boresighter.
 
I have a laser bore sighter too :) All from the Wheeler Ultra Scope Mounting kit, which I love.

Very good. In that case, put aside the clamp and levels in the kit and simply use the laser to clock the scope to the bore.

Here's a relevant thread on the Wheeler kit from a while back.