Bergara wilderness terrain 6.5 scope mounting options???- update setup and ready

[duckmen1]

So have a new rifle and looking at so many options for mounting scopes not sure what I should go with. Recommendations would be appreciated. Would like to make sure I have a quality ring/ base that will not cause me any issues. I have dealt with issues in the past with such and want to make sure I do this right. Thanks for any help

Rifle
Bergara wilderness Terrain 6.5 Creedmoore

Scope
Vortex Viper HST 4x16 44mm objective with 30 mm tube


Max range of shooting is 600 yard or less

[buckfvr]

Talley light weight.  6.5 recoil is not an issue, check their recommendations, but I think low height will work for you.

[duckmen1]

Talley light weight.  6.5 recoil is not an issue, check their recommendations, but I think low height will work for you.

Recoil should be minimal as the gun weighs 9.3 lbs with a muzzle brake, and in a 6.5 it should be very mild. I have been looking into Talley a bit but I believe there will be some lapping involved. Which I can do.

[buckfvr]

Never heard of anyone having to lapp them, as a matter of fact I believe that was brought up here before and I believe Talley recommends that you NOT lapp their products.  I know a smith who does exceptional builds and he uses them (Talley) without issue.

[duckmen1]

I have been recommended Tally rings for a lot of things in the past. The one time I bought and put scope on rifle I later dissassembled to change stock and such. When I pulled the scope off it there was pretty substancial ring crease marks on the scope and they were only tightened to recommendations of scope manufacturer using a fat wrench torch wrench. So I then lapped them and it was very obvious the uneven pressure it put on. But maybe it was a fluke. Also had bad experiences using the leupold twist on rings. That is why I was asking as prior experiences havent been good. Although I have had good experience with Warne with sideways screw mounts I have heard not so good things about using those mounts. I do like the idea of a ring/base lower single piece.

[Stein]

I have used Talley one-piece on three rifles now and really like them.  I do lap them because I can't figure out why not lapping would be better and it's an enjoyable process I do once for the life of the rifle.  They are always a bit unlevel and lapping clears that all up.  It could be the rings, the receiver, who knows.

[JWBINX]

You don't lap Talley Lightweight rings!!

[Stein]

Why?

[JWBINX]

When you lay your scope in a Talley lightweight bottom half, you will see a little light under
the scope tube. As you tighten your top cap the rings will compress around the tube creating a perfect
360 degree fit. I have installed hundreds of Talley rings with no problems.
However, I have sold the same customers 2 sets, as they lapped them resulting in a situation where
the screws bottomed out and the scope would slip. Then having to purchase another set.
I have had this conversation with Dave Talley and Gary Turner (new owner) and they will tell you the same thing.
Talley rings are an awesome products that are machined to perfection.
As far as low rings for a 44 mm objective, it will be close depending on the barrel contour.
The difference between a low and med is 1/10 of an inch.
I would hate to see you have to send a pair back then wait for the others.
I hope this helps out. Enjoy your new rifle.

[Stein]

To each their own, I've installed several and none of them have been flat or perfectly true.  The rings are manufactured to a tolerance, the receiver is manufactured to a tolerance, the ring holes on the receiver and rings are drilled and tapped to a tolerance.  Both the rings and receiver are coated to a tolerance.  That means all those tolerances stack which ensures they won't be perfectly flat or true when you install them, one edge of the ring will squeeze harder than the other edge (front or back) and they won't be perfectly true.  I've yet to see a ring bottom or top that was perfectly true and flat after installation.

It could be the rings, it could be the rifle, it's likely both.  The rifles most of us are using are mass produced and we shouldn't expect them to be perfect.  The bolt and receiver aren't perfectly true and the top of the receiver isn't perfectly flat and true either. 

Lapping doesn't affect the screws or threads, there is still plenty of gap on both sides when I'm finished.  Lapping might remove a mil or two which would probably equate to about 1/16 or less additional turn on the screws to tighten.

Talley require significantly less lapping than other brands, but the ones I have done were not flat when installed and torqued to manufacturer specs.  The Talley rings I have done were pretty close to being true but noticeably off flatness front to back.  Other brands were both off of true and flatness usually.

Whether it matters is up for debate.  The way I look at it is that having a near perfectly flat and true clamping surface is both easier on the scope tube, less chance for torquing or binding the scope internals as well as a more secure clamp.  It's a confidence thing for me, I can cross off the rings as any source of problem with zero, holding zero, dialing up or down, left or right or any other contribution to any problem that might arise.

[cjc23]

I've used talley in the past and they are great rings however I typically go with hawkins, nightforce or seekins rings now just for the aspect of being absolutely bombproof. the added couple ounces are worth the piece of mind to me. Not saying talley isn't bomb proof, the other just have a bit more meat to them.

[duckmen1]

Just wanted to update where my thoughts are and I appreciate everyone taking the time to share yours. I really wanted to go with Seekins but running into availability issues and having to order from muliple places. So saw the nightforce ultra light rings and aluminum base. Ran into all sorts of issues. Getting medium rings were to high with the 0 moa rail. So went to exchange for low. Out of stock. Went to another sportsmans that said in stock. Wouldnt you know it out of stock too. Have a 44mm scope and when adding the rail I have to go lower than normal hieght for rings. So now currently waiting arrival of the nightforce rings. The only concern is whether or not I should have went with the steel base with recoil lug or the aluminum without. I hear a lot of discussion on that subject. But the aluminum is lighter and the gun is base weight at already 9.3 lbs with a muzzlebrake so I don't believe I will see any benefit going with steel base. Trying to get this done and to the range soon to have ready to hunt but also felt for me this is a nice rifle and don't want to go cheap on rings and bases. So many options available but think I will have it good to go once these rings arrive.

[Karl Blanchard]

I'm not overly familiar with bergara actions. Are they just a rem 700 lone or is the hole spacing specific to Bergara?

[duckmen1]

The B14 model Bergaras are standard Remington 700s. The premiers Bergaras are 8-40 screws. The wilderness Terrain is the B14 model.

[Karl Blanchard]

Hawkins hybrids

[jrebel]

murphyprecision

https://www.murphyprecision.com/remington-700-short-action/

(assuming it is a Rem 700 short action clone.  Also make sure you know which screws are needed so you get the correct one.)  Best base on the market in my opinion. 

As for rings....any quality ring with 4 screws per scope ring would be my choice.  I would stick with aluminum for the rings for weight and because it's a 6.5 creed.  Most importantly, I would learn how to mount a scope and proper torque specs for bases, ring windage screws and ring screws.  Clean all serfaces and threads with alcohol prior to mounting.  Use blue loctite. 

The nice thing about remington 700 clones is the base, though expensive will fit on many many rifles. 

[duckmen1]

murphyprecision

https://www.murphyprecision.com/remington-700-short-action/

(assuming it is a Rem 700 short action clone.  Also make sure you know which screws are needed so you get the correct one.)  Best base on the market in my opinion. 

As for rings....any quality ring with 4 screws per scope ring would be my choice.  I would stick with aluminum for the rings for weight and because it's a 6.5 creed.  Most importantly, I would learn how to mount a scope and proper torque specs for bases, ring windage screws and ring screws.  Clean all serfaces and threads with alcohol prior to mounting.  Use blue loctite. 

The nice thing about remington 700 clones is the base, though expensive will fit on many many rifles.

I plan to go through every step properly mounting and cleaning before hitting the range day. And then trying to do the proper break in proccess for the rifle barrel. The only part I would have a question on with the break in proccess per manufacture reccommendation is when cleaning the gun inbetween shots does one also clean any and all copperfouling as well? Have done a lot of shooting over the years with great accuracy but also trying to learn better with small things I may have overlooked over the years.

[jrebel]

murphyprecision

https://www.murphyprecision.com/remington-700-short-action/

(assuming it is a Rem 700 short action clone.  Also make sure you know which screws are needed so you get the correct one.)  Best base on the market in my opinion. 

As for rings....any quality ring with 4 screws per scope ring would be my choice.  I would stick with aluminum for the rings for weight and because it's a 6.5 creed.  Most importantly, I would learn how to mount a scope and proper torque specs for bases, ring windage screws and ring screws.  Clean all serfaces and threads with alcohol prior to mounting.  Use blue loctite. 

The nice thing about remington 700 clones is the base, though expensive will fit on many many rifles.

I plan to go through every step properly mounting and cleaning before hitting the range day. And then trying to do the proper break in proccess for the rifle barrel. The only part I would have a question on with the break in proccess per manufacture reccommendation is when cleaning the gun inbetween shots does one also clean any and all copperfouling as well? Have done a lot of shooting over the years with great accuracy but also trying to learn better with small things I may have overlooked over the years.

Barrel break in is a horrible topic to bring up on a hunting forum.....  

I have never really bought into the whole barrel break in hoopla....and all my rifles with handloads shoot well under 1MOA.  I have some rifles that shoot 1/2 or better MOA.  When I have a new barrel, I just don't heat it up by stringing shots.....but then again, I don't do that with old barrels either.  I clean at least once a year or when groups start to open up due to barrel fowling (usually 50+ rounds).  I have tried different break in methods and found no significant improvement in accuracy.  Just my two cents. 

[duckmen1]

murphyprecision

https://www.murphyprecision.com/remington-700-short-action/

(assuming it is a Rem 700 short action clone.  Also make sure you know which screws are needed so you get the correct one.)  Best base on the market in my opinion. 

As for rings....any quality ring with 4 screws per scope ring would be my choice.  I would stick with aluminum for the rings for weight and because it's a 6.5 creed.  Most importantly, I would learn how to mount a scope and proper torque specs for bases, ring windage screws and ring screws.  Clean all serfaces and threads with alcohol prior to mounting.  Use blue loctite. 

The nice thing about remington 700 clones is the base, though expensive will fit on many many rifles.

I plan to go through every step properly mounting and cleaning before hitting the range day. And then trying to do the proper break in proccess for the rifle barrel. The only part I would have a question on with the break in proccess per manufacture reccommendation is when cleaning the gun inbetween shots does one also clean any and all copperfouling as well? Have done a lot of shooting over the years with great accuracy but also trying to learn better with small things I may have overlooked over the years.

Barrel break in is a horrible topic to bring up on a hunting forum.....  

I have never really bought into the whole barrel break in hoopla....and all my rifles with handloads shoot well under 1MOA.  I have some rifles that shoot 1/2 or better MOA.  When I have a new barrel, I just don't heat it up by stringing shots.....but then again, I don't do that with old barrels either.  I clean at least once a year or when groups start to open up due to barrel fowling (usually 50+ rounds).  I have tried different break in methods and found no significant improvement in accuracy.  Just my two cents.

I hear what you mean on that. Every barrel is different even if it is the same. You can never test a barrel twice to see the difference so how does one truely know if it helped. Lol

[duckmen1]

Time will tell now. Gun is set up and ready for the range. Took a few hours taking my time cleaning, prepping and mounting everything. Should be solid.

Bergara 6.5 Wilderness Terrain
Vortex Viper HST 4x16x44mm objective,  30 mm tube
Vortex level bubble mounted on scope
Nightforce 0 MOA base and low ultralight rings.

It is set up about the best I can do for myself. Really hopeful in it being a good shooter for my circumstances.

Will start off with factory 143gr ELDX to build on some brass and such before reloading.

[duckmen1]

Little update on the rifle. Factory rounds in my rifle have not gone well. But it allowed me some brass to start reloading. And got the break in proccess done during that time frame. Never sure where to start with seating depths with different bullets. But loaded 140 gr Accubonds. A couple powder choices Hodgdon 4350 and Superformance. Superformance did better on accuracy, pressure, and speed overall. Staying 1.8 grains under max in book I am very comfortable with the load. And getting 2800 fps. But shooting 15 thousands off the lands gets me better accuracy than 5 thousands or 25 thousands. Not sure everyone elses preference but would love to hear.

Accuracy wise
100 yards 4 shot groups
.85 inch
1.05 inch
1.15 inch
If I was shooting 3 shot groups they would have been .75 to .9 inch range. So not bad with great velocity for a 6.5 creedmoore. With a good hunting bullet. Will load more in near future and reach out further to test out to 400 yards. And when I can I will try lighter 130 gr range bullets to compare accuracy.
I can say starting out the gun has been picky about factory loads and seating depth for accuracy as well as easily gets signs of pressure compared to my other rifles but I am off to a decent start I think.

[jrebel]

Little update on the rifle. Factory rounds in my rifle have not gone well. But it allowed me some brass to start reloading. And got the break in proccess done during that time frame. Never sure where to start with seating depths with different bullets. But loaded 140 gr Accubonds. A couple powder choices Hodgdon 4350 and Superformance. Superformance did better on accuracy, pressure, and speed overall. Staying 1.8 grains under max in book I am very comfortable with the load. And getting 2800 fps. But shooting 15 thousands off the lands gets me better accuracy than 5 thousands or 25 thousands. Not sure everyone elses preference but would love to hear.

Accuracy wise
100 yards 4 shot groups
.85 inch
1.05 inch
1.15 inch
If I was shooting 3 shot groups they would have been .75 to .9 inch range. So not bad with great velocity for a 6.5 creedmoore. With a good hunting bullet. Will load more in near future and reach out further to test out to 400 yards. And when I can I will try lighter 130 gr range bullets to compare accuracy.
I can say starting out the gun has been picky about factory loads and seating depth for accuracy as well as easily gets signs of pressure compared to my other rifles but I am off to a decent start I think.

Great bullet and sounds like good accuracy.  As for preference with seating depth.....whatever is most accurate is what I would go with.  I have never used superformance but have had great accuracy with H4350.  I still load the 140 grain accubonds for 6.5 creedmoor....but have started making the switch to 124 grain Hammer Hunters.  If you are getting 2800 fps with 140 accubonds, I would suspect you could get close to 3000 fps with 124 grain HH.  I have killed with both accubonds and HH's and both are killing machines. 

[buckfvr]

In load developments that we've done, H4350 and Reloader 16 were always the last 2 powders standing. Reloader 16 ended up as the front runner, H4350 a very close second.  10k off the lands was the normal, Berger bullets also.  My personal rifles preferred Sierra TMK and TGK in the 130gr variety.  I prefer the velocity increase the 130's allow.   

[duckmen1]

After loading a batch to go site in with. The load came out .003 shorter average then my prior testing.
100 yards 3 shots - 1.5 inch
200 yards 4 shot group and 5 shot group- 4 inches
300 yards 4 shot group- 5.5 inches.

Down right awful

Just made the decision to try lighter bullets. So have 130 gr berger vld hunting bullets and Lapua LRP pocket brass on order. Will see what difference that makes. Components have been a bit scarce to come by but that should be an accurate combo. To say I am a bit frustrated starting out is an understatement. All I read about on bergara is nothing but good things. So we will see. But 140s have been crazy bad groups to times it shows promising at 100 yards but 300 yards has been horrible consistantly. So not set on 140s even though the twist rate says 140s are good.

I am looking forward to trying large rifle primers over small rifle primers with the new brass.