Scope mounting for a 10/22

Knobgoblin · Dec 4, 2025

BlackdogGS said:
The scope I'll be using. This has a fixed 60 yard parallax. Old scope was 150 yards.

View attachment 2205861

Nice little scope for rimfire.

Spitpatch · Dec 4, 2025

Gundolf said:
Im curious, what failures have you experienced when swapping scope/mounts?

I frequently swap between scope and red dot on my 10/22 and have never experienced an issue. My QD rings typically hold zero, so long as Im shooting the same ammo

Since I avoid the practice, I cannot speak of failures as a result.

I CAN speak toward easily observable (sometimes serious) wear and tear on screws, countersinks, tapped holes and clamping surfaces as a result of repeated mechanical usage on guns I have bought where a scope and/or mount swap is necessary.

Your presto-chango on sighting systems on a 10/22 is certainly something I can agree with. Though my Sporter is dedicated as to purpose, I do have a carbine that is equipped with a laser in the forend tip. I also can agree with your experience regarding QD rings (of the Leupold/Warne type) and their repeatability.

I just don't ask them to demonstrate it repeatedly on the guns where I have them installed.

Spitpatch · Dec 5, 2025

BlackdogGS said:
The scope I'll be using. This has a fixed 60 yard parallax. Old scope was 150 yards.

View attachment 2205861

Perfect! That scope allows for mounting as close to the bore (and your natural cheek-weld) as possible.

As to durability and reliability of the factory dovetail, I'm puzzled and surprised at @lucusloc's bad luck, especially since he recognizes the need to mount the scope low as possible. My Dad's carbine (a walnut-stocked gun from 1965) has the scope and mount (on the factory dovetail) he bought new with the gun.

The scope adjustments haven't been touched since then. A rifle that fed our family, and 60 years later is still dead-on and I use it regularly.

I'm equally surprised that "rings aren't tall enough" for that little scope! ????

lucusloc · Dec 5, 2025

Spitpatch said:
Perfect! That scope allows for mounting as close to the bore (and your natural cheek-weld) as possible.

As to durability and reliability of the factory dovetail, I'm puzzled and surprised at @lucusloc's bad luck, especially since he recognizes the need to mount the scope low as possible. My Dad's carbine (a walnut-stocked gun from 1965) has the scope and mount (on the factory dovetail) he bought new with the gun.

The scope adjustments haven't been touched since then. A rifle that fed our family, and 60 years later is still dead-on and I use it regularly.

I'm equally surprised that "rings aren't tall enough" for that little scope! ????

Mine probably is just a lemon, but it is the only sample I have and really soured me on mounting systems that do not have a positive lockup. Dovetails seem to work just fine for lots of people on rimfire guns, but at the end of the day they are still just friction fit*, so enough force on them and they will shift. Mine are just a poor enough fit that they shift under rimfire recoil, which is unfortunate for me. I really should dig that gun out and post pictures. The dovetails show all kinds of wear and marring from my attempts to get things to just sit tight. Steel rings on soft aluminum dovetails is not a winning combination. Steel on steel probably works better, but I do not have an example of that so

I also notice they are not used on any modern production guns that I am aware of, as even the modern 10/22s have either an integrated pic rail or are smooth top with pre-tapped mount points. It is an archaic mounting system with known weaknesses, and that is why it was almost exclusively used on rimfire even in ye oldyn days. Anything with more recoil used drilled and tapped mount points, which hold far better.

*Yes I know scope rings are just friction fit too, but there is 10 times the surface area with tons more clamping force. You can get them to shift, but it would break the scope first.

Rat44 · Dec 5, 2025

I have 2 0f those on my 10/22 and a RAR .
They are a very good choice for any 22.
Sad they did away with them.
Those and the 2.5 Compact were naturals for most 22's .

Spitpatch · Dec 6, 2025

lucusloc said:
Mine probably is just a lemon, but it is the only sample I have and really soured me on mounting systems that do not have a positive lockup. Dovetails seem to work just fine for lots of people on rimfire guns, but at the end of the day they are still just friction fit*, so enough force on them and they will shift. Mine are just a poor enough fit that they shift under rimfire recoil, which is unfortunate for me. I really should dig that gun out and post pictures. The dovetails show all kinds of wear and marring from my attempts to get things to just sit tight. Steel rings on soft aluminum dovetails is not a winning combination. Steel on steel probably works better, but I do not have an example of that so I also notice they are not used on any modern production guns that I am aware of, as even the modern 10/22s have either an integrated pic rail or are smooth top with pre-tapped mount points. It is an archaic mounting system with known weaknesses, and that is why it was almost exclusively used on rimfire even in ye oldyn days. Anything with more recoil used drilled and tapped mount points, which hold far better. *Yes I know scope rings are just friction fit too, but there is 10 times the surface area with tons more clamping force. You can get them to shift, but it would break the scope first.

I had to laugh when I read of experiments with what I call "the Shark Tooth Method" when trying to get clamps to grip a 3/8 dovetail.

Because I went that route when long ago I was punkass toward Savage's warning on the barrel of a Model 24 (Over/under with rimfire on top, shotgun lower).

It was right there, next to a very attractively machined 3/8 dovetail on the rimfire barrel.

Something to the effect of, "Remove scope before firing shotgun". I just knew iI could make that baby stay put: all the way to 4 rings I had Dremeled "Shark Teeth" into.

When even a low-base load was fired from the bottom barrel, that whole outfit rode that rail like the 3:10 to Yuma.

lucusloc · Dec 6, 2025

Spitpatch said:
I had to laugh when I read of experiments with what I call "the Shark Tooth Method" when trying to get clamps to grip a 3/8 dovetail.

Because I went that route when long ago I was punkass toward Savage's warning on the barrel of a Model 24 (Over/under with rimfire on top, shotgun lower).

It was right there, next to a very attractively machined 3/8 dovetail on the rimfire barrel.

Something to the effect of, "Remove scope before firing shotgun". I just knew iI could make that baby stay put: all the way to 4 rings I had Dremeled "Shark Teeth" into.

When even a low-base load was fired from the bottom barrel, that whole outfit rode that rail like the 3:10 to Yuma.

That seems remarkably silly. That is one of those combinations that just makes you go "but why???" I mean I get the combo gun, but dovetails? That is just asking for trouble.