Thread: Barnard SMS rails

For those of you with Barnard actions, what bases or rails are you using on them?

I bought my SMS with a Barnard rail but it was more of a generic item to fit S, SM, P, PL etc... it was probably close to 20mm high. And would have needed cutting off, as it was far too long for my SMS. Sent that back and since then, I have been using some two piece Weaver S46 bases.

I'd still like a one piece rail to allow me to run QD rings and maybe a thermal/NV. Preferably 20moa.

Has anyone with an S/SM/SMS managed to pull this off? What did you use? Both the Savage 10 and A17 rails were very close to the required hole spacing.

I just used the generic Rail Barnard supplied with a 20 moa drop. From memory I did have to trim one end down to clear the Scope Ocular (Eye) end.
Used low mounts with a 4-16x42 scope.
Z

Yeah I was really hoping there was something else off the shelf that might fit. The Savage rail was really close. Hole spacing on the two front screws and two back screws was perfect. But distance from the front to the back was off my maybe 1mm.

Try Mark at Waitaki Engineering ( be patient, he's on outwork a lot), he makes a lot of rails and might be able to help

I have used a Weaver 88 on a Barnard PL, with 60 MOA of taper cut into it.

What's wrong with a Barnard rail? Although I use them on my P actions but only the 20 MOA version and then get the rest using Burris bushed rings. I have no trouble getting elvation to 1000yds withe some still left.

I also have no experience with their other actions or their Rem clone.

I cut the overhang off on the first rail but didn't bother after that. The front ring on one of mine sits half a ring fwd of the action so the extra length was useful. Still 100% rigid at that point.
Strangely my first base was marked 17 MOA. Such an odd ball number. I must check the others but I think they are 20s.

The one they provided me was really tall. Too tall to allow a proper cheek weld. It was too long for the action and would have needed cutting down too. The only way to mount my scope back far enough (without chopping the rail) to get proper eye relief would have been with stupid high rings to allow the objective to clear the rail entirely. Making cheek weld even worse.

Functionality/ergonomics aside, it looked naff. Perhaps it would have been fine on a P/PL but not on a short little SMS. "It's that or nothing" wasn't really what I was expecting from Barnard.