MG2 weaver base

Brian James · Post by **Brian James** » Fri Sep 14, 2007 1:08 pm

To my fellow Targettalk members,

Have any of you come across a weaver scope base for the Match Gun MG2? If so, can you let me know, and perhaps the other members where.

Thanks

Brian

prfct · Post by **prfct** » Sat Sep 15, 2007 8:55 pm

Any weaver base with a flat bottom will work, or
access to a mill to flatten a base.
Had mine done for a couple of bucks.
Mg-2 has two ( 2 ) existing #6-40 drilled and
tapped holes. ( Added a hole between the
two existing holes, tapped hole Optional ).
Milled the bottom of the base for
hammer ( when pistol is cocked
hammer protrudes through the top
of the pistol. Drilled hole in base to
for access to screw above where the pistol
chamber is. ( Can dissamble pistol with base
on pistol. ) Added nuts and locktite to the three ( 3 ) #6-40
screws. ( Do not have to worry about them coming loose. )
Works great! Take off base if you like to go back to iron sights.
just three screws.

Tycho · Post by **Tycho** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 1:55 am

Nobody outside northern america would come up with that idea... but it probably has its uses... Perhaps you could try and inspire Cesare himself with the usefulness, he could mill the rails directly into the cover... :-)

Mark Briggs · Post by **Mark Briggs** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 4:07 pm

Tycho - Cesare DID think of this, hence the holes drilled and tapped into the upper slide cover on the pistol! He just didn't take it to the next level by supplying a scope mount base to match up with the holes he drilled.

Tycho · Post by **Tycho** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:38 pm

He didn't. The holes are for the weights which are screwed into the cover from below. He probably wouldn't know a red dot sight if it fell on his head.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Sep 18, 2007 6:51 am

The holes are for weights? I didn't know that. I was under the same impression as Mark that the holes were used for a scope base. I gave credit Ceasre for putting the holes there to appeal to the USA (NRA market).

Brian James

Mark Briggs · Post by **Mark Briggs** » Tue Sep 18, 2007 1:28 pm

Weights under the top cover? Hmmm... There's not much room for weights there. Have you actually seen these weights? If so, how much do they weigh?

Tycho · Post by **Tycho** » Tue Sep 18, 2007 1:55 pm

I've a bunch of them, came with our MG2's. The factory set is 2 small steel plates with a total weight of 22gr including the screws, but I have a "custom" made larger one that weighs 28gr - it's very easy to make, more or less a rectangular block with two holes. Only problems were with the updated guns with the rubber buffer - the original weights would compress the rubber, so it'd stick out of the sides and slow down the slide. Easy to remedy. 22gr seems tiny, but the difference is clearly noticeable.

Mark Briggs · Post by **Mark Briggs** » Tue Sep 18, 2007 2:41 pm

Thanks for the quick reply, Tycho. Now I'm going to ask another one of my silly questions... Why work so hard to put 22 or 28 grams on the pistol when it's so easy to put on anything from zero to several hundred grams on the sides of the steel barrel mount/front sight holder? This just seems a little less than obvious to me at the moment (but keep in mind that I also shoot the MG-2 with no weights attached... LoL).

Tycho · Post by **Tycho** » Tue Sep 18, 2007 4:10 pm

Italian design - doesn't matter how good you shoot, you've got to do it in style. And as long as there is a bit of unused space inside the pistol, something has to be invented to fill it :-)

kalz · Post by **kalz** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 3:50 am

Cesare designed the two holes on the slide cover as for counterweights as for weaver scope .
The counterweight are two steel plates of 10 g/each.

Brian James · Post by **Brian James** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 7:40 am

Does anyone have a photo of the weights they could share with us on here?

kalz · Post by **kalz** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 8:45 am

In attachment the pictures of the internal counterweights art.2064
Stefano

Gort · Post by **Gort** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 1:50 pm

On my MG-2 serial # 14xx, the factory provided tapped holes are Metric
M4x.7, Not 6-40 English. All the fasteners are Metric on my MG-2.

6-40 thread has a major diameter of .138 inch and a pitch of .025 inch.
M4x.7 thread has a major diameter of .157 inch and a pitch of .0276 inch.

The use of a 6-40 screw in a M4x.7 hole is in great danger of stripping the hole, especially in soft aluminum.
Gort

Mark Briggs · Post by **Mark Briggs** » Mon Sep 24, 2007 12:22 pm

Thanks to all for contributing to my education! I had always assumed those holes were for a scope mount, and now have learned they were destined for a higher purpose. I wonder what I'll learn next if I keep hanging around here?!?!?! ;-)

Scott H. · Post by **Scott H.** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:34 am

For what it's worth:

When I bought my MG-2 from the late Don Nygord, he included a scope base that fit the holes in question.

He did, however, mention that I probably wouldn't want to use it, since a red dot scope goofed-up the balance of the gun.

dhurt · Post by **dhurt** » Tue Sep 25, 2007 12:07 pm

I bought a MG from Don, mere days before his passing, he told me to mill the scope base at an angle to correspond to the angle of the shroud. I have not had one produced and I wish Don was still here, he was always a big help.

kalz · Post by **kalz** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 3:21 am

We, as Matchguns, suggest to put a thin plate in the front hole to compensate the slope of the cover of the pistol.
We agree with Nygord about the problem with the balance of the gun.

Jaybar · Post by **Jaybar** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:59 pm

I fabricated the base that PRFCT has on his gun. I used a Weaver #81 base as a starting point because of its long length (approx 6”) and low profile. The base is originally deigned for an H&R 360/361 rifle. Milled the bottom flat and reduced its overall length down to about 5 1/8 “ such that when mounted to the cover, the front and rear screws that hold down the cover coud still be accessed. I milled the extra length off the end where the factory screw holes in the base were, milling off the first and second hole. Positioned the base on the cover with the end that didn’t have any factory holes in it forward. And drilled two holes in the base to match the holes in the cover (they were 1.575” apart if memory serves me correctly). Countersunk the holes in the base with a Weaver head counter sink and screwed the base down with a couple of ½” 6-40 Weaver head screws. Tightened it down, spotted a new hole in between the two holes , drilled through the base and cover with a #33 drill (tap size for 6-40), took the base off, drilled the proper clearance size hole (.140”) in the base and counter sunk it for a Weaver head screw. Tapped the new hole in the cover -6-40 and re-assembled.
The base configured this way , covers the hammer opening. When the hammer is being cocked it protrudes about .060” or so above the base so I milled off .100” from the bottom of the base above the hammer opening for clearance for the hammer. With the base mounted on the cover I marked the under side of the base for the middle hold down screw, using the hole on the cover as a guide and a hand held drill bit that just fit the hole. Took the base off the cover and drilled a ¼”hole centered on the mark just made in the base. This hole allows you to remove the middle hold down screw without taking the base off the cover.
I noticed that the 6-40 screws weren’t a perfect fit in the two factory holes in the cover and figured that they were probably some metric equivalent but they tightened down nicely and to make sure that they wouldn’t come loose I put a 6-40 nut and lockwasher on the underside ( where the weights would go) and trimmed the screws to length.
I noted that the back half of the base gradually diverged from the cover leaving a clearance of about .015” at the rear. Figured either the cover wasn’t flat or I did a poor job of milling. Thanks to this forum, for telling me that I still know how to run a mill. The cover is slightly tapered at the front.
Now to the practical results.:
1). You don’t have to shim to accommodate the taper. The adjustments in the scope/dot will handle it. PRFCT’s Gun with a brand new (adjustments set to the middle of their range) Ultradot Match Dot on it hit 5 inches high on a B-2 target at 50 ft. Less than one turn of the elevation adjustment brought it to point of aim.
2) With this set up, the rear ring of the Ultradot is positioned over the hammer about ½ inch from the rear of the base. I milled another cross slot 3” in front of the rear slot for the front ring. This places the turret of the sight just about over the trigger maintaining the balance point of the gun. If you used a short base and mounted the dot towards the front of the gun I could understand the balance concern. By using a long base, the dot is mounted towards the middle-rear of the gun and the balance feels just fine.

Brian James · Post by **Brian James** » Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:54 am

Jaybar,

I might as well ask - are you planning or willing to fabricate more bases for the MG2? I suspect there is a small following of shooters who would be willing to invest in such a piece.

Brian

TargetTalk

MG2 weaver base

MG2 weaver base

MG-2 weaver base

Holes on the cover

MG2 internal counterweights

Fabricating a base for MG@