I have used them both and like them both on 45-70s even with hot loads. Warnes are worth the money, but honestly I have never had an issue with Leupold rings, even on my CZ 550 Safari magnum in .375 Holland & Holland. Use whichever one you like. If properly installed, I think the scope will go before the rings do.

 

I am partial to Warne but I like Leupold products. I agree with what T-Bone says.

 

+1 I use Warne but nothing wrong with Leupold either. Either one will outlast the scope, IMO.

 

They'll both serve you well with proper mounting, I really like the Warne bases with Burris Signature Zee rings. The delron inserts nulify any small misalignment issues and they don't leave ring marks on the scope.

 

I have Leupold on two rifles, love them.

 

I like leupold, That's usually all that's available locally. Never any problems.

 

Thanks for your feedback.
I figured they were both GTG

 

Have Warne rings on my 1895ss. No problems. That said the rifles previous owner, my friend of some 40 years, had used used Weaver Grand Slams for as long as I can remember.
He kept the rings to use on his 9.3X62 after he sold me the 1895.

 

I always use Leupold . No issues at all.

 

The only two issues between them are cosmetics and price. Your decision.

 

Have used both Leupold and Warne.
6 of one, half dozen of the other.
I use the Burris zee ring for low recoiling rifles (Marlin 336/30-30 or 1894/44 and below) as I don't like QD ring "handles" for getting caught on brush, clothing etc.
They are not QD rings perse but remount "pretty darn close" to being on zero without a range sight-in.
Of course these are not bench rest rifles I am using them on ether where 1/2 MOA is going to be a game changer for the intended purpose.