Unless this is a wild coincidence,
Let me see if I got this…when the scope was mounted in the rings, and the rings were mounted to the bases, which were mounted to the rifle…the rounds impacted where the horizontal was in line with expectations, and the vertical was off, but could be adjusted to zero - did I get this right?
Then…when the scope was mounted in the rings, and the rings were mounted to the riser, and the riser was mounted to the bases, which were mounted to the rifle…the rounds impacted were off the horizontal expectations, and the vertical was off, but both could be adjusted to zero - did I get this right?
Finally…when the scope was mounted in the rings, and the rings were mounted to the NEW riser, and the riser was mounted to the bases, which were mounted to the rifle…the rounds impacted where the horizontal was in line with expectations, but the vertical was off, but could be adjusted to zero - did I get this right?
Dumb luck….
Let’s think about the variables:
- Bore true to the action
- Action mounting location/surface true to the action and true to the bore
- Mounting screw holes true to the above
- Mounting screws true
- Torque consistent
- Bases - the same
- Rings - the same
- Scope was centered horizontally and vertically coming from the factory - did you count the clicks end to end to make sure it was centered?
- Etc.
Let’s play with the scope…on horizontally, but off vertically from the factory. If the scope reticle was perfectly centered leaving the factory, the balance of the system was off vertically. If the scope reticle was coincidently off horizontally from the factory but aligned with the system, the system was fine, but the scope was off. Three minutes in the system you describe is nothing. The whole point of adjustments is to account for all the imperfect interfaces. Welcome to tolerance stack up. Like wind, some dial in, some dial out…