Question about rifle scopes and muzzle brakes

[gamestalker]

I'm currently living in a nightmare with this 700 chambered in 300 WM and am having to eliminate variables, of which there have been countless, I have yet another question.

With this muzzle brake, the 300 WM does not only produce reward recoil, but instead, it leaps forward, which seems pretty consistent with what they are designed to do. And off hand, you can barely feel reward inertia / recoil, it definitely pulls forward, thus reducing recoil to a very nice light degree.

So, last weekend after a gun smith failed to properly tighten the Warren rings down, under recoil the scope slid forward, jamming the power adjustment ring into the bolt shroud.

Over the years I have seen what loose rings do, in that the scope has always slid back, not forward, as expected. Could this reverse inertia cause the scope to suffer damage, similar to that of what a pellet / air rifle does to optics not specifically designed for such use on an air rifle? I asked a similar question here some time back after having seen two rifle scopes ruined after using them on a pellet / air rifle.

GS

 

[witchhunter]

Call the manufacturer to check. What I have noticed the first time I shot a rifle with a brake is that it blew everything of the bench!

 

[Outlaw Man]

My suspicion is that on a well-built scope it won't matter. They know people will be shooting rather large rifles with big brakes, and, if it were me, I would design for such a scenario. Leupold designs theirs to 5,000 repetitions of 750g (acceleration, not grams), though it's not exactly in the same manner you're describing. Still, those forces are brutal and I can't see how the internal parts wouldn't have some bounce-back in the opposite direction. See here: http://youtu.be/72XhFKTyLPI?t=2m22s

I would also recommend contacting the manufacturer to make sure. If you do, let us know what they say.

 

[rcmodel]

Scopes will always slide foreword under recoil.

Think it through.

The rifle and scope are just setting there minding their own business when the shot goes off.
The rifle recoils violently to the rear.
And inertia wants to keep the scope where it was.

That causes it to want to slide forward in the mount.

Your scope did exactly what all scopes want to do every time a shot is fired.

It has nothing to do with the brake pulling the rifle foreword.
If it did, the scope would still try to stay where it was, and slide backward, not forward.

A scope on a .22 auto may try to slide forward, but not due to recoil.
That is caused by the bolt returning to battery and jarring the rifle foreword harder then it recoiled rearward.


rc

 

[Pit4Brains]

Hmm. I've yet to see a rifle leap forward (only the Marine behind it). I'm going to assume that the motion is felt after the recoil is absorbed into the shoulder and the upward movement is ceased.
Are the rings old? have they been lapped prior to this scope?
I'm thinking these rings can't get a good enough bite on the scope.

 

[R H Clark]

Yep, scopes will always move forward under recoil.

The best advice I can give you is to learn to mount your own optics and to do all low level smith jobs. Many times I have seen so called gun smith's do a much worse job than I would have.

 

[dprice3844444]

pachmyer recoil pad,check the one for the 50 caliber .gonna use that on my 16 inch 1895 45/70 guide gun.f990 triple field is the pad.
http://www.pachmayr.com/home/prefit-pads.php should you decide on a lesser pre fit

http://www.gentrycustom.com/muzzle-brake check these folks out.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Scopes will always slide foreword under recoil.

Absolutely right -- some scopes and mounts, like the old Unertel, were designed that way. After each shot, the rifleman would grasp the ocular end and pull the scope back into position.

And note this was on rifles without muzzle brakes.

If a muzzle brake has any effect on a scope, it's the double shuffle -- the scope, gripped by the rings, recoils rearward, (but tries to remain stationary.) Just as it begins to build up speed, it is stopped or pulled forward by the brake. That can be hard on a scope.

 

[45crittergitter]

You might want to recalculate your physics problem and find the error that thinks the rifle recoils forward. But it's no longer a Physics I problem when you throw in muzzle brakes and gases. It's a lot more difficult. Perhaps the rifle is bouncing off your shoulder or something.