Scope mounts and rings?

Status
Not open for further replies.
kmw1954

kmw1954

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2018
Messages
3,585
Location
SE Wisconsin
The other day I posted that with the help of a friend we swapped scopes on my Savage Axis 223 While cleaning it today after firing it the other day I noticed that the scope moved forward and is now touching the mounting rail.

The mount is a Weaver Multi-slot and the rings are Weaver Quad Lock Mediums. The old scope had a 40mm Objective and the new Burris has a 42mm Objective. Both fit very tightly on the gun in that there was not much room to move the scope forward or rearward because of the length of the base. With the old scope off the rings I could see where the original owner or mounter had cut or filed the ends of the mounting rail for clearance.

The new scope is even tighter on the rail and has now moved forward to where the mount base is touching the scope magnification ring.

So this is my question. Do I change rings to High from Medium or just try to file/grind the base mount for more clearance? As it is the scope height feels good and comfortable and I have good eye relief. I have looked already and Amazon and BPS has the Weaver Quad Lock High rings in stock. They are about $5.00 more at BPS but I can drive there and get them tomorrow or I can order from either Amazon or ObticsPlanet.

Now also before we all start to comment on the scope moving, let's not. The friend that helped has mounted scopes before and we did this at the shop at the range and had all the proper tools and the ring screws were all torqued with a driver to spec.
 
Im actually having the same issue with my Ridgeline and my FFe1 that standing in for my Zeiss for now. They arnt real long scopes, and the eye relief isn't super long either.

I would probably cut the rail back to 1/4" or so in front of the FRONT screw IF that will give you enough clearance to get the scope far enough back....I'm actually kinda surprised you have it in low rings on an Axis, I tried that with my buddies Sig which i don't remember having a much larger ocular, and the handle smacked it.
Also if your scope doesn't have at least 1/16 of an inch clearing the barrel its very possible there will be enough flex that they will bang into each other during recoil. I don't know if that actually damages scopes, but I've had rub marks on a few of mine that i managed to get too close.

The easiest option is just to switch to taller rings, but like you I have had to fight stuff because I didn't want to use that option.
 
These are Medium rings now and thinking of moving to the High rings. Seeing that the base has already been altered I wouldn't feel uncomfortable altering it a bit more. I am thinking if I remove the scope and rings from the base leaving the rings mounted I could file the base and hopefully not mess with re-sighting everything.

I believe I have enough height clearance just not enough length clearance. Though by going to the higher rings that too would give more adjustment.
 
kmw1954 said:
These are Medium rings now and thinking of moving to the High rings. Seeing that the base has already been altered I wouldn't feel uncomfortable altering it a bit more. I am thinking if I remove the scope and rings from the base leaving the rings mounted I could file the base and hopefully not mess with re-sighting everything.

I believe I have enough height clearance just not enough length clearance. Though by going to the higher rings that too would give more adjustment.
Click to expand...
Doh! don't know where i got lows from....anyway, yeah you should come back on close, tho id definitely check zero before doing anything besides potting targets.

troy fairweather said:
They really need to start making the tubes longer again, seen way to many problems with short tubes.
Click to expand...
They expect us to all shoot short actions...or use rails with stupid tall rings.....
 
I’ll need to ask forgiveness but if you’re meaning the scope has moved from where your friend mounted it, then it was not mounted correctly. That can happen a number of ways including not rinsing hardware and holes with alcohol to remove oil or having rings that don’t make even contact.

Back to a solution, I’d agree with grinding the edges of the mounts. If the problem persists then you’ve got an opportunity to grab a set of Burris Signature rings and you can compare specs to determine if their medium is taller or shorter than your current Weavers. Not every “medium” is the same and one company’s tall may be somewhere in-between.


This one has a full 1/16” clearance at the middle but copious space at the ocular and objective by comparison.
3F8B69E1-5677-44B3-BB5A-39F8810B7967.jpeg
 
OK, I removed the scope with the rings still attached and took a large flat fine rat file to both ends after I of course taped them off. I now have about a quarters thickness gap between the objective bell and the barrel and about a dimes thickness gap between the mount and the scope.
 
kmw1954 said:
OK, I removed the scope with the rings still attached and took a large flat fine rat file to both ends after I of course taped them off. I now have about a quarters thickness gap between the objective bell and the barrel and about a dimes thickness gap between the mount and the scope.
Click to expand...
Paint with a marker of something the bear metal bothers me lol.
 
Make sure the cross bolts of your scope rings touch the base groove edges.....muzzle side.
Have seen many folks forget that.

Rings, base and even crossbolt torques.......can be correct, but if you don't have the crossbolts acting as recoil stops it will anvil and slip.
 
In this case we did not disturb the ring bases, we just removed to ring tops and cleaned everything with a degreaser and then Loc-tite blue on the screws. The previous scope was very stable with the same rings and base.
 
I noticed my Freedom VX in Ruger rings had to have the top halves pushed onto the scope, even after dressing the sides (Ruger rings have tops cut so they go past center).

Putting an older gloss Vari X II in, the top rings halves dropped on way easier.

There is a diff in dimension on scope tubes. Older vs newer. At least with the scopes I have.
 
If the scope tube slipped in the rings, they were a poor fit, or or not tight enough, or both, but I would be hard pressed to continue using them, Burris Zee rings are inexpensive and work great. It's as cheap as I'll go.

I swap this one on and off ARs to test loads. YMH risers and Zee rings.
AR 15 - Anvil Arms Lower - TS .22 LR Upper - Simmons 6.5X20 Scope.JPG
 
https://ads.midwayusa.com/product/1548661544 these would be my recommendation moving forward. They don’t scratch or crush the scope tube and they hold solid. If you don’t like clicking links, $34.99

I’ve used Weavers in the past, Leupold, etc. and for my money, unless I’m shelling out for $100+ rings, these are now my go-to rings. My next step up are Talley if the rifle style suits them.
 
Thanks guys, at this point I don't know exactly what has happened or just what moved. Whether it was the tube in the rings or the rings on the base. I will take it with to work tomorrow and see if my friend can look at it.
 
This maybe just be, but any time i change scopes, i pull the rings and reset everything, unless the are one piece ring/base.

That way I KNOW ive done the job right, and nothing got shifted in the removal process.

Ive actually had really good service from weaver quadlocks, and use them pretty often if im not using Warne or Talleys. Torque specs are 30in/lbs for the cross bolts, and 15in/lbs for the top screws.
Have not had any damaged scope tubes or slippage yet.

It you decide to upgrade rings id go with the Burris listed or Warnes, which are a bit more, but that just my personal preference.
 
LoonWulf those are the torque specs we found and used which is why I took this to work to install. I don't own a in.lb. torque wrench.
 
I bought a Wheeler torque driver for 60 bucks.

Checking my old.screwdriver and Allen/ torx ( w Allen wrench type keys )....my stuff was on the money.

But I worked in a lab and did similar ( w drivers ) for decades.

I had the touch

The Wheeler driver is wrist only and very different. Has no real feel....so is easy to set it wrong and not feel it.

That slip at hitting the setting is weird too.

But over time you can develop.some.feel.for it.

Would still prefer screwdriver and allen key stuff if i had the knack. Been at a diff job w heavy lifting, impact stuff to hands and wrists....

Total shift in usage.

Consequently I run the Wheeler
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
  • Locked
Scope Mount Suggestions Needed
Replies
12
Views
831
Sniper66
S
H
  • Locked
Help with side mount rings
Replies
4
Views
203
hct4all
H
K
  • Locked
Scope mount
Replies
10
Views
1K
sage5907
sage5907
CodeSection
  • Locked
Lapping Scope Rings - Neccesary?
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
earlthegoat2
earlthegoat2
A
  • Locked
Rings for a scoped .22.
Replies
2
Views
925
Averageman
A
Back
Top