Long Range Hunting Online Magazine

Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment > Long Range Scopes and Other Optics

Long Range Scopes and Other Optics Nightforce Optics


Rem 700 VS w/ 20 moa mount question

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 04-23-2003, 06:36 AM
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 5
Re: Rem 700 VS w/ 20 moa mount question

Matt 27,

I have only tried the scope with the 20 moa Badger mount. It seemed to me that if I went to a Nightforce 40 moa mount, then I would only need to dial the scope 10 moa UP in elevation, leaving me 55 moa to get all the way out to 1000.

Do you guys think I am looking at this wrong to think that 20 moa additional elevation in the mount would result in 20 moa less elevation needed in the scope elevation?

Let me know what you think.


I am dialing the scope UP in elevation to get the bullet to zero at 100 yards. I have to use almost half of my available scope elevation adjustability just to get to zero. It seemed to me that I needed to go to the 40 moa mount, but I thought I'd see if any of you had run into this problem.

I will definitely try the 175 grain Sierra MK and see where I go, but the guys I shoot with load their 175's with the same load as their 168's. I'm also going to try varying seating depths to see what affect it has on required elevation to get to 1000.

I was hoping that someone else had run into this before. My assumption is that the receiver is off just enough to require more cant in the scope mount to be able make full use of the scope's total available elevation.

Any additional comments are certainly welcomed. Thanks.
Reply With Quote

Unread 04-23-2003, 08:25 AM
Platinum Member
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,757
Re: Rem 700 VS w/ 20 moa mount question


Check your base and make "SURE" it in fact has a .020" taper. My guess is, it don't.

If your using half of the available clicks in the scope to get to 100 yards with a supposed .020" tapered base, it can't be tapered or it's somehow on backward, which would be hard to do.

I would have started with a .040" tapered one to begin with.

The NXS 8X to 32X has 65 MOA Total
The precision Benchrest 8X to 32X has only 50MOA.

Solution---Check the tapor or get a .040" Nightforce base.

Darryl Cassel
Reply With Quote
Unread 04-23-2003, 09:12 AM
Gold Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Wenatchee, WA
Posts: 806
Re: Rem 700 VS w/ 20 moa mount question

Well, like some of the others have said... I'd suspect something is mechanically a bit off. If it's a barrel/receiver thing, then short of replacing stuff, not much you can do but live w/ it. If everything was centered, you *should* have more than enough elevation as is. My .308 has a tendency to want to go to the side, I think, which really eats up the windage on some scopes w/ smaller adjustment ranges. Try either a 40MOA base, or as a cheaper option to see if it works first, get some Signature rings w/ appropriate inserts for 40MOA. IIRC, they are about 1/3 the price of the Badger Ord. bases.

As far as the 168 vs 175gr loads... I'd say they are either underloading their 168's or overloading the 175's if they are using the same load for each, but that's just me.

BTW, pardon my ignorance, but exactly what do you think seating depth has to do w/ elevation at LR (besides increasing case volume if you seat them out a *long* ways)? I'm not familiar w/ this (seating depth) as a way of affecting bullet drop.

Reply With Quote
Unread 04-23-2003, 02:41 PM
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 5
Re: Rem 700 VS w/ 20 moa mount question


In response to your question about bullet drop and seating the bullets long, I expected to need a total of about 43 additional moa to get from 100 yard zero to 1000 yards. Since my sight adjustment required 52 additional moa, I suspected that the bullet velocity was slow causing the exessive drop. My speculation was that the increased case volume, as a result of seating the bullet .110" longer than the suggested 2.800" over-all length that ammo manufactures such as Black Hills use, was a contributor to decreased velocity (less initial pressure). Since I don't presently own a chronograph, I had no way of telling what the velocity of my hand loads were, and if seating the bullets long (within .010" of the rifle lands) was having an adverse affect on my long distance shots. That is why I asked if seating the bullets closer to the rifling might be a cause of my problem, and if I needed to compensate with a slightly higher powder charge. I've been holding until I could afford the Ohler 35P chronograph. Another $120 for the Nightforce mount keeps me just that much further from my goal. I didn't want to spend the $ for the 40 moa mount without asking for advise from more experienced shooters.

I spoke with Jeff at Nightforce this morning and his suggestion was to replace the 20 moa mount with the 40 moa mount and see if that corrects the condition. I ordered the mount this morning.

I'll reply back after I have installed the new mount and checked my zeros.

Any comments on reduced velocity as a result of increased case volume (seating bullets longer)from anyone? Any other advice is appreciated.
Reply With Quote
Unread 04-24-2003, 09:14 AM
Silver Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: occupied, USA
Posts: 189
Re: Rem 700 VS w/ 20 moa mount question

You MUST ditch the 168 bullet loads. They cannot successfully perform at 1,000y in a .308 unless you drive them at unsafe (for yourself/your rifle) velocities. Use them for 600y or less.

Use the 175 MK, it is clearly superior at long range.

Optics. Did you make sure your scope was optically centered before you zeroed at 100y?

If not, then you should, before proceeding further. With 65 total moa, then the scope should have 4 or 8 times that many clicks, depending on 1/4 or 1/8 adjustments.

Crank (gently) the elevation to the top (or bottom, doesn't matter), and then count back to the middle (meaning 32.5 moa from your top or bottom, in clicks). That's the optical center.

My guess is that you were sent a non-tapered base. I have a Badger Ordnance 20moa taper one-piece base that I will sell you for $105.00 shipped. Like new, in the original package. I know it has the taper, because it exactly matches the other one I use. [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

With that scope and a 20 moa taper base, you *should* absolutely be able to get a 1,000y zero, unless your rifle's receiver is way out of whack.

DON'T use 168 bullets in .308 Win for shooting 1,000y. They'll be going, at best, transonic to subsonic, and you won't be able to gauge accuracy from one shot to the next. Your groups will be barn door size.

[ 04-24-2003: Message edited by: Nate Haler ]
it's not about need in the USA -- it's about WANT
Reply With Quote
Unread 04-25-2003, 07:16 PM
Gold Member
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Urich, MO
Posts: 838
Re: Rem 700 VS w/ 20 moa mount question

Have to back up what most everybody said.
1. You have to have 175s for 1000. 168s are subsonic by then.
2. It's possible that you have a flat base but highly unlikely as Marty made a VERY small amount of flat bases.
3. You have another problem and putting a 40 MOA base is simply a band-aid. I mount about 10 rifles a week with Badger bases and rings and test them at 1000 every weekend with Leupold's, Nightforce, S&B and B&L tacticals and have no trouble getting to 1000.

My suggestion would be forget the band-aid and send your rig to a good smith to be checked out.
Chris Matthews
Reply With Quote
Unread 04-26-2003, 06:32 AM
Posts: n/a
Re: Rem 700 VS w/ 20 moa mount question

Wait a min..

I think the base is on backwards... 30 MOA to zero at 100 easy.. 20 MOA for the base and 10 MOA for error or just to line everything up.... I amnot sure how you could do this unless you drilled new hole but it sounds like it is on backwards.. even if it is flat or non tapered.. 30 MOA to zero at 100 ... WOW!!!!

I'd tear everything apart..rings, bases, etc.... set the turrets back to optical center .. remount everything and try it again..
Reply With Quote


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads for: Rem 700 VS w/ 20 moa mount question
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nightforce Direct Mount for Remi 700 - question Jon2 Long Range Hunting & Shooting 6 02-10-2010 07:46 PM
Question-Shawn's ring cap mount, ACI & ACD Chas1 Long Range Scopes and Other Optics 5 11-03-2009 09:23 PM
Stupid mount question trlcavscout Long Range Scopes and Other Optics 9 04-01-2009 06:34 PM
Dumb Scope Mount Question Banjo Long Range Scopes and Other Optics 2 11-08-2005 03:30 PM
My first set of Badger rings & have question on how to mount fourinone Long Range Scopes and Other Optics 2 09-07-2005 08:03 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:46 PM.

All content ©2010-2015 Long Range Hunting, LLC