Seems like the latest thing in rifle scopes is to lap the scope rings with a lapping bar and very fine grinding compound. Do you do that?? Or is it a lot of hooie and "BS".??
I have the mounts and rings installed on my new varminter but placing the scope body itself down into the bottom half of the ring(s) it doesnt just "drop in" like I thought it might...but instead its a very snug fit. I might not have the front ring just exactly square with the rifle bore and that could cause a "sideways" pinch to make the fit feel snug....I'll just have to check and double check that. Of course a lapping job would take most or all of that away...making the bore of the rings a perfect "cylinder".
Do you or have you lapped in a set of scope rings??
Yes, many times. It's not so much a new thing as it is more people are maybe paying attention to it now.
I've been mounting alot of high dollar scopes lately, and don't want ring marks if I can avoid it. I also don't want to take any chance of bending the tube on those expensive scopes. Additionally, lapping in properly gives more surface contact between each ring and the scope, thereby theoretically adding more clamping force, and less chance of scope slippage inside the rings.
Lapping is not a cure all however, some rings are "pinched" and need to be slightly spread out or they will mark the scope. Others are not aligned with one another exactly square left to right (dovetail and windage adjustable types are kinda famous for this). A precision made scope ring alignment tool will show you if this is the case, and a lapping bar will aid in alignment of those types of rings. Still, another issue that crops up sometimes is that one ring is higher than the other, which is where shimming comes in. I haven't done any of that, and hope I never have to.
Sinclair/Brownells make scope alignment and lapping kits, so does Wheeler. I prefer the lapping compound that comes with the Sinclair model, it seems to clean up easier.
Look into Burris Signature rings. Never lap again, no rings marks, great clamping power, ability to adjust scope within the rings.
I concur, Burris Signature rings are great & don't require lapping due to the plastic insert. The only problem (besides cost) is they aren't made for every application. In fact, the last 3 guns I mounted scopes on did not have Burris Signature rings available to fit!
Burris signature (PERIOD). They go up down and all around. The average action isn't straight or in plain, its almost a wonder that scopes have enough adjustment to compensate. A set of .005 bushings will take care of most concerns. Set your scope to optical zero and twist the rings until you are zeroed, then enjoy 100% scope adjustability in all directions. P.S. no binding or kinking either
I have started at least checking all of my rings with an alignment bar. All of them needed lapping with the excepton of Ken Farrel rings on their picatinny rail. On one piece bases, once again only the Ken Farrell base fit without bedding. It hurts me to watch the uneven one piece bases pulled down with the screws. I cannot imagine it is good for the receiver.
I find it is imperative to use locktight also. The 6-48 screws so commonly used are very small with very little torque to hold them in and they seem to come loose, particularly on my 338-06. Someday, I would love to tap all my receivers for bigger screws.. I notice the high end guys are using 8-40's now. I am afraid of tapping my own without a fixture. If you think of how little the erector moves inside the scope to change point of impact, I am a believer in high quality rings and bases now with bigger screws, locktight, and some bases have recoil lugs, additionally, bedding the bases and aligning and lapping the rings.