Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Long Range Scopes and Other Optics' started by Bigeclipse, Oct 12, 2019.
Use the flat end. Tells you a lot more.
Let me tell you what I do and why, you decide. I’ve only been lapping my scope mounts for the last four or five years. I have an old scope that Shows were the scope mounts angled into it with a dent, that tells me the scope mounts Weren't true or the rifle action was not true. Now I epoxy bed my mounts to the rifle action, then I check them with lapping compound. The last three rifles I have done were with tally rings, everyone of them needed lapped to getting close to full contact with the scope. The next thing I do is put a light coat of RTV on the bottom rings with my finger. Then I set the scope in place and I put a light coat of silicone or RTV on the caps get everything set and tighten down the Screws this beds the bases to the rifle and the scope to the bases. I have never had an issue and no slippage. If things need to be removed they can be taken apart easily.
Oh yes, our use wheeler lapping bars.
I don't lap my rings, but I do have a 1" diameter gauge-grade ground piece of barstock that I use for alignment. I could use it for lapping if needed.
I run a reamer 30mm and 35 mm from Manson reamers. They are made specifically for lapping rings but faster. You would be surprised on all the quality rings I see that had pinch points. Don't get me wrong it's not drastic but every scope I mount I use the reamer. Every scope mount after mounting never had any ring marks. I always do this never hurts. Only bad side the reamers are not cheap.
I use Seekins rings and vortex rings (which are made by Seekins). They don’t need lapping.
Invest in your rings, like you would in your action. Good quality rings don't require it because of tighter manufacturing tolerances and stricter QC. That said, Seekins has *never* let me down.
Call me Mr. OCD. Everything from the receiver out is trued/blueprinted. However the quality of the component, it is checked. If not perfect it is trued. If a separate screwed base is used, it is bedded. The rings then get a quick lap for contact. If not perfect then they are lapped.
We are talking about long-range accuracy. The crown, barrel, barreled action to stock/chassis bedding/gluing needs to be perfect. From off the shelf to full custom this needs to be done. If this retentive process is not needed we would all be shooting off the shelf, mass produced firearms with no modifications.
Time consuming yes! Cheep No.
And yes I am that OCD with case preparation through the final loaded cartridge. Just me, I like it anyway. I should probably change my avatar and screen name now.
Question for the non-lappers, do you verify the rings are perfectly aligned with each other and what method do you use? JacobPaul, redleg, others...
Lapping is a thing of the past. If the rings need to be lapped they need to be tossed and you should buy better rings. Precision machine matched rings and base sets are offered by multiple reputable manufacturers. Seekins, Steiner, Badger, Nightforce, and US Optics to name a few.
Yeah, I gotta disagree. It isn’t only about the rings. The rings can not compensate for the other imperfections in the base and action. I refuse to believe that a pic rail is that much more precisely machined than it was 15-20 years ago. Or the rings for that matter. Im currently using Nightforce, Seekins and Badger rings and lapping has improved every mount.
What about if you aren’t lapping the rings because of the rings? What if you are lapping to correct for other stacked tolerances that are too small to be corrected in and of themselves but their overall effect is enough that needs to be corrected somehow?
I use the A.R.C rings, never lapped them, and have used Schmidt/bender, Hensoldt, Premier, and a March in these rings with zero issues. Zero issues includes ring marks, slippage, or to the best of my knowledge, concentricity deviations. Also, I am not a machinist, nor have I worked behind a gun counter. I am also in no way affiliated with A.R.C. I have used every major ring manufacturer over the last 12 years and these happen to be the better mouse trap in my opinion. Having been successful in precision rifle, and the only ELR match I have shot, I am merely stating that if my rings are not 100% concentric to the universe, I can still say, good enough...
Like most things in hobbies like this, its a question of how much is good enough? Ultimately what matters is ring alignment with each other and with the action. Those who buy expensive rings and have convinced themselves that they don't need to be checked are possibly giving away some potential. If they're good with that then why should I care?
As I've posted, having worked in design & manufacturing for a long time I can say that the ES and SD of the right off the machine tool production tolerances has gotten better over the years. However, no COTS reamer that I know of has flutes long enough to be simultaneously fully engaged in both rings of a one-piece ring set, so their alignment may not be perfect unless the mfg is buying specially made reamers - which is possible. For two piece rings sets how they are fixtured will be hugely important to how well their bores align, but can likely get 4 rings all simultaneously engaged in a COTS reamer's flutes.
When I read posts that insist the lapping is not ever required or needed when you buy X brand I can't help but think that they have drank that brand's Kool-Aide and have no actual idea of what they're saying. That they're simply repeating what their choice of mfg has, for whatever reason, told their consumers. That said, I do think that it is feasible that a very high percentage of rings (& bases) do not need lapping or bedding to be good enough for most. In my ~6 years behind the counter in a gun shop I did a lot of scope mountings that didn't mar the scope, and never were lapped or bedded.