Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
G1–G7: Nearly had a heart attack!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Susquatch" data-source="post: 1650825" data-attributes="member: 31264"><p>All this fuss over rings. If that is so important, why isn't everyone lapping the scope tube too?</p><p></p><p>Just for Shi-s & Giggles, I just mounted three brand new scopes (never used, never mounted Nightforce, Leupold, & Winchester) in my concentricity gauge. As I expected, none were anywhere near perfect. Surprisingly, the best of the lot was a $30 Winchester (rebranded Tasco) for pellet guns!</p><p></p><p>When the practice of lapping rings first started, it was done to remove burrs and paint gobs at the edges that could marr the painted finish that was used on the scope tubes back then. </p><p></p><p>Since I never had any rings like that, I've never had to Lapp them. And I have never marked a scope.</p><p></p><p>I guess I'm failing to see how rings could affect accuracy unless they stress an action. Bedding bases to avoid stressing an action makes sense to me. Lapping rings does not. Even if the rings are misaligned, they will just bend the scope. Since scopes are bent anyway, why bother. IMHO, scope stress doesn't affect accuracy or adjustment integrity. However, stresses transmitted to the action could.</p><p></p><p>I'm sorry, I am just not convinced that lapping high quality rings is required.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Susquatch, post: 1650825, member: 31264"] All this fuss over rings. If that is so important, why isn't everyone lapping the scope tube too? Just for Shi-s & Giggles, I just mounted three brand new scopes (never used, never mounted Nightforce, Leupold, & Winchester) in my concentricity gauge. As I expected, none were anywhere near perfect. Surprisingly, the best of the lot was a $30 Winchester (rebranded Tasco) for pellet guns! When the practice of lapping rings first started, it was done to remove burrs and paint gobs at the edges that could marr the painted finish that was used on the scope tubes back then. Since I never had any rings like that, I've never had to Lapp them. And I have never marked a scope. I guess I'm failing to see how rings could affect accuracy unless they stress an action. Bedding bases to avoid stressing an action makes sense to me. Lapping rings does not. Even if the rings are misaligned, they will just bend the scope. Since scopes are bent anyway, why bother. IMHO, scope stress doesn't affect accuracy or adjustment integrity. However, stresses transmitted to the action could. I'm sorry, I am just not convinced that lapping high quality rings is required. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
G1–G7: Nearly had a heart attack!
Top