Wish me luck bedding new scope

bluedog69

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 25, 2021
Messages
299
Location
USA
All went well!!!
0E446679-AC02-4DB8-82B4-E778A6636E63.jpeg
 

DDWing

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2019
Messages
146
Location
Florence Alabama
No issues. Haven’t even shot a box with this new scope and rifle has only had about 26 rounds through it.
Just been researching and bedded my one piece rail and made sure the rail was straight. Picture the rings being attached to a rail and then flexing the rail up in the middle or down in the middle. This will put the rings out of alignment with each other. This in turn will put pressure on scope.

There are four places have to be perfect to be torque free. The top of rifle machined perfect. The rail perfect to the rifle. The rail to the rings and then the rings to the scope.

Just thought I would try it. One guy said he bedded his twelve years ago and has never had to mess with it since and he shoots out to 1000.
I shoot out to 1000, and have never bedded any of my scopes. I've never seen a reason to.
 

JMGamesniper19

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
415
Location
USA
Ok so i may have blinders on - 21 years of working in and around fine rifles. Building them, working with rifle and barrel companies, rubbing elbows with PRS style shooters and the military. Have never heard of or seen any one mounting a scope by bedding it.
Can anyone share with me the rationale? EmpIrical data. Reasons? Open to learn if there is something to learn
 

jgs8163

Well-Known Member
LRH Team Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2011
Messages
1,832
Location
Southern Arizona
Have you tried the scope alinement tools too see if everything lines up first. If they don't then lap the rings , with good quality rings and bases there usually isn't a problem , but good luck hope it works out
It’s usually not the base or rings that create the issue. It’s usually the action not being completely true/level from the front mount area to the rear mount area. This is very common on Savage, Remmy, and other factory rifles. When you mount the rail on your factory action it’s easy to check this multiple ways. I just finished a 300PRC build not too long ago and used a Nightforce base and rings. The rail was perfectly level off the rifle but when mounted and torqued the rail had a bow to it from the action not being level/true. Not good for a scope to be mounted in this. We bedded the rail and it solved the issue. I then bedded the rings as well just to be sure. You can check easily with a straight edge by checking rail before mounted and after mounted. You can also place the rail in the area to be mounted and push down on it and see if it rocks at all from front to rear. I also had the same issue with a Savage 116 6.5-284.
 

JMGamesniper19

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
415
Location
USA
It’s usually not the base or rings that create the issue. It’s usually the action not being completely true/level from the front mount area to the rear mount area. This is very common on Savage, Remmy, and other factory rifles. When you mount the rail on your factory action it’s easy to check this multiple ways. I just finished a 300PRC build not too long ago and used a Nightforce base and rings. The rail was perfectly level off the rifle but when mounted and torqued the rail had a bow to it from the action not being level/true. Not good for a scope to be mounted in this. We bedded the rail and it solved the issue. I then bedded the rings as well just to be sure. You can check easily with a straight edge by checking rail before mounted and after mounted. You can also place the rail in the area to be mounted and push down on it and see if it rocks at all from front to rear. I also had the same issue with a Savage 116 6.5-284.
I have yet to find any ring or scope manufacturer that will tell you bedding a scope is preferred or recommended. If you have a bad action, than address the action.
When mounting a scope, the best process is to lap the rings. Lapping the rings will create more consistent contact and will ensure that the torque is perfectly distributed throughout the scope and ring surfaces.
IMO and IME, I recommend lapping and would never recommend bedding a scope. Ever.
To each their own.
 

jgs8163

Well-Known Member
LRH Team Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2011
Messages
1,832
Location
Southern Arizona
I have yet to find any ring or scope manufacturer that will tell you bedding a scope is preferred or recommended. If you have a bad action, than address the action.
When mounting a scope, the best process is to lap the rings. Lapping the rings will create more consistent contact and will ensure that the torque is perfectly distributed throughout the scope and ring surfaces.
IMO and IME, I recommend lapping and would never recommend bedding a scope. Ever.
To each their own.
Ok. I can also tell you many ring manufacturers will tell you “not” to lap their rings, but I never said lapping the rings is a bad thing. As you said, to each their own. There’s no way to address it in the action that’s reasonable. Hence the reason for bedding the rail if using one. Nightforce recommends against lapping their rings and it voids their warranty. Lapping the rings can be very effective, but after lapping they’re basically only good for that rifle many times unless your action is perfectly true from rear tang mount area to front mount area, which many factory rifles are not.

 
Last edited:

JMGamesniper19

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
415
Location
USA
Ok. I can also tell you many ring manufacturers will tell you “not” to lap their rings, but I never said lapping the rings is a bad thing. As you said, to each their own. There’s no way to address it in the action that’s reasonable. Hence the reason for bedding the rail if using one. Nightforce recommends against lapping their rings and it voids their warranty. Lapping the rings can be very effective, but after lapping they’re basically only good for that rifle many times unless your action is perfectly true from rear tang mount area to front mount area, which many factory rifles are not.

Gun Digest - interesting article. Doesn't change my mind or the experiences that I have. I do appreciate you sharing it! Always good to see what is out there.

I have a long and direct connection with NF and have for years. One that allows me to call personal phone numbers. The person I spoke to kinda chuckled when I said what we were debating around bedding rings. Not something they recommend, ever. Furthermore, lapping nightforce rings does NOT void the warranty. If it did than bedding the rings would void the warranty too.

Huge fan of geeking out on accuracy. Huge fan of trying new things, if they truly make sense.
Look. What is done is done and at the end of the day, if you believe in what you are doing. Go for it. I will do the same.
 

tobnpr

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
290
I recommend lapping and would never recommend bedding a scope. Ever.
I concur. To me, it's a solution in search of a problem.
As you said, with two-piece ring mounts, bed the mounts to align them to the receiver .
I've never had an issue with a scope binding or slipping in the rings (including a .338 LM w/ Leupold MK IV steel rings).
Quality rings, on a quality one-piece rail don't need bedding IMO.

Theoretically, if you apply enough pressure to the scope tube when bedding you would squeeze ALL the epoxy out assuming the rings are precisely machined. There will be no voids. Leaving epoxy in place, simply raises the scope in the rings to sit on a thin layer of epoxy. Could the epoxy have a greater friction coefficient than the aluminum? Perhaps, but again- I don't have problems so I don't need a "solution".

Makes zero sense to me why anyone would bed the scope to the bottom rings, and not the top as well? If your rationale is that the rings are not precisely machined to obtain maximum surface area contact- wouldn't this apply to the top half of the rings as well?
 

ntsqd

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
1,112
Location
Upper SoKA
From my first exposure to lapping rings there has always been the camp that says bed them instead and that camp that says don't do either because the mfg's all say that it isn't necessary.

Done correctly I don't see much difference in the end result between lapping and bedding. Done incorrectly both are bad, they just differ in how. I do see it as ironic that people will bed actions to CNC machined chassis, but won't bed the CNC made rail to an action or bed a scope to CNC made scope rings

There are a LOT things done in the world that the mfg says isn't necessary. If YOU were a scope mount mfg would you say lapping or bedding is a good idea? I sure as heck wouldn't. That would imply that my product was less than perfect, and who would want to buy them from me then?

Just because parts are made on a CNC machine doesn't make them perfect. It really doesn't mean anything more than they're likely closer to nominal than if they were made by hand in a volume setting, but it doesn't mean that they're perfect. There are too many ways for the process to fail to expect the parts coming out of a CNC machine to be perfect.
 
Top