Adding 15moa to LW talley rings

[stcummingsjr]

My question is..has anybody milled 15 moa worth of cant into Talleys one piece alum. light weight Rings?

I have a 300 wby that shoots 210vld @ 3015fps. Where we live at sea level.

I'm looking to optimism my range and reach what I can with my 45 total moa range.

I have other optics with more adjustment, but with what I'm trying to accomplish I'm looking to save the most weight as possible hence the talleys matched with the conquest.

I'm not looking for much more range that what I can achieve without adding additional moa to this setup, but would be happy with its capability If I could reach 1200yds or so.

I currently need 31.5 moa to hit 1200 yds per FTE.

So should I try to get my talleys milled? ... Or (I realize the harm of) but can I get away with adding a rear shim and bed to receiver or suggestions ???

I realize that trying to save a total of 4 oz is not all that practical considering the weight of one loaded round topped by a 210gr vld but hey why not push the envelope.

I have at my disposal from past projects alum tps rings and alum 20moa egw base that come in right around 6 0z combined but was hoping to shave a little more off of that set up.

Thanks for the help. Steve

 

[rscott5028]

I may not be the best to comment. But, I'd go with the EGW. And, if I was determined to lose weight, I might consider milling some uneeded metal from the EGW. Or, even taking out the middle section. But, I think a solid/stable setup is better than getting greedy.

my $.02

 

[Clark]

If your rings/bases are 5" apart and you want 12 moa, then the shim or milling would be

H = 5" tan 12 moa = 5" tan .2 degrees = .01745"

Here is some shim stock.

Enco - Guaranteed Lowest Prices on Machinery, Measuring Tools, Cutting Tools and Shop Supplies

I would not only put shims under the rear mouth, but would put epoxy under each mount.

I would get the Leupold zero point bore sight, so I knew where i was.

When the scope reticule is adjusted to center of the scope tube, and then I look at the zero point, there are often more problems than elevation that need to get fixed. The epoxy under each mount can help fix those problems.

Here is a video of screwing on the elevation and windage turrets while looking through the zero point

 

[rscott5028]

So, you did some math to figure out how much to raise the rear mount. But, what are you doing to adjust the tilt so that the rings don't put the tube in a bind?

 

[Clark]

Do not tighten the base(s) until the epoxy is hard.

While the epoxy is hardening, make sure the center adjusted scope looks like it is where you want it in the Leupold zero point. In your case, the cross hairs should be 12 inches low.

 

[Dr. Vette]

You could calculate how much of a shim you will need.

Apply release agent to the action and bedding material to each underside of the mounts. Insert shim under the back of the rear mount or around the rear screw hole (your choice) when installing.

Of the 4 screws (2 front, 2 back) you could install the front one to about 5-10 in-lb, the middle two just so they align the bases left-to-right, and the rear one (which has the shim underneath) also to 5-10 in-lbs. Be sure to put release agent on all 4 screws.

Now, using a 1 inch bar (i.e. scope alignment bar) you would torque each of the ring cap screws to 20 or 25 in-lbs. This would effectively place the mounts in a straight line based on the alignment bar, and the front screw would act as the "zero" for the mounts, the rear screw as the highest point. After it all dries and you remove the alignment bar you can install your scope stress free.
Obviously, be sure to torque all of the base screws before installing the scope.

You might think I've done this before.

 

[Boss Hoss]

A good Smith can do this for you easy if you supply the calculations. I am fortunate because I just tell mine what we need and he does it. Have only had to do this once but it is really no big deal.

 

[SidecarFlip]

My question is..has anybody milled 15 moa worth of cant into Talleys one piece alum. light weight Rings?

I have a 300 wby that shoots 210vld @ 3015fps. Where we live at sea level.

I'm looking to optimism my range and reach what I can with my 45 total moa range.

I have other optics with more adjustment, but with what I'm trying to accomplish I'm looking to save the most weight as possible hence the talleys matched with the conquest.

I'm not looking for much more range that what I can achieve without adding additional moa to this setup, but would be happy with its capability If I could reach 1200yds or so.

I currently need 31.5 moa to hit 1200 yds per FTE.

So should I try to get my talleys milled? ... Or (I realize the harm of) but can I get away with adding a rear shim and bed to receiver or suggestions ???

I realize that trying to save a total of 4 oz is not all that practical considering the weight of one loaded round topped by a 210gr vld but hey why not push the envelope.

I have at my disposal from past projects alum tps rings and alum 20moa egw base that come in right around 6 0z combined but was hoping to shave a little more off of that set up.

Thanks for the help. Steve

Probably should have saw this thread before, but I didn't look....

Talley will custom mill the rail in house to your cant specification. Just give them a call. I just talked to Josh at Talley on Thursday and they will cant to your MOA offset.

I'm against shimming the rear because with an alloy rail-ring, one piece assembly, shimming the rear could cause misalignment of the rail, it is alloy and more flexible than a steel rail/clamped ring assembly.

I just ordered one with no cant but I'll in house ball mill the base to a 10 moa cant, because I have the machines and the means to do it, however, Talley will.

Have a good friend with the Talley one piece mounting a Nikon and he's very happy with them...

 

[SidecarFlip]

So, you did some math to figure out how much to raise the rear mount. But, what are you doing to adjust the tilt so that the rings don't put the tube in a bind?

There is no 'bind' because the rings and base are integral, that is, one piece. The base and rings are milled from a block of aluminum in one piece and the ring half is split to accept the optic.

I would still lap the rings after fitment to the firearm.

 

[Clark]

I'm against shimming the rear because with an alloy rail-ring, one piece assembly, shimming the rear could cause misalignment of the rail, it is alloy and more flexible than a steel rail/clamped ring assembly.

You have to shim it right, so there is not stress on the rail.
At Boeing tooling, they make things with shims and Devcon ever day.
They don't just shim on one side of a fastener.
Boeing's standards for accuracy and precision would make Talley look like a garage operation.
And they have lots of mills and mill operators standing by at Boeing if they wanted to do it that way.

 

[Dr. Vette]

There is no 'bind' because the rings and base are integral, that is, one piece. The base and rings are milled from a block of aluminum in one piece and the ring half is split to accept the optic.

I would still lap the rings after fitment to the firearm.

You'll still have bind because there is a front ring/base and a rear ring/base, at least if his 300 Wby is actually in a Weatherby rifle. He's then adding misalignment and therefore bind if he shims one of the two.

Using the scope alignment bar as I did there's no bind, and no lapping is needed.
However, would Talley make a matched set with preloaded cant? He'd have to call them and ask.

 

[SidecarFlip]

You have to shim it right, so there is not stress on the rail.
At Boeing tooling, they make things with shims and Devcon ever day.
They don't just shim on one side of a fastener.
Boeing's standards for accuracy and precision would make Talley look like a garage operation.
And they have lots of mills and mill operators standing by at Boeing if they wanted to do it that way.

First off, lets not get into Boeing. I'm familiar with them and their 'standards'...lol, remember they are a government contractor. enough said on that.

Secondly, I'm not a shim and Devcon person, I want metal to metal contact, not plastic to metal.

Thirdly, I suspect lots are standing by..... one reason their products cost so much in the first place. If Boeing had to compete in the real world, producing products in a competitive marketplace instead of an artificially financed one, they'd be tits up in 60 days.

Finally, If the rail base is properly machined with the corresponding radius and the proper cant, there is no reason to shim anything and, if cutting hairs, the bottom machined radius can be form ground though thats overkill in this instance....

You'll still have bind because there is a front ring/base and a rear ring/base, at least if his 300 Wby is actually in a Weatherby rifle. He's then adding misalignment and therefore bind if he shims one of the two.

No, you don't. The Talley is a ONE PIECE BASE AND RING UNIT. It's machined from one block of (I assume) 6061 T4. There is no misalignment becaue the rail/ring is one solid piece with just the ring half's split off to accept a scope tube.....

Using the scope alignment bar as I did there's no bind, and no lapping is needed.
However, would Talley make a matched set with preloaded cant? He'd have to call them and ask.

You need to go and look at the Talley ring/base set first. We aren't talking about individual base/ring assemblies.

Mount and lap out the irregularities in the ring bores. That's it. That's EXACTLY what I'll be doing when mine (I have one on order) arrives, plus form milling the mounting radius for a 10 MOA cant. No Devcon, no JB Weld, just a srop or 2 of 272 threadlocker and proper mounting torque on the fasteners.....

 

[Dr. Vette]

You need to go and look at the Talley ring/base set first. We aren't talking about individual base/ring assemblies.

Look at the photo I posted earlier.
I not only looked at them but I own them and I've done this.
If he decides to add a shim to the rear, then he's got to do something to maintain alignment between the front base/ring unit and the rear base/ring unit as well as filling in the gaps with Devcon or similar.
The only way this wouldn't be needed is if the bases for both rings were a mated unit, like this:

Now, if Talley will make a set with a cant in them for him then that is by far the best way to go.

 

[SidecarFlip]

Look at the photo I posted earlier.
I not only looked at them but I own them and I've done this.
If he decides to add a shim to the rear, then he's got to do something to maintain alignment between the front base/ring unit and the rear base/ring unit as well as filling in the gaps with Devcon or similar.
The only way this wouldn't be needed is if the bases for both rings were a mated unit, like this:

Now, if Talley will make a set with a cant in them for him then that is by far the best way to go.

Is it my imagination or do all Michiganders have hard heads????

All he has to do is call Josh at Talley. They will machine the desired cant in the base at their shop.....

I said that previously...... I called them on Friday. Nice to have a company phone. LD is always no charge........

I fully understand what you imply. If you shim the rear of the base to achieve the desired cant, the rest of the base needs to be, shall we say, 'supported' with something in the way of filler.... However, I'm not a 'filler' person. Bondo is for backyard mechanics......

If it was a 2 piece, not. However, it isn't....and which is why I'll machine the cant in my shop when mine arrives. That will be profile milled, end to end, profiled to the exact outside diameter of the receiver. Depending on surface finish and my mood, I may form grind the radius as well.

I believe you can order direct from Talley, I did not because Talley will quote list, I believe... Talley products are discounted a bit by their dealers. Mine came fron Natchezz.