Budget Scope Advice

[westcliffe01]

When I can get a one piece STEEL Picatinny base (with no groove down the center) for less than $100 from WARNE, I don't understand why anyone would want a stupid aluminum scope rail to attach their fancy scope to. Then they will pay $180 for aluminum rings that take 6 bolts each, when they can get STEEL WARNE rings that take 4 screws each and will NEVER strip out (which cost $45 for a pair).

Honestly, listening to talk about mounting scopes is like listening to the story on the emperors new clothes...

 

[ntg]

I appreciate the input on bases, but didn't really ask for it. I've got old, weaver bases on an old rifle, that I've had no issues with, after bumps,etc. Same with the scope on it. Now, back to the original topic. Can anyone provide me useful input?

 

[MudRunner2005]

When I can get a one piece STEEL Picatinny base (with no groove down the center) for less than $100 from WARNE, I don't understand why anyone would want a stupid aluminum scope rail to attach their fancy scope to. Then they will pay $180 for aluminum rings that take 6 bolts each, when they can get STEEL WARNE rings that take 4 screws each and will NEVER strip out (which cost $45 for a pair).

Honestly, listening to talk about mounting scopes is like listening to the story on the emperors new clothes...

Let me drop some metalugical facts on you.....When you machine aluminum from a solid billet, to the be same dimensions as if you were machining mild carbon steel from a solid billet, the aluminum will be 1/2-2/3 of the weight of the steel, and twice as strong. The only draw-back to aluminum is that b/c of it's rigidity, it is quite brittle, being that it is non-ferrous (doesn't contain iron) in the alloy composition.

And no, none of this was copied or pasted off the internet. My family has been in the steel & metal industry for over 35 years. And let's just say I have a couple years experience under my belt, as well...

 

[westcliffe01]

Well, it just so happens that I work with steel too, mostly stainless steel.

But to answer your claims, I compared 6061T6 to cold drawn 1018 steel

6061 T6 Hardness, Rockwell B 60
1018 Hardness, Rockwell B 71

6061 T6 Tensile Yield Strength 276 MPa / 40000 psi
1018 Tensile Yield Strength 370 MPa / 53700 psi

6061 T6 Modulus of Elasticity 68.9 GPa / 10000 ksi
1018 Modulus of Elasticity 205 GPa / 29700 ksi

6061 T6 Shear Modulus 26 GPa / 3770 ksi
1018 Shear Modulus 80.0 GPa / 11600 ksi

Looks to me, particularly looking at the tension and shear modulus, that the values for 1018 are basically 3x the value for 6061-T6. That means that steel is 3x stiffer with 1/3 of the deflection of aluminum. Since any part of the scope mounting system will be working within its elastic range, deflection is going to be the primary consideration.

So where is your "twice as strong" data ? It looks rather like 1/3 as stiff to me, as an engineer ? I haven't heard of anyone making scope bases out of 2024 because of the corrosion problems. It will match steel in tension, but the Modulus and therefore deflection are no better than 6061.

You have any data to prove your point ? Mine came from matweb.com

 

[MudRunner2005]

Well, it just so happens that I work with steel too, mostly stainless steel.

But to answer your claims, I compared 6061T6 to cold drawn 1018 steel

6061 T6 Hardness, Rockwell B 60
1018 Hardness, Rockwell B 71

6061 T6 Tensile Yield Strength 276 MPa / 40000 psi
1018 Tensile Yield Strength 370 MPa / 53700 psi

6061 T6 Modulus of Elasticity 68.9 GPa / 10000 ksi
1018 Modulus of Elasticity 205 GPa / 29700 ksi

6061 T6 Shear Modulus 26 GPa / 3770 ksi
1018 Shear Modulus 80.0 GPa / 11600 ksi

Looks to me, particularly looking at the tension and shear modulus, that the values for 1018 are basically 3x the value for 6061-T6. That means that steel is 3x stiffer with 1/3 of the deflection of aluminum. Since any part of the scope mounting system will be working within its elastic range, deflection is going to be the primary consideration.

So where is your "twice as strong" data ? It looks rather like 1/3 as stiff to me, as an engineer ? I haven't heard of anyone making scope bases out of 2024 because of the corrosion problems. It will match steel in tension, but the Modulus and therefore deflection are no better than 6061.

You have any data to prove your point ? Mine came from matweb.com

No, I don't use websites to prove my points... I use what I have personally encountered. And in my experiences with aluminum bases and rings have been zero issues, no stripped screws, no flexing, no nothing. As with the steel bases and rings I've installed in the past, stripped screws, bent or ornery bases that didn't want to align, even properly torqued with screw backing out from semi-heavy recoil. So far is the aluminum setups, 0 issues.

Anyway, sometimes things work better in reality than in theory. If you work in metal, then you should know this to be true, unless you work in a lab and push a pencil. I've welded and built things I should have never been able to do....But with some luck and know-how alot of impossibilities become possible.

Also, I'm gonna quit screwing up this guy's thread. My appologies to the OP.

Hope you find the answer you are looking for.

 

[westcliffe01]

You were going to educate us all by "dropping some metallurgical facts". So the truth is you have no facts except your intuition. It doesn't sound like you have ever had to calculate a deflection, else you would not be so dismissive of "theory" particularly when you can measure it on a real sample and verify that the theory works.

People, if you want rigid optical mounts - use steel. If you want to climb mountains after goats, use aluminum or of you can afford it, Titanium. But understand the compromises you are making when using "soft" materials like aluminum.

Watch how the scope and rail flex like pretzels on this 50BMG rifle.
[ame="http://youtu.be/s5pVya7eask"]high-speed video of scope and barrel flexing on a 50BMG - YouTube[/ame]

 

[ntg]

We're not talking about firing a 50BMG here....please prove your point elsewhere. I think it's a worthy discussion. Start a thread and explore it with all interested.

 

[MudRunner2005]

Last I checked the OP isn't shooting a .50 BMG.....And if you looked carefully, the base didn't appear to flex, the rail the base was attached to, did. And the scope bell and occular objective flexed from the recoil vibration.

But either way, this arguement is getting too far-fetched and this man's thread is ruined. I'm done arguing solely off of me feeling bad for screwing up the guy's thread any worse than it already has been.

 

[ntg]

Thanks, Mud.

 

[westcliffe01]

The only reason I posted that video is because you can visually see the deflection happen (which is pretty ridiculous). Usually, any time you buy a scope, you have to consider what to do to mount it. OK, so you have rings and bases. But many do not and then choose aluminum parts to hold their $350, $700 or $1800 scope onto whatever rifle it is getting put on.

If you have not done so already in your research, go to Natchez http://www.natchezss.com/optics.cfm?contentId=opticsType&opticsType=9&category=20

Their "drill down" menu is one of the best. It beats opticsplanet hands down for a search function. Of course they do not carry everything that opticsplanet does. I have bought several scopes from them at pretty major discounts. You can search by optical power range, objective size, reticle, manufacturer etc.

Have you considered the Vortex Viper 4-12x40PA ? It has side focus to correct parallax and is $399 and Vortex has one of the best warranties in the business.
Vortex Viper 4-12x40 PA Matte Riflescopes FREE S&H VPR-M-04BDC. Vortex Viper Rifle Scopes, Vortex Rifle Scopes.
It has a dead hold reticle and a 1" tube, so if your current rings are good you should be all set.

 

[MudRunner2005]

Make sure Natchez delivers to your state.....They won't here in Alabama or Georgia. Not sure why, b/c we have some of the country's most lax weapons laws. Unless they have distributors in our area, and don't want to ruin their business with cheaper online buying...Which is probably what it is.

 

[ntg]

Thanks...I'll have to look at nachez. I'm aware of it but haven't really explored it. The Viper would be great but really more than I want to put on this budget gun. I was thinking of how I ought to explore flebay for it and maybe some leupolds.

 

[westcliffe01]

There is also a Vortex Diamondback 4-12x44 AO. It is $299 and has basically the same dead hold reticle. It is probably assembled in China. I have not heard much about this model, but one is getting down into price territory where having the AO is getting rarer. When it comes to warranty Vortex and Leupold/Redfield are probably the best. I have several Nikons, but warranty or even dealing with customer service is a giant PIA.

 

[ntg]

I've heard that about Nikon, plus not thrilled w/ their BDC make them not too high on my list. The vortex DB is still on the list...there's a lot going for it.