Do you always lap your scope rings?

John Wess is correct the machined Nightforce and talley's don't need to be lapped. Go by the manufacturer recommendations.
My Talley lightweights very much needed to be lapped.

Nothing in the universe is perfect, nothing. Don't care who made it/them. How far from perfect you can accept is where to draw the line.
 
Right or wrong...I always place the scope on the rings and see how easily I can move it back and forth. If I feel a, "hang up" I will lap ever so slightly.
 
I always lap the rings, use RingTrue tape and use blue loctite on the screws.
https://www.highpoweroptics.com/ringtrue™-tape-three-scopes-p-24944.html

Using this process, I never have problems with scopes slipping on magnum or 50BMG rifles. I don't have ring marks on any of my scope tubes.

Almost always the lapping process shows that even expensive rings were out of alignment. Once I realized that lapping was essential anyways, I stopped paying >$120/pair for rings.
 
My Talley lightweights very much needed to be lapped.

Nothing in the universe is perfect, nothing. Don't care who made it/them. How far from perfect you can accept is where to draw the line.

How do you know this to be true?

High quality rings are built to very tight tolerances. Is the problem with the rings (send them back) or the reciever...?

In my experience, rings may APPEAR to need lapping due to misalignment. The BEST way to deal with this is sort out the bases. This may involve indexing and enlarging the mounting holes in the receiver, and/or shimming/bedding the bases.

Lapping is a quick fix. It addresses a SYMPTOM, but it does not fix the root problem. It may cause other problems also... I think it's laughable how many 'experts' act AGAINST a manufacturer's instructions and lap because they know better...

Lapping is a fools errand, and a great way to ruin a perfectly good set of rings.
 
How do you know this to be true?

High quality rings are built to very tight tolerances. Is the problem with the rings (send them back) or the reciever...?

In my experience, rings may APPEAR to need lapping due to misalignment. The BEST way to deal with this is sort out the bases. This may involve indexing and enlarging the mounting holes in the receiver, and/or shimming/bedding the bases.

Lapping is a quick fix. It addresses a SYMPTOM, but it does not fix the root problem. It may cause other problems also... I think it's laughable how many 'experts' act AGAINST a manufacturer's instructions and lap because they know better...

Lapping is a fools errand, and a great way to ruin a perfectly good set of rings.
How are the rings ruined? I've lapped several and they are still working great, years afterward, haven't lost alignment despite extensive shooting, hunting, abusing, and you can't tell by looking at them. Ok, so a little material was taken away on the interior of the ring, that will never be seen. I guess I better yank all those rings off and throw them in the trash since they are "ruined".

Small imperfections in the barrel fitment, the receiver itself, holes for the bases, the bases themselves, etc. All those can add up. So the choice is try to identify and correct all of those, potentially very small problems, to save your precious rings from being "ruined". Or just lap and all those other things are correct for in one step. As mentioned above, if major errors are detected then they should be corrected.
 
I've lapped every set of Leupold rings I've ever used. Recently, I put a set of Warne Mountain Tech rings on one of my rifles and it was recommended by Warne NOT to lap them. So I didn't. I really like those rings.

I installed Warnes Mountain Tech rings on Warnes bases. The scope was way off to the right. I through the bases out, ordered Warne Maxima base, lapped the rings and its perfect. For those who said they dont need to lap rings, I'd recommend to get Wheeler Scope Ring Alignment Tool. Its worth the money.
 
I lap with very fine compounds
Just a little and then look at the finish on the inside.

And then I Loctite the inside the rings.

Yes......Loctite
 
How do you know this to be true?

High quality rings are built to very tight tolerances. Is the problem with the rings (send them back) or the reciever...?

In my experience, rings may APPEAR to need lapping due to misalignment. The BEST way to deal with this is sort out the bases. This may involve indexing and enlarging the mounting holes in the receiver, and/or shimming/bedding the bases.

Lapping is a quick fix. It addresses a SYMPTOM, but it does not fix the root problem.

Agreed - in principle. However, sorting out the source of the problem is usually much more effort than simply lapping the rings. Even a minor misalignment will usually result in ring marks on the scope tube. If at the start of the lapping process I can see that the rings are way out of alignment, then I stop and track down the problem in the base. Otherwise, I lap the problems away.

... I think it's laughable how many 'experts' act AGAINST a manufacturer's instructions and lap because they know better...

These instructions were written by the marketing department. If the manufacturer admitted that lapping is often required to get perfect ring alignment, people would buy elsewhere.

To be honest, the manufacturer's instructions should say something like, "Lapping is not required AS LONG AS the base is new AND void of machining burrs AND perfectly straight AND mounted stress-free using proper bedding procedures on the receiver."
 
Lapping rings is a remnant of time passed. There is no need to lap any quality rings anymore. As has been said, most manufacturers specifically state that rings should NOT be lapped.
 
I would like to try this stuff someday. I have also used black electrical tape the same way with good results too.

I don't know if you remember Bruce Ventura but he owns HighPowerOptics.com and he speaks highly of his tape/method. I was going to use try it but since I already use Burris sig lines with inserts, I did not find the need for it. I might try them on a non-Burris just to help protect the scope tube from any marks. :D
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top