Do you always lap your scope rings?
- Thread starter Bigeclipse
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
I have rarely lapped good rings, but I have had to improve alignments via modifying or changing bases due to varied reasons. Many receiver holes are/were not drilled correctly, so customizing the bases is a solution "I like".
The tape method I have employed since the 80's, and have even used double stick tapes or fine felt tapes to improve hold and cushion the ring to scope contact.
YMMV
The tape method I have employed since the 80's, and have even used double stick tapes or fine felt tapes to improve hold and cushion the ring to scope contact.
YMMV
Deputy819
Well-Known Member
Mine went on a zero moa Murphy Precision stainless steel rail (bedded to the action). After making sure the scope was plumb it required hardly any adjustment when bore-sighting.
Bigeclipse
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2012
- Messages
- 1,969
I currently have Talley 1 piece base/rings and a Leopoldo vx3 scope.
Clem Bronkoski
Well-Known Member
I watched a video by a gunsmith on this and bedding the rings is the way to go. Personally I've never lapped or bedded any of my rings.
freddiej
Well-Known Member
On any rifle I build or install a scope I always bed the rifle to the stock, I lap the rings even when they say not to, and I never allow people to influence my good outcomes. I only have to smile and think those idiots tried to mess up my nearly 1/4" C to C group.
I have two lapping bars (1" and 30MM), 800 and 1,000 grit lapping compound and an inch pound torque wrench with T-10, T-15, 3MM, 2.5MM, 1/8" hex, 5/64" hex, 3/32" hex and a couple more. also use Purple Loc-tite so the setup does not come loose, Blue on the bases. red when I am feeling very ****ed at the client.
I have two lapping bars (1" and 30MM), 800 and 1,000 grit lapping compound and an inch pound torque wrench with T-10, T-15, 3MM, 2.5MM, 1/8" hex, 5/64" hex, 3/32" hex and a couple more. also use Purple Loc-tite so the setup does not come loose, Blue on the bases. red when I am feeling very ****ed at the client.
Are you having problem with this set-up for you intended purpose (<300 yard shots)? ?
HaroldNRAEndowment
Well-Known Member
I do not have hands on experience, but I have read quite a bit. If you follow the link: https://www.midwayusa.com/product/2130187492 This will be the kit to lap the rings If you choose do so. (Also the instructions are Very Explicate on not lapping too much, but just a minimum). Experienced ones on this web-site may give insight to that and the instructions indicates how much. The way the system works is to clamp each rod with the points(cones) toward each other and barely not touching the points . I would recommend the torque screw driver that Wheeler also has for the correct screw tension and the screw driver kit does come with a chart to show how much the torque setting needs to be depending on the screw size. Once the 2 opposing rods with the cone pointing each other and locked down securely, then take a visual on whether the 2 points of the cones are perfectly aligned. I would make sure to view from every angle you can for they could be aligned in one plane (maybe top view as an example) and misaligned in another plane ( maybe side view, as an example). If they are misaligned You very likely will damage the scope when clamping it down, by actually bending the scope. Before I would start using the lapping procedure in the instructions, I would look at the mating surfaces of the rings and rifle to make sure there is not a bur or trash that can be removed. Also if it is an arrangement as on the Ruger's with a dovetail(triangular arrangement), I would look at loosening and retightening the rings to the rifle first. With a triangular arrangement, Technically, there is only one position that the rings can tightened down to, But the question is, did something cause the angle of the mating surfaces to clamp too high on the angle.
This is my Theory.
I have an Associate Degree In Mechanical Engineering Technology specializing in machinery component fits with 31 years experience, but not in firearms as a designer.
Hand Skills
Well-Known Member
That is a good question. Quality rings are machined round - some manufacturers will even state their tolerances - generally .002 - .0001" depending.
Lapping removes material - it may improve concentricity some, but it results in the interior surfaces of the rings being out of round.
This means MORE clamping force is necessary to achieve the SAME coefficient of friction (what keeps a scope from sliding). To compound matters, now the clamping force is no longer perpendicular to the scope, which results in pressure points. So increased stress to both the rings and the scope tube due to uneven clamping. I'm not saying you have to throw away your lapped rings, but if you go to install them on another rifle, you might.
Give Talley a call - ask them why they recommend against lapping. I can tell you with certainty it is NOT the marketing department making this recommendation.
I have dealt with slipping scopes and mechanical failures. I have lapped a set of rings or two along the way... I'm just saying there is a better way of doing things.
Bedding is not that difficult. Alternatively, from an engineering point of view, a gasket (like Burris Signature) or ring tape (like others have mentioned) are superior ways to go if one is interested in a mounting system that doesn't slip, doesn't leave ring marks and can be mounted to another receiver down the road.
I understand that lapping is a common practice, but when guys are saying;
"I lap everything"
And
"Lapping is the best"
I can't stand by as that's simply not true. It's a quick fix, it works for some but again; lapping addresses a SYMPTOM, it does not correct the problem.
If you have 2 independently mounted rings, if they are canted or offset from each other, lapping improves clamping, BY removing material.
If one set of mounting holes is off by 1/2 of a degree, yes, you could weld and redrill the holes. Or you could spend 30 minutes lapping and be done with it. Or you could do as you say and leave the rings unlapped and you would possibly damage your scope and certainly have less clamping force since they are not aligned.
Remington probably doesn't recommend welding their actions and redrilling either. None of the base manufacturers recommend shimming them or slotting holes. But sometimes you have to correct problems. Lapping is a perfectly acceptable way to ensure ALL other factors are dead nuts, including the rings themselves. Recommending to never do it, even as a tool for checking is not doing the community a service.
If one set of mounting holes is off by 1/2 of a degree, yes, you could weld and redrill the holes. Or you could spend 30 minutes lapping and be done with it. Or you could do as you say and leave the rings unlapped and you would possibly damage your scope and certainly have less clamping force since they are not aligned.
Remington probably doesn't recommend welding their actions and redrilling either. None of the base manufacturers recommend shimming them or slotting holes. But sometimes you have to correct problems. Lapping is a perfectly acceptable way to ensure ALL other factors are dead nuts, including the rings themselves. Recommending to never do it, even as a tool for checking is not doing the community a service.
Last edited:
Can also tighten the rings to the scope first AND then tighten the rings to the base. This allows any slight misalignment to be moved to the ring/base connection where it will not bend the scope and allow the scope to fit in the rings for better grip and minimize ring marks on the scope. This has worked for me a couple times. Especially with steel rings and bases.
Last edited:
freddiej
Well-Known Member
oh I like this question.. if you had not noticed the ring companies give you 1/16" of gap in their rings so you can lap them in with out needing any more force to clamp them, Leupold has a 210 Deg top and the rings have great clamping force. so if you take a few thousandths off, how will you see that on the sides when you clamp the rings down?
the problem that you are referring to is the problem of stacked tolerances. the machining of the receiver is not perfect to the 0.001", Nominally is +/- 0.005". then the tolerance of the base can not be perfect do to the tolerance of the receiver, they can be +/- 0.005". then the rings are normally about +/-0.002" from each other. we could have 0.009" too high in front to 0.009" to high in back. that is a 0.018" swing. we all want 0.000" (totally level), but manufacturing tolerances will kill that. the best I have ever had was a setup that was 0.003" high in the back.
Yes, the Burris signature Z-rings are helpful and I have used them, they take a lot of work out of mounting a scope. I do recommend them for light recoil applications. with heavier recoil applications I tend to not recommend them. as for the ring tape; bad news! I had a 300 W/M that had tape in the rings and the scope did a full forward then full rearward shuffle. outcome was a nasty black and bloodied eye for a client. I never recommend you use that infernal tape. there is a substance that is far better and I use it conjunction with lapping. that is contact cement and rubber cement. both give a buffering effect and will help keep the scope in place without making the tube look like you took a scraper to it. if you ever have to change rings, receivers or anything.. the contact cement and rubber cement peal off easily and you can re do the process.
You must be talking about night force rings I was going to say the same thing but you've already said it
