Is this too close?

[shogi]

Not sure why the rail would ever flex if the front and rear scope mounts are secured. If the rail flexed at all then the scope mount bases aren't set back hard against the rail notches. If there is gap, between the rail and scope bottom, it will always be maintained due to mechanical fixtures.
It's fine the way it is.

 

[Dragoon300]

As long as it clears, it's OK.
Keep your rings as far apart as possible without contacting the bells at either end, this is more rigid. If you need to change the spacing for eye relief that's ok too. You are fine right where you are.

 

[Philward]

As long as it clears, it's OK.
Keep your rings as far apart as possible without contacting the bells at either end, this is more rigid. If you need to change the spacing for eye relief that's ok too. You are fine right where you are.

Interesting, if I understood the other member correctly, he suggested moving rings to the mid point between turret and flare at either end. My choice was as you say, as far apart that will still allow correct eye relief, which is the way they are currently.

 

[Philward]

Not sure why the rail would ever flex if the front and rear scope mounts are secured. If the rail flexed at all then the scope mount bases aren't set back hard against the rail notches. If there is gap, between the rail and scope bottom, it will always be maintained due to mechanical fixtures.
It's fine the way it is.

I wouldn't think it would flex either and if there were 0.015 clearance I probably wouldn't have asked anything. It just seems close and the turret bottom is plastic, so...

 

[xsn10s]

I wouldn't be too surprised if actions have some flex from the barrel whip. Slow motion videos you can see the movement in the barrel. Whether or not is does damage is a different story. But I would venture to say the turret bottom wasn't design to take repeated impact. So I'd either get different rings or make some clearance.

 

[david g ranes]

Referencing the attached photos, is the clearance between the turret and rail too close? 0.006" feeler gauge with minor resistance, about what you would expect for a good fit. 0.007" slides in with a little more force and 0.008" is a nogo. These are 0.850" height rings, 0.990" were on previously and there was a lot of space between turret and rail but head is too high and would need to add 1/4" of padding to stock. It shot fine with that setup but I prefer them lower. Had to cut off the first notch to eliminate interference with the scope bell and get correct eye relief. Not sure how much that rail may flex while shooting. Rifle is 257WBY. I could always file down the center notches is it needs more room.

edit: mounts are EGW.

I had to do the same thing with my egw rail been using it for 11 years without a problem had to set my scope back farther do to having my neck broke and the back of the bell hit the rail cut it off added little black paint been using it ever since. David

 

[Dragoon300]

Interesting, if I understood the other member correctly, he suggested moving rings to the mid point between turret and flare at either end. My choice was as you say, as far apart that will still allow correct eye relief, which is the way they are currently.

Thats correct, placing the rings further apart makes twisting scope side to side or up and down harder to do. It will resist bumping out of alignment better. Also, the one piece rail is better for that and ring alignment. It is generally best to mount your scope as close to bore center as possible too, especialy on hunting rifles that you are not dialing up for long range. I think you have it pretty much perfect!

 

[mercerbear]

I'm in the it's fine if there's any gap camp.

I'm also quick to put a file on bases to make a close fit work.

 

[FEENIX]

Interesting, if I understood the other member correctly, he suggested moving rings to the mid point between turret and flare at either end. My choice was as you say, as far apart that will still allow correct eye relief, which is the way they are currently.

If you are referring to my comment, yes, that is exactly what I meant because twisting/oscillation is greater the longer the unsupported main tube is. The turret area is probably the weakest part of the scope and will benefit the most with rings evenly spaced for even pressure as possible to maximize the dampening augmentation of the oscillation/flexing of the main tube. There are LRH rifle builders that use two sets of rings. In addition, the one-piece scope mount system, like the Spuhr is not designed to mount the scope as far apart as possible but rather around the turret area. BTW, all of the components will flex.



In case you did NOT notice, I also emphasized "I".