Millet rings = poop!

[billt]

From what I understand the heavier a scope mount and rings are the higher the amount of inertial energy can be imparted to them during recoil.  The higher the energy the greater the chance to exceed the strength of the weakest link of the mounting system, or scope.

That is exactly correct. Recoil forces set a rifle into rearward motion. From there all of the stress is absorbed and transferred into the scope bases, rings, and the scope itself. The heavier these items are, the greater the stress impaired on them. This is where the "weakest link" comes into play. In examining the entire scope mount system, the 4, 6-48 UNF screws are by far the smallest fasteners from the receiver, all the way to the top of the scope. If anything is going to break, that is where it will be.  Bill T.   

[Jackel]

bit off topic but the wood on your stock is brilliant.

[MAUSERMAN]

More toes.

[Ping]

Billt, you are right on the money with the scope rings. The price is nice too.

[droggsey]

I agree that the four mounting screws to the receiver look to be the weak point, but I have found that the clamp force of the ring to the scope is the weak link. I have a Remington 700 in 300 Win Mag topped off with a Burris 6-24 Signature Series scope. The scope is a tank and kept sliding forward with recoil. I started with a set of Leupold standard windage adjustable rings, couldn't make the windage screws tight enough to keep the rear ring from sliding in relation to the base. Next was the Burris plastic insert rings, I like the theory of adjustable MOA offset and no lapping, but again wouldn't keep the scope still. The final solution proved to be a set of the Burris Xtreme Tactical rings. The six screws per ring finally gave me the clamp force to keep the scope from moving and they aren't horribly priced, around 50 bucks.

[Sponsor]

[blackwolfe]

Hey droggsey, gald to see another person from Michigan on board.

[billt]

Next was the Burris plastic insert rings, I like the theory of adjustable MOA offset and no lapping, but again wouldn't keep the scope still.

Did you clean both the plastic insert, as well as the interior of the ring itself along with the scope tube, with alcohol before assembly?   Bill T.

[tombogan03884]

I agree that the four mounting screws to the receiver look to be the weak point, but I have found that the clamp force of the ring to the scope is the weak link. I have a Remington 700 in 300 Win Mag topped off with a Burris 6-24 Signature Series scope. The scope is a tank and kept sliding forward with recoil. I started with a set of Leupold standard windage adjustable rings, couldn't make the windage screws tight enough to keep the rear ring from sliding in relation to the base. Next was the Burris plastic insert rings, I like the theory of adjustable MOA offset and no lapping, but again wouldn't keep the scope still. The final solution proved to be a set of the Burris Xtreme Tactical rings. The six screws per ring finally gave me the clamp force to keep the scope from moving and they aren't horribly priced, around 50 bucks.

If you exceed 18 INCH pounds torque you stand a very good chance of wrecking your scope.

[droggsey]

Hey droggsey, gald to see another person from Michigan on board.

I figured that it was about time to quit just reading the posts and actually put my two cents in.

Did you clean both the plastic insert, as well as the interior of the ring itself along with the scope tube, with alcohol before assembly?   Bill T.

It has been a couple of years since I used the Burris plastic insert rings, so I am not 100% sure, but I am usually pretty good about cleaning before assembly. The scope weighs 19 oz. and the standard rings just didn't seem to have enough contact area on the scope to keep things from moving with the 300's recoil.

If you exceed 18 INCH pounds torque you stand a very good chance of wrecking your scope.

I must admit that I still haven't gotten a torque wrench that makes it down to 18 inch pounds, mine only goes down to 24 (I just checked Midway and for the price I don't have a good excuse for not having the correct tool). I do go easy when tightening the ring screws and this could very well be the reason I was having trouble with the standard two screw rings. Insufficient torque.

The one thing that I do think should be done on every ring set up, is that they need to be lapped. I have lapped four or five rifles now and on every one the initial ring contact was maybe 50%. I did a rifle for a friend and the rings that he had were stamped with the company logo on the top ring. After the first round with the lapping rod the logo was clearly visible on the inside of the ring, these were not high dollar rings, but at least now he has more than the reverse impression of the logo contacting the scope.

[billt]

It is very important to be sure to get any and all lubricant or rust preventative off the inside of the rings, as well as the plastic inserts themselves to prevent any slippage. No matter what type or brand scope ring you employ, it will be holding a smooth surface with another smooth surface. Even the slightest bit of oily film from your fingers can cause slippage.

I always clean the rings with isopropyl alcohol just before assembly, and I am careful not to touch the mating surface once I've cleaned them. Another thing that will help distribute the clamping force evenly is once you have everything exactly where you want it, and the crosshairs perfectly level, (this IMHO is the biggest PITA), torque the ring cap screws in a criss cross pattern, much like mechanics do when torquing down an engine cylinder head. This will also help keep the crosshairs nice and straight throughout the entire torquing process. Also while torquing everything down, be sure to keep an eye on the gap between the top and bottom half of the rings. Try to keep the gap even on each side.

One other "trick" I would mention, which I used yesterday when installing a Bushnell 3200 Elite Tactical Scope on my new Savage 110 FCP-K, is to use a couple of small line levels to get the crosshairs perfectly straight. I purchased 2 of these from Harbor Freight for just a couple of bucks each:

http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=66318

It turned out to be the best $4.00 I could have ever spent! I used one on top of the elevation turret which has a nice flat on it, and the other I placed on the flat on the receiver after removing the bolt. This worked out much better than the "look and see" method. For me getting the crosshairs perfectly straight is one of the most challenging aspects of mounting a scope. And it seems to get more difficult as I get older. Me eyes start playing tricks on me, and I have to put the rifle down and let my eyes "readjust", otherwise you think they are straight, only to get to the range and find out they aren't. By using these 2 inexpensive levels it takes all of the guesswork out of it. I think Midway sells a similar arrangement, but this was much cheaper, and worked just as well because it takes any and all human error out of the equation. The job went really well and the rifle is now range ready. I'll try and post some pics later today.    Bill T.