Bulk sized blunders?

Status
Not open for further replies.
My dad was told to put see-throughs on a Marlin 336 in 1986 :barf: So, as my first gun, that is what I went with when I scoped my Remington 700. Finally got some decent glass, and put it in the see-throughs. "Learned" more through the internet, NEVER use see-throughs, etc. So, I bought a set of Weaver bases and some no-name mounts (which hold zero fine, not the point). The point is, with the zoom ring on the Burris, and where I had to mount it for eye relief, I needed medium rings. All that work, and having to re-sight in, because I managed to drop my scope a whopping 1/4".o_O

To the OP, my rinse-and-repeat experience was getting bored with what I had, buying something new that I couldn't afford, shooting it until I could identify what I didn't like about it, selling it for half of what I paid, and buying something else with more money that I didn't have. This year, my finances caught up to me. I have learned to enjoy what I have, have "officially" given half of what I owned to my sons (11 & 9), and am in the process of making what is left, exactly how I want them, so that I can appreciate them without getting bored.


I believe that the "See-Thru" sights were created when we switched from all rifles coming with iron sights standard to switching to more scope mounted guns. People just couldn't get over the fact that you would need your irons because the scopes wouldn't be reliable.

Not long after a few rifles came without iron sights standard and it was wild. Then everyone started doing it and now it's rare to see a rifle come with iron sights from the factory.

We may see a similar situation with pistols coming with fancy optics standard rather than iron sights, some pistols now come with an optic already and no iron sights or are made with grooves from the factory for optics.
 
I do so many dumb things I could write a book, and doing them once is never enough so I keep doing them.

I always tumble 357 & 454 cases together, a perfect storm when you use walnut shells. The 357s nest in the 454 cases and get compacted together with the media working to keep them stuck tight. The outside of the 357s don't get clean and the insides of the 454s don't get clean and when I yank the cases apart media flys everywhere and it's often packed in the primer pockets. But I just keep on doing it, I get so aggravated as soon as I realize I've done it again.

Mine was 9mm and .45 acp. Same type situation you describe. I think I finally learned not to tumble those two together, but it took a while.

Several times over the years I've upgraded to a better scope on one of my rifles. After taking the old scope off I decide that it would be an upgrade for another rifle, and so on. I've had to go to the range to zero two or three rifles because I bought ONE new scope.

Are you saying that's not normal? Could have fooled me. That's the way I always do it.

Yeah, I’ll do that right after I ask my wife to do the same with her shoes....talks about a blunder... :)

When my wife passed away I gathered up all her shoes to donate to a local church yard sale. It was something like 75 pairs, almost all in boxes and many with no wear marks on the soles. She had almost as many purses as well, most of them also in like new condition. So it's not just us guys who have odd compulsions.
 
You are supposed to lapp the rings before installing the scope.
If you plan on buying better ones. It doesn't make sense to start out cheap unless it's going to be a long time before you can afford it.


I believe a lot of today's quality rings no longer needed to be lapped for most shooters because of better, more precise and consistent manufacturing ( some competitive long range shooters still do though I think).

I asked Warne about lapping their rings and they said not necessary.
 
I believe a lot of today's quality rings no longer needed to be lapped for most shooters because of better, more precise and consistent manufacturing ( some competitive long range shooters still do though I think).

I asked Warne about lapping their rings and they said not necessary.
I was referencing cheap rings. The higher quality ones are worth the money. I was just making the point that you can get hold accuracy using cheaper rings in non Magnum rifles.
 
I believe a lot of today's quality rings no longer needed to be lapped for most shooters because of better, more precise and consistent manufacturing ( some competitive long range shooters still do though I think).

I asked Warne about lapping their rings and they said not necessary.

Scope ring alignment is a system that cannot be perfect by just the rings or just the base, etc. Heck it starts with the drilled and tapped holes (or possibly even the consistency of the contour of the receiver) and if you had any experience with Remlin Marlins with crooked sights then why would you trust a Remington 700’s scope base mounting holes....or any other manufacturers.

If I was buying the scope, rings, and base from the same manufacturer then maybe I would trust it if they said no lapping is necessary....or if it is a one piece base and integral rings such as what Nightforce sells. The Burris Zee rings are also a notable exception.

I think to maximize the scope alignment and consistent pressure on the tube, lapping will help nearly always.

Many, many factors play a part in this system of which many of us really don’t need to worry about if we are just average joe hunter.
 
I never had a problem with my see thru rings. I hunted in SC and NC, mostly thick woods with a little field and power lines thrown in. I'm more guilty of using my scope when I should have used iron sights. I remember one hunt. I was in my ladder stand. A big doe "Yes, it was doe day" walked up. Not more than 30 yards. Easy shot. I said to myself, take it and go home. It's cold as #%&# out here. Gravy shot, Easy, No problem. I raised my 30-06 and let go. That deer looked at me and just turned and trotted off. Like it was on a Sunday stroll, no worry's. I just sit there with my mouth wide open. What in the "heck" happened??? I walked back and forth between my ladder stand and where that deer stood for probably 30 minutes trying to figure what happened. Finally, about half way was a limb, about the size of your thumb. I reached up and touched that limb and it just fell over. Apparently, My bullet hit that limb right in the joint where it joined a larger limb. Just enough to turn my bullet to miss that deer completely. I was to close to see that limb through my scope. Should have used the iron sights. True, Honest to God, Story.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top