Lapped Mid-Grade Mount Okay for Distance Shooting?

[Swifty Morgan]

Having had some training, I am in the process of getting rid of junk that doesn't work and buying new junk that does work. Case in point: my AR-15 scope. I want to be able to shoot well at long distances, but the AR won't be my primary long distance rifle, so I'm getting an inexpensive MIL_dot scope that gets good reviews.

Problem: how to attach it.

I decided to get Seekins rings for another scope I just bought, and Seekins told me not to lap the rings. Fine; I had no desire to do that anyway. But I'm thinking of getting a quick-detach mount for the AR in case it ever has to be used for self-defense.

If I get a mid-priced mount that isn't high-end, will lapping make up for the difference? I have machine tools, so making bars to lap a scope mount is not a problem.

I'm not planning to use this gun for super-accurate shooting, and I don't expect to use most of the 900-yard distance at the nearest range all the time, but it would be nice to be able to hit a silhouette at 1000 yards when I want to. Also, I don't want screwed-up rings to flex the tube.

 

[taliv]

i wouldn't lap it.

 

[Swifty Morgan]

I decided to go for a Midwest Industries mount. I'll see how things look when it gets here.

 

[cdb1]

I wouldn’t lap unless you run in to issues that suggest lapping may be needed.

 

[Varminterror]

If I get a mid-priced mount that isn't high-end, will lapping make up for the difference?

No, it will not make up the difference.

Which mount in particular are you considering? Getting specific here will allow respondents experienced with the mount in question to share specific experiences.

I’m often the dissenting opinion on this particular forum regarding lapping and bedding of rings, but I can say most of what I would consider “low to mid grade” rings and bases tend to have low surface contact. Will they hold well enough for most applications? Eh, usually. Are they so far out of round that they will damage the scope (more than just gouging finish)? Eh, usually not. But is it difficult to lap or bed rings to eliminate any potential issue? Nope. I at least CHECK contact and alignment before installing scopes. It may not always prevent catastrophe and may not always improve function, but it is never burdensome, and is never detrimental - so for me, it’s always on the table.

 

[Swifty Morgan]

I ordered a 30mm quick-detach mount made by Midwest Industries:

https://www.midwestindustriesinc.com/MI-30MM-QD-20MOA-Scope-Mount-p/mi-qd30sm-20moa.htm

I am not thrilled about the offset, but my understanding is that I don't want to attach the scope to the handguard rail, so it looks like the offset is needed unless I want rings.

I guess the mount I ended up ordering isn't quite mid-grade.

 

[Varminterror]

It’s a pretty good representative of “mid-grade”. It’s likely high enough that you should expect to not need to lap/bed, but I would not take it for granted.

For an AR, most likely you will need the offset, and if you don’t NEED the offset, you will likely appreciate it for the wider support of the tube, rather than pushing your adjustment body on the scope right up against the front ring on the receiver, leaving a lot of scope unsupported out front. Even for some bolt guns, an offset is nice - I wish I had an offset mount on my match rifle, as I really prefer to have my bubble level against the adjustment body, and then the ring in front of that - but the combination of my natural head position, my Defiance Deviant action, and my Bushnell XRS II scope dictates the scope Adjustment body has to be touching the front ring on the front slot of the rail, and my level has to hang in front. Works, but not ideal for me.

 

[Swifty Morgan]

Thanks. I will make it work.