NorthGeorgiaHunter
Member
Does anyone lap scope rings when mounting a scope? If so, which tools do you use?
Lapping scope rings?
- Thread starter NorthGeorgiaHunter
- Start date
- Status
cwmoss
Member
If you have nothing better to do, go for it, but in my opinion, a waste of time.
Daryl (cwmoss)
Daryl (cwmoss)
NorthGeorgiaHunter said:
I always check the alignment of the scope rings, one piece mounts etc. and lap if necessary. In my experience with numerous rings, bases, mounts and scopes the vast majority need lapping. I use Wheeler alignment bars for 1" and 30mm with Wheeler lapping bars. I made a custom set of alignment bars and lapping bar for 34mm but they're easy to find today.
Jackal
Member
I'd only bother with lapping if I was using a very expensive scope on a long range rig.
Yup. I lapped the following: 2 Leupolds, 2 Nightforces, 2 Trijicon Accu-Points. Does lapping make a difference? I don't know. I did not do a before and after test.
However, when I started to test the rings, the Wheeler lapping rods, were hitting only on about 25% of the Nightforce rings interior surface, tightened to 65 Inch pounds, on Nightforce bases, on Bolt action rifles, M70 Stealths, Weatherby Mark V, etc.
Lapping simply ensures more contact surface, or consistent contact, surface between the rings and the optic. And yes, I do place a drop or three or Loc-Tite between the optic and the rings. And yes, I epoxy the base to the receiver. Less movement, more consistency.
JMHO,
Geno
However, when I started to test the rings, the Wheeler lapping rods, were hitting only on about 25% of the Nightforce rings interior surface, tightened to 65 Inch pounds, on Nightforce bases, on Bolt action rifles, M70 Stealths, Weatherby Mark V, etc.
Lapping simply ensures more contact surface, or consistent contact, surface between the rings and the optic. And yes, I do place a drop or three or Loc-Tite between the optic and the rings. And yes, I epoxy the base to the receiver. Less movement, more consistency.
JMHO,
Geno
Burris Signature Zee Rings pretty much made lapping obsolete IMO. You can use the offset inserts to make even the worst rifle mount straight. And you don't need to make a set of rings proprietary to a single rifle either. Lapping might still be a good idea in certain situations I guess. Extreme cold conditions might make the rubber inserts in the Zee rings crumble for example. But we're talking a very limited set of circumstances that would make lapping the way to go IMO. If I want precision and a I want to be sure an expensive scope doesn't get bent I'll use Zee rings. I keep a spare set in the safe just in case I decide to swap a scope to a different rifle.
BTW I think using locktite and epoxy to make sure a scope never moves is a good idea if you're certain you will never need to change the scope on a rifle. You might have a problem there. But with really high end scopes that isn't all that likely. As long as you can get the scope off for repairs then you can likely count on it for the life of the rifle. And Locktite isn't forever like epoxy is.
BTW I think using locktite and epoxy to make sure a scope never moves is a good idea if you're certain you will never need to change the scope on a rifle. You might have a problem there. But with really high end scopes that isn't all that likely. As long as you can get the scope off for repairs then you can likely count on it for the life of the rifle. And Locktite isn't forever like epoxy is.
gamestalker
member
Like Cee Zee, I have always used Burris Zee rings, both the signature series, and their standard quality rings, never had a scope that wouldn't hold zero with them, and in some of the worst conditions too.
GS
GS
Thanks for the redirect, guys! Great catch!
Some manufacturers (Nightforce) recommend using only an M1913 picatinny rail, and proper rings. They explicitly reject such bases as Leupold Dual Dovetail, etc.
Regarding adhesive tendencies, manufacturers such as Ken Ferrell, Inc, recommend using epoxy to mount the rail, but to precede that mounting by applying a good release agent. I prefer to use Kroil, then use a degreaser. Kroil penetrates deeply, but the surface can be degreased. As such, this process has allowed the epoxy to create a consistent mounting surface, yet not allow excessive adhesion between the receiver and base, or the rings and optic.
I am able to remove the optics from the rings, and the bases from the receiver with minimal effort, and have an excellent return to zero.
Geno
Some manufacturers (Nightforce) recommend using only an M1913 picatinny rail, and proper rings. They explicitly reject such bases as Leupold Dual Dovetail, etc.
Regarding adhesive tendencies, manufacturers such as Ken Ferrell, Inc, recommend using epoxy to mount the rail, but to precede that mounting by applying a good release agent. I prefer to use Kroil, then use a degreaser. Kroil penetrates deeply, but the surface can be degreased. As such, this process has allowed the epoxy to create a consistent mounting surface, yet not allow excessive adhesion between the receiver and base, or the rings and optic.
I am able to remove the optics from the rings, and the bases from the receiver with minimal effort, and have an excellent return to zero.
Geno
i've never lapped a set of rings. i buy what i consider to be quality rings (seekins precision on a couple rifles, talley one piece, warne).
i have a set of leupold qrw that i would not buy again.
the only mount that i've had trouble with is a cheap one piece for an AR that was a freebie. two of the screws have stripped but it still holds zero just fine.
i have a set of leupold qrw that i would not buy again.
the only mount that i've had trouble with is a cheap one piece for an AR that was a freebie. two of the screws have stripped but it still holds zero just fine.
CLP
member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2010
- Messages
- 1,397
Nightforce also states that their rings are not supposed to be lapped if used with a Nightforce scope. I've lapped less expensive rings- mostly because it was something new to learn. I watched one of Darrel Holland's videos and thought, "Maybe that'll help tighten up my groups." It didn't. At my level, more practice is all I need.
yzguy87
Member
Several years ago I had a Savage 10 fcp-k. I used Burris xtr rings and a Burris Fulfield II scope. I sold the gun about a year or 2 later and kept the scope and rings. When I removed the scope from the rings the front ring had left a slight ring about half to 3/4 around the scope tube.
I also have another Burris Fulfield II mounted on my ar by a RRA one piece mount. I have checked it a couple times for marks on the scope and it hasn't marked it yet.
Since I sold the savage I've wanted to lap scope rings on my next rifle.
I also have another Burris Fulfield II mounted on my ar by a RRA one piece mount. I have checked it a couple times for marks on the scope and it hasn't marked it yet.
Since I sold the savage I've wanted to lap scope rings on my next rifle.
30+ scopes mounted and never even heard of lapping until I read this board.
Most expensive scope I've ever bought was a $700 Bushnell 4200 Elite Tactical and $50 Warne rings for CZ 550..no lapping and it seems to be working fine 4 years later.
Most expensive scope I've ever bought was a $700 Bushnell 4200 Elite Tactical and $50 Warne rings for CZ 550..no lapping and it seems to be working fine 4 years later.
witchhunter
Member
I got the lapping tools for Christmas a few years ago. After lapping a couple of sets of rings, I see that they were not fully contacting the scope and lapping corrected that. I can't see a downside.
Nightforce 3.5-15X56, Nightforce 30 MM rings, Nightforce 20 MOA rail on a Winchester M70 Stealth. Doesn't make sense, does it?
alsaqr
Member
i mount a few dozen scopes every year: Every set of rings is checked with alignment bars and lapped, as required. One hunter could not zero his rifle. He brought the gun to me. His "gunsmith" had installed a very expensive scope in out of alignment rings. The tube was bent on installation, trashing a $2,000 scope.
Forty-five years of scope mounting and shooting - always used the factory set-up with no problems however. I am not a precision or hard use owner so my factory stuff never really gets tested. I am an old school Leupold guy (scopes and rings) and have always seen their products having quality - have had no problems and never ventured into other manufactures but I am sure there are some other very good ones. Again, never lapped and never will - no need for my uses - there might be some great merits for doing so under other circumstances. Good shooting!
LAGS
Member
I always Lap the rings on about 80% of my rifles.
But, then I am the guy who sets my scopes on " V " blocks and sets the crosshairs to Zero Zero to the scope tube.
Then Shim or machines the Base so the scope when put in the mounts is set to Zero Zero at 100 yards on a bore sighter without using the adjuster dials to get it bore sighted.
It takes time, and that mount and rings will then only fit that rifle.
But 90% of the scopes that are set on a Zero Zero to the tube, will mount up and be dang close to boresighted.
It also allowes me Full Up and down ,And right and left adjustments in the scope.
I have owned too many rifles in the past where you either had no adjustment in one direction because of a misaligned mount or rings.
But, then I am the guy who sets my scopes on " V " blocks and sets the crosshairs to Zero Zero to the scope tube.
Then Shim or machines the Base so the scope when put in the mounts is set to Zero Zero at 100 yards on a bore sighter without using the adjuster dials to get it bore sighted.
It takes time, and that mount and rings will then only fit that rifle.
But 90% of the scopes that are set on a Zero Zero to the tube, will mount up and be dang close to boresighted.
It also allowes me Full Up and down ,And right and left adjustments in the scope.
I have owned too many rifles in the past where you either had no adjustment in one direction because of a misaligned mount or rings.
SleazyRider
Member
Details are trifles, but details make perfection, and perfection is no trifle.
I always lap my rings (with the exception of Signature Zee rings, which are terrific). Even when the alignment checks out, lapping insures increased contact between the scope and the rings, hence enhancing repeatability, in my estimation. When a properly lapped and torqued scope is removed, absent are any nicks or scratches caused by rings being slightly out-of-round or slightly misaligned. Yes, I understand that it is not always necessary, but I think it makes for a better job.
The other circumstance that does not require lapping is the DNZ (Dednutz) Game Reaper one-piece mounts, as alignment is assured by virtue of the design. I think these are the most rigid mounts on the market, and I even go so far as bedding them to the receiver with a thin coat of epoxy.
I am of the opinion that many, if not most, complaints of a "scopes not holding zero" can be attributed to the mounting technique or poorly designed/manufactured rings.
I always lap my rings (with the exception of Signature Zee rings, which are terrific). Even when the alignment checks out, lapping insures increased contact between the scope and the rings, hence enhancing repeatability, in my estimation. When a properly lapped and torqued scope is removed, absent are any nicks or scratches caused by rings being slightly out-of-round or slightly misaligned. Yes, I understand that it is not always necessary, but I think it makes for a better job.
The other circumstance that does not require lapping is the DNZ (Dednutz) Game Reaper one-piece mounts, as alignment is assured by virtue of the design. I think these are the most rigid mounts on the market, and I even go so far as bedding them to the receiver with a thin coat of epoxy.
I am of the opinion that many, if not most, complaints of a "scopes not holding zero" can be attributed to the mounting technique or poorly designed/manufactured rings.
STD rings
Leupold rings -the STD ones anyhow- have grooves cut into the bearing surfaces. These groves are anodized or painted, which leaves a slightly rough texture in the set I had.
Lapping the STD rings takes this roughness out and flattens the groove a little bit, which increases the contact area with the scope tube.
Leupold rings -the STD ones anyhow- have grooves cut into the bearing surfaces. These groves are anodized or painted, which leaves a slightly rough texture in the set I had.
Lapping the STD rings takes this roughness out and flattens the groove a little bit, which increases the contact area with the scope tube.
- Status
