My Remington 700 won't hold a group

[bambam1723]

I have a Remington 700 SPS Tactical .223. I have a Bushnell Banner 4-12x mounted on it with a Leupold Base and Leupold Dove Tail Rings. When I first got the scope I mounted it and it was shooting great and holding 1 inch groups at 100 yards. I had to replace my original rings and get higher rings to get the bolt to clear my scope flip up covers and now I can't hold a group within 3-6 inches at 100 yards.

What should I do?

I assume just take the scope, base and rings off and remount them. I assume something is loose causing the scope to jostle during shooting.

Anyone have any suggestions or experiences like this?

This is my groundhog rifle, and is really frustrating. I try to adjust the scope, but the adjustments don't take.

HELP!!!

 

[Ridgerunner665]

I think your assumption is right...something is loose or out of spec.

 

[Casefull]

I recently purchased a rem 700 in 338 lm and installed a 6.5 x20 50mm leupold scope with varmit reticle(new scope as far as I know) It would not even stay on the paper. I knew the mounts were tight and the rifle could not be that far off so I put another scope I knew was good from my 300 rum and the rifle immediately began to group. I had a new sightron on a new rifle once and it was the same situation. I think scopes or the mounts are the problem more often than not.

 

[C-grunt]

Make sure everything is tight. Even the stock. My stock loosened up on my old Savage 10FP one day turning a sub MOA gun into a 3 inch gun.

Casefull... Remington makes a 338 Lapua Magnum in a M700? Or is it a custom job?

 

[MrCleanOK]

If the gun and optic were shooting just fine before you changed rings, that points a pretty big finger at the problem. You probably don't have something snugged up right. Go back to every screw you touched and check the torque. That will likely fix the problem.

 

[M1key]

Scopes can stop working, too.

Why not upgrade to one of the better Bushnell "Elite" series?

 

[bambam1723]

Scopes can stop working, too.

Why not upgrade to one of the better Bushnell "Elite" series?

That's the next step after I reattach everything. If it does turn out to be the scope then I will get in touch with Bushnell as the scope has probably only seen 50 rounds.

I know that Leupold says there is no need for "Lock-Tite", but should I apply it at least to the base screws? (the blue Lock-Tite of course)

 

[Geno]

First, I would suggest a more secure mounting system. This is what I use on my SPS Tactical and my SPS Varmint. The Ferrell company recommends using epoxy to assure a uniform fit of base to receiver. Use a release agent when mounting. For what it's worth, I do not use a release agent. I actually epoxy the base to the receiver. There ain't no movement...period!

What I value about this set-up is that if/when I have a failure, it is easy to diagnose. I can switch to a trusted scope in 30 seconds, confirm stock bolts' torque, and test-fire. If the trusted scope groups, I had a scope failure. If this trusted scope also fails to group, I know I have a rifle issue.

Ferrell G-Force w/ 20 MOA:
http://www.kenfarrell.com/F-GF-REM-700S-1-20.html

Leupold Mark 4 rings:
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=987843

Wheeler Engineering Scope Ring Alignment and Lapping Kit 1":
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=227261

Leupold Mark 4 Ring Torque Wrench:
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=782041

Check the stock for loose screws. Torque the front screw first, then the rear screw.

Good luck,

Geno

 

[navyretired 1]

Obviously the rings are causing problem if bases weren't touched. Possibly needs lapping due to misalighnment or misadjustment of rings. Try Bushnell scope on a known accurate rifle and see what the scope is capable.

 

[mshootnit]

geno's not messing around! I was going to suggest the warne tactical base instead of the dovetail setup, myself. Could be the scope too. Eliminate one variable at a time.

 

[Geno]

mshootnit:

I agree, the Warne tactical bases are every bit as good. That is what I have on my long-action rifles. Regardless of make, all of my scoped centerfire rifles have the picatinny rail as the base set-up. The long-action, hunting rifles do not have the 20 MOA off set, because I use them strictly for hunting to 500 yards.

Geno

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

and Leupold Dove Tail Rings

Dual dovetail

or

1 dovetail - 1 clamp ring

??

If the latter, in that specific situation with other factors 'controlled for', you might make sure the rear clamp on the ring is tight.

 

[Andrew Wyatt]

consider the Iron Brigade Armory scope mount. it's really solid, has the built in 20 MOA cant, and the rings and base are all one piece.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Of course, the scope MAY have broken during re-mounting....

 

[bambam1723]

Sorry. 1 Dovetail and 1 Clamp Ring.

 

[Yarddog]

"Make sure everything is tight. Even the stock. My stock loosened up on my old Savage 10FP one day turning a sub MOA gun into a 3 inch gun."

+1 iI had a stock come loose, shot all over the target
Y/D

 

[Casefull]

Yes they do. I think they are limited runs, about 1200 dollars with 5 round mag, 40x trigger, 26 in barrell including brake. Nice stock...I believe it is mcmillan. It also has the external extractor.

 

[baldeagle93]

Geno-I was thinking the same thing about the mount (while trying to disregard my bias about the optics).

Was not familiar with the Ferrell company, looks like a good mount and half the price of the Leopold Mark4. I originally had a two piece Mark4 base on my PSS and wanted to upgrade to a one piece mount...after letting the rifle set for over a year at Texas Brigade Armory waiting to be clip slotted, I decided to get it back and just put a stock Mark4 one piece mount. Because the Mark4 one piece base is not elevated or machined to allow for loading, I purchased an aluminum Weaver one piece mount. I machined it and mounted two years ago...working great!

bambam1723-I would remove the optics, get better mounts & Rings and reset scope. And always lock tight! My shooting partner actually JB Welded his mounts to his receiver, not my suggestion, but his rifle is tight.

btw...I would upgrade optics, rifle is only as good as optics!

 

[bambam1723]

I looked at the Warne scope rings, very nice, but the fixed series highest mount is only a .65". That is the starting point (low) for leupold rings. I at least need a .90" height to clear my bolt. My current ones are 1" and they work perfect to clear the bolt.

Any other suggestions for a better mounting system than my Leupolds?

 

[Uncle Mike]

Say you 'raised' your scope to get bolt handle clearance...?

More than likely 'that' is the problem!

You see, you do not 'raise' the scope to achieve bolt handle clearance, but you should modify the bolt handle and keep that scope as low as possible!

What might of happened is...with the lower mounted scope, you were closer to shooting the rifle correctly, your cheek was on the stock closer to were it was supposed to be, I say closer in all senses because without a raised cheek piece, the SPS's stock is not high enough for any optics to be used correctly.

Now that your further out of the correct shooting position, as to eye to scope alignment (cheek weld) your groups have opened up.

Your holding your head up instead of your head being firmly positioned on the stock, with the proper cheekweld and the proper eye to scope centerline relationship...that will definitely cause your shooting to suffer!

Suggestion....lower the scope as close to the centerline of the bore as you can, get yourself an adjustable, or fixed, what ever you like, cheekpiece, and practice getting behind the scope correctly, and I bet your groups come back...and even improve!

Holding your head 'up' is just plain ol' bad!..... unless of course you are shooting a 'chin gun', but you are not.

 

[bambam1723]

I don't believe that the problem is the scope height, at least when it comes to my shooting position. The scope was only raised just over a quarter of an inch for the clearance. When I was shooting these groups I was using the bipod and a rest on the rear of the stock to stabilize the gun to take away any movement when I shot so I know it was aimed at the very center of my target. I am going to get a hold of Bushnell to see about a repair on the scope.

 

[Uncle Mike]

It is not the fact that the rifle was steadily aimed at the target, you see, if the rifle is not supported correctly at boom time, the rifle will do several unwanted and derogatory things, or movements before the projectile exits the barrel.

By not being in the proper shooting position, you allow the rifle to 'dance' during bullet luanch, and each shot will exhibit a different dance, leading to a different strike on the target.

I'm not saying this is in fact the problem with your accuracy dilemma. but it could very well be, and is easy enough to fix.

Bottom line, elevated optics are a no no unless compensated for.

 

[Art Eatman]

When I see the word "bipod", I go to wondering whether the barrel is free-floated so that there can't be any change in the forearm pressure against the barrel. I've always been a same-position sandbag guy, myself. As near-perfect continuity from shot to shot as possible.

Absent a bunch of ham-handedness, just doing remove and replace shouldn't cause a broken anything in the scope, I'd think.

All bagged in, cheek weld at the benchrest isn't as important as it is in the field. Well, other than the parallax issue.

 

[d2wing]

I had a Bushnell Banner scope That would not hold a zero after a few shots. I tried another scope and with that scope everything was good. It happens.