Scope Mount Problems... Need Help!!!

[Guyon]

The rifle is a Win 70 in .30-06, and I'm trying to put a Leupold VX-II in 3-9X40 on it. You'd think this combo would be a piece of cake, but it's been a headache so far.

My problem has been getting proper eye relief on the scope. Let me add...I really don't think this is a stock fit issue. I'm 6'1" tall with a long neck and have never experienced any stock fit issues with standard stocks before.

So far, I've tried:

1. Talley Lightweight Low -- Scope too far forward in its rearmost position.
2. Talley Lightweight Low Extended -- Scope too far forward in its rearmost position.
3. Leupold DD with Reversible Front (Low Rings) -- Bell of objective end hit the front mount.
4. Leupold DD with Reversible Front (Medium Rings) -- This last one seems barely to work with the scope as far back as it'll go. I can get a good full view, though the scope is a little too high for my taste. Also, I'm not crazy about the mount overhanging the ejection port (see picture below.). But I guess it'll do till I can figure out something better.

Anybody got ideas for a better set-up in terms of mounts and rings?

 

[dakotasin]

look how far back your scope is over the wrist of the gun... sure looks to me like you need to modify your stock a bit to make this work.

if i have batteries in the digicam, i'll get the same pic as you put up, of my leupold/winchester set -up... hang tight....

 

[rbernie]

It *does* look like you need the scope inordinately far to the rear (which usually means that the buttstock is too long for you). But presuming that you're happy with the fit, have you looked into a Weaver-style one piece base? I use Weaver-style mounts on most of my rifles, because the bases give you multiple mount location options...

 

[Guyon]

Maybe I'm asking the wrong questions then... perhaps I ought to be asking for gunsmith recommendations in my area. Cutting down the stock is not something I really want to try.

I want to do a couple of things I should have already tried: (1) Contrast LOP between this rifle and a Rem 700 with which I have no problems (2) Actually have my wife measure the eye relief distance when I have the scope set at 9X.

If it turns out to be stock fit after all, I still have the Talley LW Extended (low) mounts. Haven't returned them yet. I may go back to those as I like their simplicity and their look.

dakotasin, I'd like to take a look at your set up.

 

[dakotasin]

no pics tonight - sorry... can't find the camera. wife had it, and she went to bed. but, holding it here in my hands, my scope's ocular piece is almost perfectly flush w/ the tang - it certainly does not hang out over the wrist of the rifle.

the length of pull on most of my remingtons is right around 13.25 - 13.375", and most of my winchesters run around 13.5 - 13.75". of course, that can be altered tremendously and easily by recoil pads...

when mounting a 3-9x scope, i set the power to 6x. by splitting the difference, if i adjust the scope a little one way or another when actually hunting, i don't have such a dramatic change to the feel of the gun. also, almost all of my hunting is done w/ the scope set at 6x, anyway. but the primary reason is so going down to 3x, or up to 9x isn't such a huge difference like going from 3x up to 9x or vice versa is.

cutting a stock is best left to a 'smith - not because its hard to wrap a piece of tape around a stock and lop a little bit off, but because he can help tremendously in getting your perfect lop, and making it right the first time.

try mounting the scope again at 6x, and see if that helps. also, what is your most common hunting position? if it is prone from a bipod, your scope's physical location on the gun should be dramatically different from the guy who hunts offhand all the time...

 

[USSR]

Guyon,

The solution is a one-piece picatinny base such as those made by Badger Ordnance. This base will allow for numerous ring attachment points on the base, thereby allowing you to set the scope further to the rear.

Don

 

[Guyon]

A couple of folks at TFL have suggested that a longer scope would solve the problem. One guy noted that the Leupold VX-II is a relatively short bodied scope that I'm putting on a long action. Said he'd had the same problem on a .270.

I'm thinking of going with a Zeiss Conquest in 3-9X40. It's about an inch longer than the Leupold, and it has about a quarter inch more eye relief. About $150 more, but I'd thought about going with Zeiss in the first place. Now, I wish I had.

Thoughts?

 

[USSR]

Guyon,

The problem is not the scope. The problem is with the scope location caused by the base/ring setup you are using. A one-piece picatinny base will allow you to move your scope back closer to your eye.

Don

 

[dakotasin]

agreed that the scope isn't the problem. as far back as you have that one mounted, even the conquest (if it does have a longer mounting area - i don't know) will sit too far back.

 

[asknight]

Put me in the camp with the guys that say either the stock is too long, or the scope doesn't have enough eye relief. The scope shouldn't have to sit that far back to comfortably and clearly see through it.

 

[dakotasin]

got a pic... lemmie see if i can get it up.

 

[dakotasin]

see if it works... this is a m70 long action, leupold vari-x2, leupold std bases and rings.

 

[Gewehr98]

Wow! That scope really sits far to the rear!

And the overhanging front scope mount, both on your's and Dakotasin's rifles looks rather clunky for Leupold's normally fine level of fit and finish.

Let us know how the comparative measurements between the Model 700 and that Model 70 go, and what the eye relief numbers say. Something just ain't right.

 

[Guyon]

I don't think it's the stock. Someone over at TFL gave me the following quick and dirty rule of thumb. Measure trigger face to end of stock/buttpad. Measure first joint of index finger to inside of elbow. Should be +/- 1" for decent fit. The measurements were 13.5" on the rifle (matches what dakotasin listed above) and 14.5" on me. Notice that the rifle measurement is actually shorter, so I decided I'm not cutting any stock off just yet.

I also mounted the rifle, eased my eye up to where I got a full, clear view and had my wife measure the eye relief at 9X. It was right at 3.75"--just as advertised. I don't wear glasses, and my eyesight is 20/20 or better, so I don't think it's a vision problem.

I don't do anything strange when I mount the rifle. I've been shooting rifles since I was 10, and no one has ever said, "Why are you mounting that rifle so funny?"

Still perplexed...

 

[dakotasin]

don't know of anything left to help you, but you are reiterating why i prefer remingtons - and geweher has also noted a winchester deficiency (hard to get mounts that look decent on a winchester).

anyway, your numbers are about right. if you want to get really technical, you'll have to check the fittings w/ your hunting gear on - especially if you hunt where it gets cold (sub-zero).

however, i think your situation is probably best handled under the tape measure, pencil, saw, and gunsmith...

 

[Guyon]

don't know of anything left to help you, but you are reiterating why i prefer remingtons - and geweher has also noted a winchester deficiency (hard to get mounts that look decent on a winchester).

I appreciate all the help so far, and thanks for going to the trouble of posting the pic.

In response to the last question by THECOHIBA, no. I'm of average build. Probably could stand to lose about 10 pounds, but I'm not overweight or really stocky.

Trying the scope first makes sense to me. If it's a full inch longer, that means I'll be able to get more of the scope further back. And if it has a quarter inch more eye relief, that's only going to help as well. If the Zeiss doesn't do it, I'm going to a smith.

 

[USSR]

All this talk about cutting the stock and Winchester's deficiency makes me laugh. It's said that a picture is worth a thousand words. Please take a look at this Badger Ordnance picatinny 20MOA base mounted on a Winchester long action. As you can see, the many cross slots allow for any number of ring mounting positions which will put your scope exactly where it needs to be.

Don

 

[Guyon]

The folks over at TFL were right. The longer Zeiss scope did the trick.

 

[Guyon]

Here's a pic of the result. This Zeiss is a keeper. Crystal clear optics. I also like the neat look of the Talley Lightweight mounts (Low Extended version).