Sorry for more rookie scope questions

Status
Not open for further replies.
mfer

mfer

Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2016
Messages
122
Location
TX
Ok, I'm set on a Nikon scope now and was ready to order than I googled how to install a scope properly. Glad I did, not a simple task for those who have never done it and I'd need some more tools it seems. Few questions.

Is a two piece scope mount more likely to give me troubles than a one piece?
a p-series vs m-series mount for example.

I have to get a torque screwdriver, $45 and a bubble leveling set $18 or could but the scope kit for $90 but if I need lapping, it would be even more.

Should I just pay a gunsmith to do it for me? I'd probable only ever own 3 guns with scopes that I see in my future. It looks like cost to mount a scope is ~$30 from a google search.

Appreciate input.
 
honestly I use a 4 dollar bubble level that walmart sells for hanging pictures. No torque driver, no lapping kit, and so far (watch somethings gonna go wrong now) no problems.

Tools I consider necessary are a decent way to hold the rifle, or the barreled action, i uses a padded 5" bench vice.
Previously noted bubble level
And decent sets of allen, torque, and screw drivers, which most people already have.

I use both single piece and split bases, have had little trouble with either, as long as they are from a decent manufacturer.

All that said, if your only doing a few scopes it may not be worth the effort to learn to do it yourself with basic stuff, and/or get all the tools that make the job easier.
 
mfer said:
I have to get a torque screwdriver, $45 and a bubble leveling set $18 or could but the scope kit for $90 but if I need lapping, it would be even more.
Click to expand...
You're overthinking it. You don't need any of that for your M&P 15-22.

Bear in mind you're putting the scope on a .22 rifle which will be subject to very little recoil. Recoil will act to move the rifle back relative to the scope. Pressing the base mount forward while you tighten it will inhibit any motion in that direction.

Leupold publishes 65 in lb for the Mark 4 IMS mounts I use. That's a lot; more than you need for an M&P 15-22. Just make it tight. It won't move. I prefer one piece mounts on an AR.

I level my scope by resting the rifle's mag well base on a surface verified to be level. You need a level for that but it can be a carpenter's level you probably already have. That makes the gun level. Hang a plumb bob in the distance, which will obviously be vertical. Rotate the scope so that the vertical reticle lines up with it. Tighten the rings and you're done. Good quality rings (remember I said you should get good quality rings?) will not need to be lapped, nor will it be easy to strip screw threads with a small Allen or Torx key. Leupold publishes a torque specification of 28 in lb for the ring screws. They specifically state not to use thread locker, and not to lap their rings.
 
Last edited:
About the only other thing I think you need besides what you already have is a gun vise or rest . Like others have said , if you get good rings you will not need to lap them . I do like the one piece base / rings like Talley and DMZ .

If you don't like turning wrenches , there is nothing wrong with letting a GS or LGS install it for you . My LGS will mount it free if I buy the scope from them , while I wait . I like doing it myself so I never take them up on it and I have everything that I need to install one .
 
You can do a perfectly good job with a screw driver and an ounce of sense.

Also, you don't need a special level kit to precisely level a scope.

edit: what v35 said, exactly.
 
Last edited:
From what I'm reading here is looks like most everybody agrees that the important thing is to by good mounting hardware(rings , mounts etc.)
 
Both the Nikon P series and M series mounts are junk. The single screw (per side) design gives poor contact, and the absolutely terrible machining quality reduces their contact with the scope even more. They require lapping, else you can expect damage to your scope.

I firmly disagree with the others commenting above - especially if you are using crappy mounts like the Nikon products. You are NOT overthinking this. The rings should be lapped and torqued appropriately, lest you want to trade between damaging your scope and having it slip under recoil. Equally, if you are serious about hitting your targets, the consequences of a canted reticle are real, so leveling the scope is a necessary step.

I do not agree, however, that mounting a scope is a complicated process, nor do I agree the minimal tools are expensive. If you are only doing one or two rifles, then For the cost of the tools, I'd recommend paying a good smith to install the mounts, lap the rings, and level the reticle. Else, if you would do more than a couple installations, the cost of the tools is chump change compared to the price of a damaged optic.

You CAN get by without lapping if you buy quality mounts and rings, but the Nikon products are absolute junk. Guys like them because they are cheap, but ask those guys how many times they've pulled their scope to see the bite marks, or calipered their tubes to check for round?
 
Check out YouTube for a tutorial on the subject. Should find an audio/visual one. Very easy to follow and understand.
 
Varminterror said:
Both the Nikon P series and M series mounts are junk. The single screw (per side) design gives poor contact, and the absolutely terrible machining quality reduces their contact with the scope even more. They require lapping, else you can expect damage to your scope.

I firmly disagree with the others commenting above - especially if you are using crappy mounts like the Nikon products. You are NOT overthinking this. The rings should be lapped and torqued appropriately, lest you want to trade between damaging your scope and having it slip under recoil. Equally, if you are serious about hitting your targets, the consequences of a canted reticle are real, so leveling the scope is a necessary step.

I do not agree, however, that mounting a scope is a complicated process, nor do I agree the minimal tools are expensive. If you are only doing one or two rifles, then For the cost of the tools, I'd recommend paying a good smith to install the mounts, lap the rings, and level the reticle. Else, if you would do more than a couple installations, the cost of the tools is chump change compared to the price of a damaged optic.

You CAN get by without lapping if you buy quality mounts and rings, but the Nikon products are absolute junk. Guys like them because they are cheap, but ask those guys how many times they've pulled their scope to see the bite marks, or calipered their tubes to check for round?
Click to expand...

It's nice to have a dissenting opinion, but I think this is where context is in order, based on his other thread he's mounting an economy scope to a .22lr plinker. Those Nikon scope mounts will be just fine for that.
 
Ok. Let's say I up my budget as I'm getting caught up in all this.

I was looking at
Nikon prostaff 3-9x40 rimfire ~$120
Nikon p-rimfire 2-7x32 ~$175
Leupold rimfire 2-7x28 ~$230

So would I get much difference in the nikons? Seems like the p-rimfire is just more AR style. The leupold is just the next step up. Seems most people say to stay away from other brands.

Can someone tell me what good mounts are? Can I mix manufacturers. IE Nikon scope and leupold mounts?
 
A guy can justify using duct tape and baling wire if they want, but it doesn't change the fact the Nikon mounts are notoriously poor quality and design, or the fact there are better products in its price range. It's a $120-140 scope on a $300 rifle - I'm pretty fortunate, but I'm not willing to ruin a $100 bill (the scope) just for the sake of saving $10-20 by using the M223 instead of a Burris PEPR.

With enough lapping, and by enough, I mean "a lot of," the M223 can be made to have sufficient contact and avoid deforming or gouging the optic. Lapping won't do anything to help keep the mount tight, so torquing the mount appropriately and blue loctite are a must. For the $10-20 in purchase price difference, the Burris PEPR is a better quality product, and in my experience, a guy who just wants to slap the parts together and run is much better served with the PEPR, which will stay tight, and offers better contact on the scope without lapping than the M223.

Leveling the reticle might not seem important for some folks, and if you never shoot any range where you need to dial or hold over, it's moot, but the .22LR drops more than most rounds, so it's more prone to wander across the target than flatter shooting centerfire rounds. For the minimal cost, skill, time, effort, and equipment required, there's no good excuse to not level the reticle. A guy doesn't have to own a Gunsmithing specific level set or collimator - a simple compact or torpedo level will work fine. Simply level the rifle then use a true vertical line, like the corner of a building across the yard, to true the reticle. It takes me longer to pick my position for eye relief than to level my optics, and neither take any considerable amount of time or effort.

To each their own. But if you want a mount which will stay in place, keep your scope in place, and not damage your optic, look for something which doesn't say Nikon on the box.
 
mfer said:
Can someone tell me what good mounts are? Can I mix manufacturers. IE Nikon scope and leupold mounts?
Click to expand...

In no particular order, and with no consideration to price: LaRue, Burris, Warne, and Aero are the AR type mounts I would recommend. The Burris PEPR tends to be the cheapest in that fleet.

Yes, you can mix manufacturer brands of scopes and rings. Optics and mounts are all standardized in the US to use 4 tube diameters, only two being common: 1" and 30mm. The scopes you're reviewing are all 1" tubes, and can be used with any 1" rings of the appropriate height.

In your price range, the Leupold isn't really better than the Nikon, and in my experience, the Bushnell Banners will offer better image clarity and better tracking than both the Leupold or Nikon. The Nikon will have edge issues, which are ok at first, but will lead to headaches over a long shooting session. The cheap leupolds are just equivalent in clarity, but often lack a bit in adjustment consistency, and often cost more = poor value in their class. I have not been impressed by the Vortex Dback or Crossfire. The Nikon will give crisp images in the center, but with more color/contrast distortion than the Bushnell or Leupold - which for many folks, that makes them look great until you're trying to hone in on your aiming point (think about the settings on your TV for sports vs. movies, or your laptop screen compared to your phone for image quality and contrast). In my experience, the Bushnell Banners are the best deals in this price class for quality vs. price, Nikon behind them, Leupold behind that for being over priced, then Vortex, Simmons, Weaver etc in line behind these. I have a couple of the Bushnell Trophy Xtreme's which I got on demo recently, and while they aren't quite as distortion free as the Banners, they seem to be right in line for clarity and resolution, so I'd put them as a coin flip for second place with the Nikons, behind the Banners.
 
mfer said:
Ok, I'm set on a Nikon scope now and was ready to order than I googled how to install a scope properly. Glad I did, not a simple task for those who have never done it and I'd need some more tools it seems. Few questions.

Is a two piece scope mount more likely to give me troubles than a one piece?
a p-series vs m-series mount for example.

I have to get a torque screwdriver, $45 and a bubble leveling set $18 or could but the scope kit for $90 but if I need lapping, it would be even more.

Should I just pay a gunsmith to do it for me? I'd probable only ever own 3 guns with scopes that I see in my future. It looks like cost to mount a scope is ~$30 from a google search.

Appreciate input.
Click to expand...

OP, you are NOT overthinking this at all, despite what some are telling you. If a scope is worth using then it's worth mounting correctly, period end of story, and you're on the right track. If you don't mount a scope correctly then it will distort the image and ruin accuracy, as well as break the scope eventually.

If you use individual rings you will likely need to lap them. But since you're mounting on an AR you will want a one piece cantilevered mount anyways. You will never get the proper eye relief mounting on an AR with individual rings unless you go out on the rail, and that's a big no no. Any good one piece mount shouldn't require lapping. I don't have any personal experience with nikon mounts, so I can't commend on them.

You do need a torque screwdriver. I highly recommend the Wheeler Fat Wrench. But these come in handy for more than mounting scopes, so they're a great investment. Machine screws absolutely must have the correct torque spec to stay put. Too loose and they back out, too tight and they back out all the same. People complain about keymod coming loose all the time because they overtighten the screws.

I wouldn't recommend using a bubble level unless you're willing to spring for a precision level, which will run about 100 bucks. Thing is though, you're betting that the turret caps are perfectly level. It's better to just use a flat piece of metal to level the bottom of the scope under the erector assembly with the top rail, or the mount itself, as the case may be. That's the simplest cheapest method and is about as good as you're going to get with any other method.

Regarding gunsmiths, don't trust just anyone. If you do a one piece mount there's no reason you shouldn't do it yourself. If you use separate rings and have a gunsmith do it make sure he checks them at least, and make sure he laps them if they don't line up. I doubt that 30 dollars you were quoted includes lapping, as it's pretty labor intensive. Most "gunsmiths" just slap the scope in the rings and crank down on the screws, probably not even using a torque screwdriver. If you're lucky enough to find a real gunsmith he probably won't come cheap.
 
grampajack said:
OP, you are NOT overthinking this at all, despite what some are telling you. If a scope is worth using then it's worth mounting correctly, period end of story, and you're on the right track.
Click to expand...

No one suggested he do it incorrectly. We're just saying with a bit of common sense, you don't need any of the tools listed. If you need those tools, or feel it's the only right way to do it that's great, we're all entitled to our opinions.
 
Thanks again everyone. Learning LOTS. I am liking what I'm reading about those Burris mounts. Anyone have experience with the removable kind? Can you really take them off and then put them back on without any accuracy issues?
 
I believe the paperwork with the Burris mount claims it will come back to within a half inch at 100yrds, but in my experience, it's more like 1/4moa. Of course, you have to put them back into the same T slot in the pic rail, but then I start one of the cams closed to tighten up a little, and give the mount a quick tap forward to seat it against the front of the slot, then locking the QD levers down tight. By making sure the QD detents on the backside are tightened the same and tapping on the mount to seat it, I get pretty dang close to the same index position, and my groups show it - I only shift half as much as Burris claims I could.

And of course - you're shooting a 22LR. Being 1/4-1/2moa consistent at 22lr ranges of 50-75yrds will only mean a shift of 1/8"-1/4", at worst 3/8", which sure isn't much. With cheap 22LR ammo, you likely won't even notice the shift, even if you're shooting from a machine rest.

On a related note, however, using an index mark on the crossbolts nut on the hard mount PEPR, I can get the same consistency upon removing and replacing the mount as I do with the QD version. The only difference is the need for a small tool to loosen and tighten the nuts on the standard model, and can remove the QD model without tools.
 
Where city/town are you located in mfer? If you are close I'll mount it for you at no charge. I have an optics mounting business and I'll walk you through it.

I have mounted many Nikon one and two piece bases and haven't had any come back with issues. I think you will be fine with either. Most companies take a scope and put AR or Tactical in the name and jack the price up. A Nikon P Rimfire is absolutely no better than a Prostaff Rimfire. Nikon is charging extra for exposed turrets which aren't needed on an AR style .22LR. What you are paying for is tacti-cool looks. The Leupold scope you mentioned is definitely a better scope than the two Nikons but you will pay a lot more for one. I'd stick with the Prostaff Rimfire.

I'm not an expert but did mount scopes for the Fort Worth Cabela's for a couple of years and also have a small business doing it. I agree with others you don't need any special tools. I have a bunch of scope mounting tools, if I could only have one it would be my torque wrench but with a Rimfire you don't even need one.

image_8.jpeg
 
How funy, I live in the same town as Dwight. Yes, there are a lot of things to take in to account when mounting a scope correctly. Levels definitely make a difference. I bought magnetic ones off amazon for cheap. I also have a wheeler reticle level and scope mounting kit for precision rifles and scope where everything needs to be perfect. Nikon's M and P series mounts come with all you need to mount the scope minus the level. I have a plumb bob I use sometimes to make sure my scope is stright up and down, you just have to make sure it's level when you look at the bob. You will have a ton of fun with your M&P 15/22. Mine have seen 10,000 plus rounds of 22 ammo under them and keep on shooting. If you want to make it easy on yourself and you're not swapping the scope out all the time, give a pro a call to mount the optic and then just have fun.

All your scope choices are sound options. One additional that you might like is Nikon's PROSTAFF Target EFR 3-9. This scope has parallax adjustment for longer shots but it's a 22lr, really how far are you going to be shooting? Most likely the answer is 50 yards most of the time.

I do use a P-Rimfire 2-7 ( old version is P-22) on my Smith's.
22lr4-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
The Nikon PROSTAFF Target EFR 3-9 would be my choice over the other two Nikon Rimfire scopes. It cost more but is worth it to me.
 
I've heard differing accounts on the repeatability of the Burris PEPR. I do have the QD version on my AR but don't take it off, so I have no experience with that aspect. My reason for having it is to remove the scope quickly if it fails so I can use the iron sights.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Mounting scope on my AR-15
Replies
2
Views
501
Scionti95
S
v35
  • Locked
AR scope mount... am I doing it right?
Replies
19
Views
1K
v35
v35
fireman 9731
  • Locked
Weaver 1-3 AR scope mounting reccomendations
Replies
10
Views
1K
fireman 9731
fireman 9731
CodeSection
  • Locked
Lapping Scope Rings - Neccesary?
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
earlthegoat2
earlthegoat2
W
  • Locked
Scope Ring Question
Replies
4
Views
900
Whacked
W
Back
Top