Torque Spec's and compatability questions.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Averageman

Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2009
Messages
1,446
Location
Texas
I have a new Vortex scope, it came with a warning tag "Do not exceed 18 inch pounds Torque." The Warne Rings however say "Do not exceed 25 inch pounds Torque." that around a 25% differential in Torque.
Now in my OCD world that's just bugging the heck out of me.
I'm going 17 3/4's inch pounds torque on the rings and 24 pounds on the ring to mount on the rifle.
Will this cause issues?
 
As most torque wrenches have about a 5% spread for a given in/lb number, I don't think you'll have problems.
 
Differing advice from the OEM's of the scope and rings, almost 180 out which I find fascinating.
Here is what I think I will do.
22 inch pounds to mount the rings to the rifle, 17 for the rings to scope mount (top). bear in mind these are Warne 214 30mm rings going on a Vortex scope and they have a vertical rather than a horizontal split.
 
I have mounted many Vortex scopes using Warne rings. I've always torqued the rings to 25 inch pounds per Warne. Never had an issue.
 
It's very interesting that upon calling Warne and Vortex, I got differing views that were totally opposite.
I torqued to 18 lbs and went with that.
 
Which is what I would have done. The rings are rated to 25 (Or at least say don't go over 25), but the scope maker says stop at 18, so it makes sense to do that.
 
You go with the optics manufacturers recommended torque value. Ring specs are generic. Different scopes have different housing.metal chemistry, thicknesses, different pressure spreads, etc.
 
This is an interesting post and saved me asking the same basic question. I have a set of Nikon P-Series scope mounts and was wondering what to torque them to, mounting a Burris Fullfield E1 scope on my AR. (The Nikon website doesn't specify.) I had already mounted everything using "tight enough" settings and taken it to the range once, with no problems. Then I finally bought an in-lb torque wrench, and decided to call Nikon and inquire. I was told that the specs for the P-Series are 30 in-lbs for the cross bolts and 25 in-lbs for the rings. I checked my mountings, and the cross bolts are at least 25 in-lbs, so I left them alone and didn't torque them any further, since the crossbolts are also Loctited. The rings were not even 20, so I torqued them to about 22. I figure this gives me some insurance, without going overboard and risking damage to the scope tube. (The .223 isn't a particularly brutal round in terms of recoil.) I may have to rezero a bit; we'll see at my next range session. But my point in relaying all this is that as imashooter and others have pointed out, at some point you have to use your judgment on how tight to go. There is not always an exact figure for every scope, ring, and caliber combination.
 
The torque specs given by Vortex are based on what the manufacturer feels is safe for their scope
The torque specs given by Warn are based on what the manufacturer feels is safe for their rings

Torque the rings to the scope based on what the scope manufacturer recommends
Torque the rings to the base according to what the ring manufacturer recommends for their cross bolt/ through bolt to the mount
 
I called Burris today and asked them this question. I have a Burris Fullfield mounted on an AR with Nikon P-Series rings. The tech at Burris told me that generally speaking, I should follow the recommended torque specs of the ring manufacturer, for both base and rings. And in fact, if you look at the Burris FAQs, they only provide torque specs for their rings, not for their scopes.
At the end of the day, I am not sure there is just one answer to this question; it may depend on whose rings and scope you are using and what guidance they give you. Note that according to the OP, Warne specifies "up to" 25 in lbs, not exactly 25. So it would seem Warne is simply trying to prevent you from overtightening and crushing the scope.
I would think the OP's decision to go with 18 in-lbs should be fine. The OP didn't mention what caliber he's shooting. I would think this is more critical on a high-recoil round where the recoil could actually move the scope.
Just my two cents based on my research, and my recent experience of having a scope loosen up in my .30-06 due to cheap rings (never again) and undertightening (why I bought a torque wrench). YMMV.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top