New Scope - Ran out of Windage Adjustment

[Shynloco]

I have a brand new Leupold 45X Competition Scope that I've mounted on a Ruger M77 (1983 Vintage), now a 260 Rem. The scope that it is replacing is a Weaver T36 that adjusted just fine with 1" rings. This may be a bit premature because I haven't yet shot the rilfe with this scope on, but I mounted the scope using a Barska Mounting kit (that I've used to successfully mount several scopes in the past). And I'm using new 30 mm Leupold Extra High Rings and found I've run out of Windage adjustment just short of zero on the grid inside the mounting unit. So the questions is, if I get to the range and the scope still not come in for Windage, what to do to obtain more Windage? Elevation is fine and adjusted up. I've found that supposedly, Leupold makes an adjustable base rings for the Ruger M77, but I can't find such an animal anywhere. Any ideas guys? Thx!

Alex

 

[savagedasher]

Welcome to ruger they were famous for haveing that problem. Check to see if the barrel is straight with the action . Larry

 

[Keith Glasscock]

I have a Leupold with a similar issue. It requires about 20 MOA of windage one way to zero. If I take it out of the rings, and replace it with a Sightron or Nightforce, they zero really close to the middle of their adjustments.

I've sent this scope back to Leupold 2 or 3 times and finally gave up. They don't think there is anything wrong with it. I bought a set of Burris signature rings and used the offsets (both sets of 10's) standing up on edge to zero the rifle with the scope near the middle of its adjustment range.

That scope has been relegated to one of the varmint splattering devices as I cannot in good conscience sell the darn thing.

The key message is that it could be the scope, but you should do your homework to make sure you've isolated all other possibilities.

 

[Fast14riot]

Old "standard" style bases with a turn-in front ring and windage adjust rear are still available for the M77. The best is the now discontinued Millet angle-lock rings. Another way may be to try flipping one or the other ring around to see if it is out of center, and may bring it back to mechanical zero. I've seen a few of the m77 that are off on windage, my 3 are good though.

 

[BoydAllen]

Redfield makes windage adjustable rings for the integral Ruger bases. These sorts of situations are why I keep an old steel tube Weaver around. I can center up the reticle, and get the rings pointed so that the thing bore sights right on, or you can even range verify for windage, and then lap.

 

[Shynloco]

UPDATE:::::

Well guys, guess what I found.....the other day I was soliciting ideas about whether I should use High Rings or Extra High Rings on my new Leupold 45X Comp. Based upon suggestions, I went with the Extra High Rings and found I'd run out of Windage. SO I decided what the heck, I've got the other Leupold High rings so lets see if I get the same results of not enough windage. SURPRISE.............the scope adjusted in just fine with plenty adjustment in both Elevation and Windage. The High rings sit about 1/8" off the top of the barrel whereas the Extra High Rings satsalightly higher. SO I guess I've either got a bad set of Extra High rings or that article I'd read stating that the higher the scope sits off the receiver, the greater the error margin in parallax. Oh well, gonna test this at the range and see if I can zeroed with the High Rings installed. Thanks for all the comments and suggestions nonetheless. Happy shootin all!

Alex

 

[ebb]

Many years ago I had trouble getting a Leupold scope to zero on a Ruger 77 tang safety rifle. Leupold said the scope was OK .. I called Ruger and told them my problem, they sent me a set of rings they call concentric rings (shouldn't they all be?) the new rings solved all my problems. It was a single power scope that didn't have much adjustment, but the problem was all Ruger.

 

[shoot4fun]

Maybe a dumb question but aren't the Ruger rings specific to front and rear? You have to be careful about making sure the correct ring is in the correct dove tail.
This may only apply to certain models of Ruger firearms. I can't remember.

 

[Stingray]

Had the same problem with a NightForce. Needed 30 MOA to reach 1000 yards. 100 yard zero with a 20 MOA mount was 20 so I only had 25 left. Tried different rings and switching the rings and turning the rings. Sent it back to NightForce and they sent it back saying it was in spec. Got a Schmidt & Bender which has 65 minutes of travel problem solved. Sold the NightForce with the proviso that I could not get enough windage out of it and the fellow that bought it said he had the opposite problem. He couldn't get it low enough.

 

[savagedasher]

Years back when you installed a scope on a ruger you always String the scope screws on the action to see if the bore was close to center. Larry

 

[savagedasher]

Had the same problem with a NightForce. Needed 30 MOA to reach 1000 yards. 100 yard zero with a 20 MOA mount was 20 so I only had 25 left. Tried different rings and switching the rings and turning the rings. Sent it back to NightForce and they sent it back saying it was in spec. Got a Schmidt & Bender which has 65 minutes of travel problem solved. Sold the NightForce with the proviso that I could not get enough windage out of it and the fellow that bought it said he had the opposite problem. He couldn't get it low enough.

If you lower the scope hight you have more adjustments for evelation. Larry

 

[Stingray]

If you lower the scope hight you have more adjustments for evelation. Larry

My scope was mounted just off the barrel with enough room to a mirage shield.

 

[ebb]

Yes Shoot4fun I have seen them put on wrong. A blind man can see that the scope is not parallel with the bore. Some guy came to the range with 2 front rings on his Ruger and the bullets would hit the ground about half way to the target.

 

[Shynloco]

UPDATE AGAIN! This is for members or people interested in converting the restrictive Ruger Scope Mounts to accommodate Picatinny/Weaver style rings on a Ruger or other types of rifles. I happened to trip across a website, www.jackweigand.com that advertises a base he makes that converts the base of a Ruger to accommodate other types of Scope Rings. I'd never seen such a base anywhere so I'm going to give one a try. The base comes in either 0 or 20 MOA, your choice. Something for Ruger Owners to consider.

Alex

 

[CaptainMal]

Shim the darn thing.

Ironically a friend came to me with an older Ruger 77 and I mounted a B&L 6-24 on it for him. He claimed it would not zero. I got it back, studied it out, even though I foresighted the thing visually. If looked fine. His reloads were hideous and too heavy a bullet for the 1-14" twist.

After a bit of a confrontation, I used a piece of milk carton and shimmed the darn thing. Simple and effective he sighted it in easily. Of course the next contact had to do with hideous, tumbled bullets sometimes hitting the target.

If you are having the problem just take some plastic strips and insert them appropriately into the rings to shim and not damage the scope.

Another option, factory made, is to use a set of Burris Signature rings with the inserts. You can get different offsets and put them in sideways to make a correction within the rings. Of course, you have to spend $$$ for new rings. If you deal with Barska crap quality you must be quite frugal. I suggest a slice of old milk carton.

 

[MrBottleneck]

UPDATE AGAIN! This is for members or people interested in converting the restrictive Ruger Scope Mounts to accommodate Picatinny/Weaver style rings on a Ruger or other types of rifles. I happened to trip across a website, www.jackweigand.com that advertises a base he makes that converts the base of a Ruger to accommodate other types of Scope Rings. I'd never seen such a base anywhere so I'm going to give one a try. The base comes in either 0 or 20 MOA, your choice. Something for Ruger Owners to consider.

Alex

Thats a neat mount Alex. Thanks for sharing the link.

 

[hogan]

UPDATE AGAIN! This is for members or people interested in converting the restrictive Ruger Scope Mounts to accommodate Picatinny/Weaver style rings on a Ruger or other types of rifles. I happened to trip across a website, www.jackweigand.com that advertises a base he makes that converts the base of a Ruger to accommodate other types of Scope Rings. I'd never seen such a base anywhere so I'm going to give one a try. The base comes in either 0 or 20 MOA, your choice. Something for Ruger Owners to consider.
Alex

Like the Burris 2pc Picatinny set that sells for $30?

Pretty hard to characterize the Ruger integral base as "restrictive". They are what they are, and are about THE BEST base setup going, unless you have a custom tactical action w/integral Pic rail.

Larry is kinda dwelling in the past with his Ruger critiques here. May as well beat up on Sako and Tikka. These days, half the problem is in the scope design when comes to logistics of mounting correctly on variety of rifles. Long occular and mag ring assemblies restrict mounting or require extension rings.

I only own one Ruger 77, a .375ruger guide gun, but with Leupold, Warne, and Ruger rings in both 30mm & 1" diameters the scopes are always concentric to bore.

Funny how TJ Jackson's letter to Dave Brennan in Benchrest Primer about how he centered bases and rings to gain concentricity with a super-custom varmint class rifle he built for Brennan was largely about efforts aided by boresighter-collimator to have scope lineup on concentric axis. Guess he was a poor gunsmith, eh?

I did own a Wiegand base for a Ruger Super Redhawk. Nice gear, but required rear sight removal. There are also 2pc adapters that put a weaver base on a Ruger mount. Really worth using the integral base unless you need to swap scopes. If swapping, you need a boresighter-collimator, because unlikely the adapter and other base will be close to same height. i am very favorably impressed by my Ruger 77. Have never owned a Savage.

 

[hogan]

The MOST Valuable tool a rifleman can invest in, IF he uses telescopic sights, is a boresighter with collimation grid. I bought a Bushnell 74-3333 almost 30yrs ago, when I got serious about rifle work.

If you use the collimator grid to align your reticle, it is Very Apparent when you got a problem. I have found MANY scope bases that were not made correctly. Badger Ord, LaRue, Leupold QR were WAY OFF from center of bore. Talking up to 30moa off, and talking pic rail slots machined at less than 90deg angle from bar stock. The Collimator grid enables diagnosis of all sorts of problems...

How much it cost to use live ammo to sight-in? How much it cost you in time and money before you realize you have a problem? Then how do you prove the cause of the problem?

Want to learn about scopes and KNOW them thorouighly? You NEED a boresight-collimator. The ammo savings plus wasted range fee and transport costs enable you to pay for the tool first time you use it.

 

[Shynloco]

The MOST Valuable tool a rifleman can invest in, IF he uses telescopic sights, is a boresighter with collimation grid. I bought a Bushnell 74-3333 almost 30yrs ago, when I got serious about rifle work.

If you use the collimator grid to align your reticle, it is Very Apparent when you got a problem. I have found MANY scope bases that were not made correctly. Badger Ord, LaRue, Leupold QR were WAY OFF from center of bore. Talking up to 30moa off, and talking pic rail slots machined at less than 90deg angle from bar stock. The Collimator grid enables diagnosis of all sorts of problems...

How much it cost to use live ammo to sight-in? How much it cost you in time and money before you realize you have a problem? Then how do you prove the cause of the problem?

Want to learn about scopes and KNOW them thorouighly? You NEED a boresight-collimator. The ammo savings plus wasted range fee and transport costs enable you to pay for the tool first time you use it.

Well thx for all that advice. But if you read what I wrote, I was Bench Zeroing the scope IN ORDER to check the rings and base in order to save myself a trip to the range. Driving there and finding out you aren't even on paper is a waste. But in my now 55+ plus years of shooting weapons of all types sizes and calibers, I've mounted some 40 scopes successfully (I lost count probably back in the 80's) for myself and other shooters. So I feel very comfortable in what I'm doing. And BTW, I am going to the range in the morning to conduct actual zeroing of the scope and rifle. And I have never worried about savings money in any situation where live fire will be the ultimate test of any change, addition or modification to any rifle. So apparently, you have misread and completely misunderstand what I wrote. But I do appreciate your writing so that it may be useful to others with less experience than I have.

Happy Shootin and Scope Mounting!
Alex

 

[Shynloco]

LATEST UPDATE: Oh Happy Day!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This morning weather FINALLY permitted me to go to the range and zero my new scope. Not only was I on paper at 100 yds, but it took me ONLY 7 rounds to get into the bullseye on a BR target. From there, I started testing further in terms of a good load and was able to put together five shot groups @100 yds that put a huge smile on my face. Guess I got this one right despite a naysayer's comments to my post and what I'd need to get zeroed and to find accuracy. But my thanks to all those who contributed in a positive sense in looking for possible alternatives to having my baby perform. And I really do like my new Leupold 45X which is as fine as all my other Leupolds I've owned over the years in getting me the accuracy and clarity I need to get me to where I want to be. Thx again for the input.

Alex