Bed or Lap Scope Rings?
- Thread starter TTE
- Start date
It is one thing to explain what you do, and what your results are, but essentially impugning the intelligence of those who do it differently is to me out of line on a forum such as this. Speedy Gonzales has a long history as a top level competition gunsmith. He laps and beds. I do not think that he blindly follows the latest money making scam. BTW I lapped and then bedded my first set of rings about 40 years ago, and have seen how a lap cut in many other rings that I have mounted scopes in for myself and friends. Many of those rings were top quality. You might note that I have not said that you are less intelligent for doing what you do. Of course it is your perfect right. It is just that some of us have chosen a different path, for what we think are good and sufficient reasons.
Mulligan
Silver $$ Contributor
From the March website (Deon Optical)
As a manufacturer of precision optical instruments, it is suggestable that you lap the scope rings. This is because while a single product will stay within tolerances and not cause problems, multiple products stacked on top of each other can add up to manufacturing tolerances and, in rare cases, exceed tolerances.
Jeff, I am just a worn-out wildland firefighter, not a smith of any sort and I don't claim to be.
My smith said the rings need lapped, the scope company says lap the rings, I had the smith (Dan Dowling) lap the rings. I in no way shape or form think I got hood-winked.
If this of something I previously said has offended you in some way, I apologize.
Kind Regards
CW
As a manufacturer of precision optical instruments, it is suggestable that you lap the scope rings. This is because while a single product will stay within tolerances and not cause problems, multiple products stacked on top of each other can add up to manufacturing tolerances and, in rare cases, exceed tolerances.
Jeff, I am just a worn-out wildland firefighter, not a smith of any sort and I don't claim to be.
My smith said the rings need lapped, the scope company says lap the rings, I had the smith (Dan Dowling) lap the rings. I in no way shape or form think I got hood-winked.
If this of something I previously said has offended you in some way, I apologize.
Kind Regards
CW
I am going to vote for "both. Both because receivers, base holes, stocks and stock bedding are never perfect, and maybe even rings themselves, though the rings are least likely to be off. Lapping will take care of aligning things. Secondly, bedding the rings, because the tubes might not be exactly the same diameter as the lapping tool used, or even the rings before lapping. You might not want to believe it, but I have found out that scope tubes get tweaked, or may not even be perfectly round right from manufacture. Scope collimaters get a bad rap here at times, especially from people who somehow don't have the money for one (that's another story), but I have by now found out how much scope tubes can end up being off. Put a bore sighter on a rifle, then take a scope with a centered reticle and place it on the mounted bottom half of the rings, then rotate the scope. You will be surprised how the center of the reticle is dancing all over. I also blame a lot of scope ring torquing on scope tube issues. Yes, you heard that correctly. I once kinked a new Nikon scope tube by torquing to "proper torque" on a Cooper having the original brand vertically split scope rings. Here are my observations. Not all scope rings are constructed exactly the same. Some are really thin, some really thick. When you torque scope rings, you are attempting to stretch the fasteners slightly to put a load on them so that they don't loosen. In some, many, or all(?) cases, what can happen is that the rings themselves respond to the torque and start to deform, not the screws stretching. What can happen when the rings respond to the torque is that they can start to flex, bend and the top halves can pinch inward. The scope ends up talking that load and deformation and gets scratched or dinged. I am also convinced that by following "proper torque", with some heavy rings, you can tweak and distort scope tubes out of roundness.
Danny
Danny
His line of thinking is usually what I see in the case of someone that for some reason does not have something. Those proud individuals often try somehow to turn that deficiency into "a virtue" and then proceed to try to beat up all of those that do have something.
Danny
JEFFPPC
Gold $$ Contributor
I usually agree with your line of thinking and also Boyd Allens But not on this issue. I equate this with all the 10 year olds Nike has convinced will jump higher, run faster, make more three pointers if they have a 200.00 pair of Nike's verses a 50.00 pair of Converse. It's called 'feel good'. I have never ever at a match seen any proof or even really heard any conversation how lapping rings made shooter x a winner. I have never heard anyone one say I had this particular problem and I solved it by lapping. Boyd you brought names into this, not me. Just saying. Your both on a band wagon that is basically perhaps a cure without a problem. So we will just have to disagree on this non issue.From the March website (Deon Optical)
As a manufacturer of precision optical instruments, it is suggestable that you lap the scope rings. This is because while a single product will stay within tolerances and not cause problems, multiple products stacked on top of each other can add up to manufacturing tolerances and, in rare cases, exceed tolerances.
Jeff, I am just a worn-out wildland firefighter, not a smith of any sort and I don't claim to be.
My smith said the rings need lapped, the scope company says lap the rings, I had the smith (Dan Dowling) lap the rings. I in no way shape or form think I got hood-winked.
If this of something I previously said has offended you in some way, I apologize.
Kind Regards
CW
I think the single most useless tool/joke is the pair of pointed rods -claimed to show if the rings are aligned. The points can be touching regardless of linear misalignment of the the rods.
After making sure the other (flat) ends are square, put the rods in the rings "backwards" -square ends facing.
That will show you if there is any misalignment.
Lapping alone is fine, if your scope is 100% straight.
I once turned some delrin inserts to hold scopes in the lathe and measure the tubes for runout.
A few tests of lower/medium priced scopes (+$1000) -and I now lap or bed all non -Burris Signatures.
If someone wants to send me some $5000 scopes, I will gladly test those -no matter how long it takes.
After making sure the other (flat) ends are square, put the rods in the rings "backwards" -square ends facing.
That will show you if there is any misalignment.
Lapping alone is fine, if your scope is 100% straight.
I once turned some delrin inserts to hold scopes in the lathe and measure the tubes for runout.
A few tests of lower/medium priced scopes (+$1000) -and I now lap or bed all non -Burris Signatures.
If someone wants to send me some $5000 scopes, I will gladly test those -no matter how long it takes.
Last edited:
I have lapped rings where the contact was only at the leading edge of the ring, so that the scope would have to be bent slightly to make contact with the rest of the ring. My experience has been that small problems with installed ring to scope fit are hard to spot by simply laying the scope in the rings, but that a little lapping will quickly make them apparent. How many sets of rings have you lapped? I have also seen many instances where one piece bases would show a gap at one end if tightened at the other, and if installed that way( which I believe to be common) , the base would have been bent, taking the rings installed on it out of alignment with each other. In the case of two piece bases, screw holes in them have quite a bit of clearance so that there is little chance that they would be installed in alignment with each other, and even it they lined up, due to the way that factory recievers are finished they would be out of alignment in other ways. No matter how perfect rings might be, if they are installed on a base or bases that are not straight, the result will be rings that are not in alignment with each other. I would say that the majority of rifles are not based on custom actions, and for that reason I think that in those instances where, for one reason or another, the Burris rings are not chosen, that doing something to prevent a scope being bent is desirable. I also believe that ring lappers are more the exception than the rule, because most do not know that simply bolting things together may not produce the best results. We are lucky to have many really fine aluminum rings to choose from, and for that reason and the effort it takes to lap steel, I invariably choose aluminum, which takes little time and effort to lap.
AlNyhus
Silver $$ Contributor
The best way to think about bedded bases and lapped & bedded rings is to think of the mounting system like a well done pillar bedding job.
When you tighten the screws on a stress free pillar bedded stock, they come up 'tight' instantly. If they don't....the mating surfaces are bending and flexing to make contact. There's stress in the system somewhere.
The same is true with a lapped and bedded scope mounting system. The screws (base and rings) get tight instantly. No tightening the screws another 1/4 after they come up to a mushy semi snug.
A good indicator that you may benefit from treating the rings is how level the reticle stays when the ring tops are snugged down. Properly bedded, the reticle doesn't cant one way or another when the ring tops are tightened.
Good shootin'
-Al
When you tighten the screws on a stress free pillar bedded stock, they come up 'tight' instantly. If they don't....the mating surfaces are bending and flexing to make contact. There's stress in the system somewhere.
The same is true with a lapped and bedded scope mounting system. The screws (base and rings) get tight instantly. No tightening the screws another 1/4 after they come up to a mushy semi snug.
A good indicator that you may benefit from treating the rings is how level the reticle stays when the ring tops are snugged down. Properly bedded, the reticle doesn't cant one way or another when the ring tops are tightened.
Good shootin'
-Al
Last edited:
Ledd Slinger
Silver $$ Contributor
High dollar precision matched rings are only as straight as the rail or bases they sit on. So spending a ton of money on high dollar rings means absolutely nothing if everything else isnt perfect. If you think your Rem 700 or even a lot of the custom actions have perfectly straight rails or bases, you'd be wrong. To take it further, even a top dollar action that has been checked and trued for straightness can be messed up if a bedding job wasn't done properly to eliminate stress when it's torqued down.
The only way you will ever know if a set of rings needs to be lapped, is to lap them. I have some very precise alignment checking tools that would probably show various levels of misalignment on most rings that aren't lapped by people who think they don't need it.
Never once have I ever seen a set of rings, at any price point on any action, that makes over 80% contact once lapping marks reveal the true amount of contact. Usually its less than that. With proper alignment and a high quality scope, you should be able to center the reticle adjustment on the windage knob and not have to touch it when bore sighting. Windage adjustment at optical center on the scope should line up perfectly with the target centered looking down the bore of the barrel. That's when you know you got it right. If the guys who say they never lap rings are honest with themselves, they probably can't make that claim very often, if ever.
Bedding is the ONLY way to achieve 100% ring surface to scope tube contact. I use JB Weld because it's a little softer and has a grippier surface than other epoxies so it will not scratch the scope tube and holds under any amount of recoil. Can also build any amount of custom MOA compensation by doing the math and placing a small shim of the correct thickness in the bedding of the rear ring. Can shim a for a little MOA or shim it big for ELR. No need to buy expensive custom rings or use plastic inserts with a finite amount of MOA. Just do the math based on your ring spacing and bed in 10, 15, 20 MOA or even 50 MOA if you need it. After bedding with JB, I use a sharpie to label the tops and bottoms of ring for front and rear and direction they are mounted. Write on inside of rings on the JB so it can't be seen. I also write the amount of compensation built in on the bottoms. Good to keep the data written in a log book as well. Down side is that if you ever move the rings to a different rifle, the bedding will probably need to be redone.
The only way you will ever know if a set of rings needs to be lapped, is to lap them. I have some very precise alignment checking tools that would probably show various levels of misalignment on most rings that aren't lapped by people who think they don't need it.
Never once have I ever seen a set of rings, at any price point on any action, that makes over 80% contact once lapping marks reveal the true amount of contact. Usually its less than that. With proper alignment and a high quality scope, you should be able to center the reticle adjustment on the windage knob and not have to touch it when bore sighting. Windage adjustment at optical center on the scope should line up perfectly with the target centered looking down the bore of the barrel. That's when you know you got it right. If the guys who say they never lap rings are honest with themselves, they probably can't make that claim very often, if ever.
Bedding is the ONLY way to achieve 100% ring surface to scope tube contact. I use JB Weld because it's a little softer and has a grippier surface than other epoxies so it will not scratch the scope tube and holds under any amount of recoil. Can also build any amount of custom MOA compensation by doing the math and placing a small shim of the correct thickness in the bedding of the rear ring. Can shim a for a little MOA or shim it big for ELR. No need to buy expensive custom rings or use plastic inserts with a finite amount of MOA. Just do the math based on your ring spacing and bed in 10, 15, 20 MOA or even 50 MOA if you need it. After bedding with JB, I use a sharpie to label the tops and bottoms of ring for front and rear and direction they are mounted. Write on inside of rings on the JB so it can't be seen. I also write the amount of compensation built in on the bottoms. Good to keep the data written in a log book as well. Down side is that if you ever move the rings to a different rifle, the bedding will probably need to be redone.
Last edited:
Liven The Dream
Gold $$ Contributor
Have always brought high Quality Rings never a problem in 50 years.
Been buying Warne High Mountain of late ?
Been buying Warne High Mountain of late ?
JEFFPPC
Gold $$ Contributor
While all you say maybe correct. All the scopes I own have both elevation and windage adjustment. I find no problem using it. Your arguing about , for the lack of a better term, a process, that is seldom needed. It's like going to the range by myself and coloring my bullets to guard against cossfires, but no one else is there. You have a cure for a problem that for practical purposes isn't impacting people. I shoot with guys who believe in lapping, but not one of them is doing it because of a problem they have had that I ever heard them talk about. They read about it. Sounded good. Their efforts would be better spent sorting bullets or spending their money on windflags. Some smart guy found a money maker in my opinion. Selling bars and compound. If you know who Glenn Zediker or M.L.McPearson are they both write against it. That is not why I formed my opinion but since forming my opinion I have read that in their books. They where pretty well respected individuals. Fake news is my opinion.
DShortt
Gold $$ Contributor
I find it difficult to believe that things assembled with a high degree of precision are going to function no better that those that are not.
Given range conditions and the skill of the shooter it might be difficult to demonstrate but I still find it difficult to believe it doesn't matter.
If that's the case, why are we spending money on cut rifled barrels and custom actions? Never seen a guy with a thrown together factory action, jankey barrel and mis-matched ammo win a match. But scope bases/rails/rings don't matter?
Maybe I've been at the wrong matches?
Given range conditions and the skill of the shooter it might be difficult to demonstrate but I still find it difficult to believe it doesn't matter.
If that's the case, why are we spending money on cut rifled barrels and custom actions? Never seen a guy with a thrown together factory action, jankey barrel and mis-matched ammo win a match. But scope bases/rails/rings don't matter?
Maybe I've been at the wrong matches?
Ledd Slinger
Silver $$ Contributor
Well I guess if we all sat around only shooting our hand painted BR rifles at paper from nice covered concrete benches in controlled environments and nice weather with the truck parked close by, then yeah, I'd have to agree with you there. But some people are a little rougher than that with their firearms. Me being one of them. You take a good fall on a steep mountainside and whack your rifle hard on the rocks, then later in the hike you see the buck or bull of a lifetime, you better hope you did those rings up right. Or maybe when shooting a 338 Lapua Improved with 300gr Bergers and a 5 port Super Beast break sending an ungodly amount of muzzle blast energy back at the Optic, you better hope you did those rings up right.
Yeah it takes time and effort, but it's a one shot and done deal so long as the rings stay on that rifle. Cheap insurance is how I like to look at it. You can take your truck to Grease Monkey and have them change the oil while just hoping they put good oil in it and do a good job so your investment will last a long time. OR, you can do it yourself with the best full synthetic oil and filters money can buy and you know the job was done right so your truck has the BEST chance of performing perfectly for a very long time. Same difference. Some people are gamblers, some aren't
DShortt
Gold $$ Contributor
I'd say this sums it up best right here.
JEFFPPC
Gold $$ Contributor
Good answer. Now here is a question or maybe a joke. Did the first guy to bed rings do it as a repair from over lapping? I always look at your post and learn from them. This is just one we will have different thoughts on. Looking forward to your reply, None of those big boomers for me, no more moutian treks, I can trip walking across the lawn. Have a good evening.
Ledd Slinger
Silver $$ Contributor
Good question. I bet it did start as a repair job but I wouldn't bet against the benchrest guys for coming up with it on their own.
Most of the advancements we enjoy today with modern actions, triggers, optics, stocks, barrels, rifle rests, and everything to do with the machining and other work involved to build some of the most accurate rifles at long range can be greatly accredited to benchrest community members testing everything they could think of to squeeze every last drop of accuracy from a rifle.
...I think that was the longest continuous sentence I've ever written...But anyhow, my point is that even if a gunsmith was said to have first bedded rings as a repair job, I would bet money that some benchrest shooter somewhere had already been bedding rings to test for accuracy gains but never made the knowledge public at the time. There's really nothing I've ever figured out on my own for improving rifle accuracy that I later found has already been tested in the BR world and I just didn't know about it.
JEFFPPC
Gold $$ Contributor
Yes the orange keeps getting squeezed for another drop of juice. In my 25 or so years in the bench game I would say the only 2 things I consider big advancements are the use of chronographs by many and tuners. With tuners being in my mind the number one thing. I omitted borescopes but they have made us appreciate first hand the beating our barrels take. But actually, its probably forums such as this and the intetnet that allow us to learn, argue with, trade thoughts, become friends but never meeting, with shooters from across the world. I appreciate those who try and test, even if I disagree, rather than those who I refer to as typewritter shooters.My parting thought, get a good Springer air rifle and enjoy fine accuracy, no loading, and almost no cleaning for .04 per shot.
Ackman
Gold $$ Contributor
Yes Yes Yes. Rings are just tubes that hold the scope. Unless the hole is perfectly straight and they're in perfect alignment with each other, they'll stress/flex the aluminum scope. I've lapped rings and it was a pita.....no more of that. Started using Burris Signatures on everything and voila, perfect alignment and no ring marks. Those inserts are also very handy for putting crosshairs where you want them in the adjustment range. I even used them to raise the scope enough to where a flip up front had barrel clearance.Neither. I use the Burris Signature Zee 30mm Rings with inserts.
View attachment 1458534
Burris Signature Zee Rings — Great Value, Great Performance « Daily Bulletin
More and more folks are using Burris Signature Rings these days. These unique rings feature polymer inserts. That allows you to pre-load some elevation in your scope set-up, or you can center-up the windage. Additionally, the polymer inserts hold your scope securely without leaving marks on the...bulletin.accurateshooter.com
One tip though -- with the inserts, if you move your scope along the barrel axis, you may need to re-confirm your zero. With one rifle I moved the scope about 1.5" forward at home, and my zero went off 18" or so at 600 yards.
Once out of curiosity I measured and whole slew of conventional ring pairs off of bought rifles.....Leupold, Burris, Ruger, etc. From mating surface on the base to bottom of ring. NONE of them were the same, the closest having about .005" difference one to the other, the worst up to .015". Plus, front to back each ring was out also. In other words, the hole wasn't straight. That's gonna bend a scope or dig one side into it, ie ring marks. Now these are rings from up to 30yrs ago, takeoffs which were switched to Burris Signatures. Maybe current ones are better, I don't know. But Signature self-aligning inserts eliminate alignment and steel on aluminum problems. They're a must for anything that uses two-piece bases, Sako for example. Also the best rail I've found is the picatinny by Hanks Precision gun parts, 7075 aluminum, or stainless, and dead nuts flat. Disclaimer.....my actions are Rem 700, Sako, T/C and a couple Savage.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.