Inexpensive Scope Tales

[Rickhem]

Here's a bit of a diatribe about my twists and turns with a cheap scope that I bought used, and an old rifle I matched it up with.

I have a Bushnell Banner 6-18x50 that I bought used, I think it was from this site too, but I forget. I also have an H&R Model 700, which is a semi-auto .22 mag, that I bought from a guy unfired about 30 years ago. That rifle has sat in my safe for so long since I really never had a purpose for it. So fast forward to now, and I not only have the ability to shoot on my own property, I also have a problem with beavers. I got the nuisance permit for the beavers, and have shot two already with a .22 LR, but the .22 mag seems like a better option. It wasn't until a few weeks ago that I put the first rounds through my H&R .22 mag, and I knew it needed some glass. Saw the For Sale ad for the Banner scope, and decided it would make a good match for my rifle, so I bought it. I did buy the appropriate Weaver base for the rifle way back when I first got the rifle, but after three moves, I can't find it now. So eBay to the rescue, bought a base still in the plastic, and finally, the Banner was mounted up, and a selection of ammo purchased to see what this rifle might like.

So I get the bench set up, have a target at 50 yards, and start working through the ammo. Didn't focus too much on fine sight adjustments with the scope, just wanted to see what grouped best. There's a wide range of ammo available now for .22 mag, and it ain't cheap, so I wanted to be judicious with how I evaluated it. Well, nothing seemed to group better than about an inch and a half, which really isn't too good at 50 yards. In trying to adjust the turrets, and move that group up to the point-of-aim, I found out that the scope was maxed out for elevation, and the groups were still about 3" low at 50 yards. Windage seemed to work fine, not exactly the ¼-min clicks the turrets were marked for, but they responded, and adjusting it to be centered (but low) was not an issue. Well, now I know why this scope was sold by the previous owner. Yeah, I should know better, but one of my faults is trusting people, when I should be more cautious.

I have a few cheap scopes, and have dealt with how adjusting windage sometimes affects elevation, and vice versa, but you can eventually get them dialed in, it just takes longer and more shots. Mostly these cheap scopes go on rifles that would not get re-adjusted, just left as-is and aren't used all that often. That was the plan here too, but when the elevation turret maxed out, I knew I wasn't getting this one adjusted any more.

So I took the scope back off again, did the optical centering in a mirror, and put it back into the box. I have more than a few Bushnell scopes, and they have been pretty good to me overall. I decided to send them an email, and after a few back and forths, where they wanted more info and the serial number on the scope, they sent me a brand new R3 6-18x50 scope as a replacement. Great!, but I still have this itch to get the original scope back to usable status. I'd never sell it, seeing as it's got issues, but maybe I can work around them. I like the irony of how someone sold me a broken scope, but I not only got it to be functional again, but also got a whole new scope from the deal too.

I remounted it on the rifle again. I use the Burris Signature rings, with the poly inserts, as those are my favorite rings. I bought the eccentric insert kit, that includes both 10 MOA and 20 MOA inserts, and remember seeing them in with some other stuff, but can't find them now. They'd be perfect for this, if I could find them. Somewhere, probably right next to that original Weaver base for the rifle, those things are waiting to be rediscovered, but for now, they remain lost. A great feature of those poly Signature inserts, is that they're self-aligning, and you don't need to lap them, but they also can self-correct for use of those eccentric inserts. So why not try shimming with the currently installed rings? In going by my group being about 3" low at 50 yards, and not wanting to be right at the end of the elevation adjustment on the scope, I decided to go with 6" for my calculation. A distance of 50 yards, is 150 feet, or 1800 inches. So that makes a calculated adjustment of 0.00333 inches per inch of distance. My scope rings are 4.125" apart, so a shim underneath where the scope is sitting in the rear ring, would need to be 0.014" to balance that out (4.125 x 0.00333). More is better there, to get me back towards optical center.

I have a couple feeler gauge sets that could be used for shim stock, but what fun is that? I've used the cover of a tin of airgun pellets for a shim before, and even saved the rest of that as some stock for a future use, but it's too thin for this application. A beer/soda can is too thin as well. After walking around the garage, and then the house, with my calipers, measuring and deciding what would be good donor material, I found an old plastic card from the healthcare plan we had last at work. It was just a bit over .020", and I decided that the extra should put me even further up into the workable range of the scope again. I figure the poly insert is going to deform a bit, so a little extra would again, be better. I grabbed the good scissors, cut myself a shim from that card, and got to mounting the scope again. It took a few more cuts, since the whole bottom ring didn't need to be lined completely, and the screws weren't long enough to put the top half of the ring back on when I did that, but lining about 1/3 of the bottom insert seemed to work. I can actually see the way the inserts are tilted in the rings, due to the scope being at a downward angle now. I can even make a rough measurement of the difference between the bottom of the scope and the Weaver base, both in front of the rings and behind them.

Now I fully realize that this may all be a giant waste of time if the scope is screwed up to where it won't hold a zero, and that remains a strong possibility, but I'm rolling the dice with it anyway. I have a nagging suspicion that the poor groups I was getting were not all the fault of the rifle, but may have been another symptom of the bad scope. This might not completely answer that. However, if this works, I'll have something that will get set for either 50 or 75 yards, and probably never get adjusted again, and I'll have another scope to put on something else. If it doesn't work, then that R3 will just go on in place of this scope, and that will be that. It's only an investment of time and ammo now.

Tomorrow I'll try to go set things up again, and see if I can get some questions answered.

 

[Rickhem]

As a follow up, the shim really did help, and my elevation is now centered in the range of the turret. I took a shot at about 15 yards and it hit about 4" high on the target. Cranked down about 40 clicks, moved back to 50 yards, and it was about even with the POA for that first shot, and about 3 " left, but it started scattering them for the next few. This is what I was afraid of.

I clicked a few clicks right and got the windage close, but elevation went back to 3" high again. This is the song of the inexpensive scopes, either adjustment seems to always affect the other.

So with my using a standard 10 meter airgun target for my shooting, I'm now pretty comfortably on the paper (17cm) at 50 yards. At this point I started trying different ammo again. I'm looking for groups now, and will fight with the turrets once one brand separates itself from the others. First was some old CCI 40 grain hollow point that I was using to get centered. This is ammo that my dad bought by mistake for his 17HMR, and he peeled the labels off, so I don't even know what's in the little plastic box, aside from it being a HP bullet. I'm hoping this isn't the best, since I'll have a hell of a time figuring out what it is. Headstamp was the big "C", so it's CCI. that shot about a 2½" group, with one low shot. Next up was CCI Maxi Mag +V ammo, which shot about 2" for 4 shots, but one low one made the group about four inches.

The fear of the reticle being "loose" is growing, and these random low shots are only fueling that fear. This rifle has a trigger that breaks at about 7 pounds, so that's not good, but I'm using a front rest and rear bag, so the rifle isn't moving much, and the trigger, despite it's weight, is breaking clean on target. I can probably clean that up, but first lets see if it's worth getting into that.

Next two loads are ones I bought just a few weeks ago, and they reflect some of what is now offered for this cartridge. I loaded up five rounds of Federal with the Speer 30 grain TNT bullet. The TNT bullets have been exceedingly good bullets in a number of other cartridges for me, so I had high hopes. These 5 shots were the ones you see in the picture just below the black. (other holes were from the other day) That's just over an inch and it's mostly windage, the elevation stayed pretty consistent. I added 8 clicks of elevation, then loaded up the last ammo I wanted to try. This was Hornady ammo loaded with the 30 grain V-Max bullet. This ammo gives me a very different recoil impulse, and occasionally won't pick up the next round, not sure why. Both the Federal and the Hornady are 30 grain bullets at a listed 2200 fps muzzle velocity, but could be different powders getting them there. Anyway, my first three shots punched out the 10 ring, shot four was the low 8, then shot 5 right back up into that group. A really nice group for four shots, with one low one opening it to about an inch.

I'm thinking that maybe the Federal and the Hornady ammo don't have enough jolt when firing to move the reticle, if it is in fact loose in the tube. That four shot knot in the ten ring felt good, and will renew my interest in at least a couple more follow-up groups with both the Federal and the Hornady ammo. I'd say either should be good for the beavers, or the random groundhog that decides that under my garage would be a good place to live.

I'm happy with the results thus far, but I'll need a few more different days at the bench to confirm that I don't still have issues with that scope.

If you're still here, thanks for reading all the way through.

 

[DShortt]

Anyone can do whatever they want, obviously, to evaluate a situation like this.
Personally, I use picatinny rails exclusively and bed the base to the action when installing them. I also keep a Leupold 3x9x40 on hand. Something like this comes up, I mount it and in short order, I have a really good idea of what to do next.

Again, not saying it's the best plan. I don't even worry about dialing the Leupold in. At 50 yards, it's easily on paper without adjustments and then I can tell if the scope is bad or if the rifle/load combination is causing problems. It's not precise enough for load development by any means. But it answers that 'scope or rifle/load?' question really quick.

Hope this helps.

 

[Infrequent Shooter]

Here's a bit of a diatribe about my twists and turns with a cheap scope that I bought used, and an old rifle I matched it up with.

I have a Bushnell Banner 6-18x50 that I bought used, I think it was from this site too, but I forget. I also have an H&R Model 700, which is a semi-auto .22 mag, that I bought from a guy unfired about 30 years ago. That rifle has sat in my safe for so long since I really never had a purpose for it. So fast forward to now, and I not only have the ability to shoot on my own property, I also have a problem with beavers. I got the nuisance permit for the beavers, and have shot two already with a .22 LR, but the .22 mag seems like a better option. It wasn't until a few weeks ago that I put the first rounds through my H&R .22 mag, and I knew it needed some glass. Saw the For Sale ad for the Banner scope, and decided it would make a good match for my rifle, so I bought it. I did buy the appropriate Weaver base for the rifle way back when I first got the rifle, but after three moves, I can't find it now. So eBay to the rescue, bought a base still in the plastic, and finally, the Banner was mounted up, and a selection of ammo purchased to see what this rifle might like.

So I get the bench set up, have a target at 50 yards, and start working through the ammo. Didn't focus too much on fine sight adjustments with the scope, just wanted to see what grouped best. There's a wide range of ammo available now for .22 mag, and it ain't cheap, so I wanted to be judicious with how I evaluated it. Well, nothing seemed to group better than about an inch and a half, which really isn't too good at 50 yards. In trying to adjust the turrets, and move that group up to the point-of-aim, I found out that the scope was maxed out for elevation, and the groups were still about 3" low at 50 yards. Windage seemed to work fine, not exactly the ¼-min clicks the turrets were marked for, but they responded, and adjusting it to be centered (but low) was not an issue. Well, now I know why this scope was sold by the previous owner. Yeah, I should know better, but one of my faults is trusting people, when I should be more cautious.

I have a few cheap scopes, and have dealt with how adjusting windage sometimes affects elevation, and vice versa, but you can eventually get them dialed in, it just takes longer and more shots. Mostly these cheap scopes go on rifles that would not get re-adjusted, just left as-is and aren't used all that often. That was the plan here too, but when the elevation turret maxed out, I knew I wasn't getting this one adjusted any more.

So I took the scope back off again, did the optical centering in a mirror, and put it back into the box. I have more than a few Bushnell scopes, and they have been pretty good to me overall. I decided to send them an email, and after a few back and forths, where they wanted more info and the serial number on the scope, they sent me a brand new R3 6-18x50 scope as a replacement. Great!, but I still have this itch to get the original scope back to usable status. I'd never sell it, seeing as it's got issues, but maybe I can work around them. I like the irony of how someone sold me a broken scope, but I not only got it to be functional again, but also got a whole new scope from the deal too.

I remounted it on the rifle again. I use the Burris Signature rings, with the poly inserts, as those are my favorite rings. I bought the eccentric insert kit, that includes both 10 MOA and 20 MOA inserts, and remember seeing them in with some other stuff, but can't find them now. They'd be perfect for this, if I could find them. Somewhere, probably right next to that original Weaver base for the rifle, those things are waiting to be rediscovered, but for now, they remain lost. A great feature of those poly Signature inserts, is that they're self-aligning, and you don't need to lap them, but they also can self-correct for use of those eccentric inserts. So why not try shimming with the currently installed rings? In going by my group being about 3" low at 50 yards, and not wanting to be right at the end of the elevation adjustment on the scope, I decided to go with 6" for my calculation. A distance of 50 yards, is 150 feet, or 1800 inches. So that makes a calculated adjustment of 0.00333 inches per inch of distance. My scope rings are 4.125" apart, so a shim underneath where the scope is sitting in the rear ring, would need to be 0.014" to balance that out (4.125 x 0.00333). More is better there, to get me back towards optical center.

I have a couple feeler gauge sets that could be used for shim stock, but what fun is that? I've used the cover of a tin of airgun pellets for a shim before, and even saved the rest of that as some stock for a future use, but it's too thin for this application. A beer/soda can is too thin as well. After walking around the garage, and then the house, with my calipers, measuring and deciding what would be good donor material, I found an old plastic card from the healthcare plan we had last at work. It was just a bit over .020", and I decided that the extra should put me even further up into the workable range of the scope again. I figure the poly insert is going to deform a bit, so a little extra would again, be better. I grabbed the good scissors, cut myself a shim from that card, and got to mounting the scope again. It took a few more cuts, since the whole bottom ring didn't need to be lined completely, and the screws weren't long enough to put the top half of the ring back on when I did that, but lining about 1/3 of the bottom insert seemed to work. I can actually see the way the inserts are tilted in the rings, due to the scope being at a downward angle now. I can even make a rough measurement of the difference between the bottom of the scope and the Weaver base, both in front of the rings and behind them.

Now I fully realize that this may all be a giant waste of time if the scope is screwed up to where it won't hold a zero, and that remains a strong possibility, but I'm rolling the dice with it anyway. I have a nagging suspicion that the poor groups I was getting were not all the fault of the rifle, but may have been another symptom of the bad scope. This might not completely answer that. However, if this works, I'll have something that will get set for either 50 or 75 yards, and probably never get adjusted again, and I'll have another scope to put on something else. If it doesn't work, then that R3 will just go on in place of this scope, and that will be that. It's only an investment of time and ammo now.

Tomorrow I'll try to go set things up again, and see if I can get some questions answered.

I want you as my neighbor for WSHTF. I have a few buddies I try to keep on the good side of for when I have a garage/engineering project! Cheers.

 

[dryhumor]

I shoot a Tbolt 22mag, you are correct about it being more expensive ammo to experiment with, but once you find what shoots best you’re good to go. Mine shoots several reasonably well. The last time out, I used Hornady 30gr Vmax.

If you have no confidence in your scope, get another one and give it a try. Never hurts to have a scope or two in reserve. I have a Leupold air rifle scope that I know has been on more than 20 rifles for load development.

FWIW, a cheap set of feeler gauges from an auto supply store are good for shims. Consistent, about the right size, and marked for thickness.