Zee ring inserts?

[sscoyote]

About all I use anymore also. Love 'em for the most amount of flexibility possible in a ring system AFAIK. Even shim them some with plastic shim material for extreme range shooting and they work fine for me--

 

[normmatzen]

I have used Signature ZEE rings for all my long range bench rest guns. First I used them for the "20 MOA" I needed and even tho it may not give the full 20 MOA, it worked just fine.
Now, I get 20 MOA weaver rails and use the 0-0 rings for the self centering and soft squeeze. I use them for my light gun and heavy gun.
I have also used them on two Mauser sporters I built. A VZ24 for me and a Spanish Mauser for my Grand Son. The scope mount holes were drilled by less than competent smiths so I needed the off-set rings to get the correct windage. No problem!

Go to a long range BR match and see how many shooters use the Signature ZEE's, you will be surprised.

 

[Dave Berg]

so, the link here refers to gunamonth's OP on the topic with a link to the forums.

http://www.accurateshooter.com/optics/calculating-elevation-shift-with-burris-signature-rings/

Only gunamonth doesn't appear to have any more posts on the forums. Appears somebody quoted him though on page 1.

I just changed my user name that's all. And occasionally I go through and delete my old posts which is how I was quoted in this thread but the post is gone. Kind of surprised this eight year old thread hasn't been archived. Even more surprised someone read it and gave it new life. I've explained the Signature Zee phenomenon over and over but the unwashed masses still think it's MOA so I'll just sit down and shut up. It's time for someone else to teach this. Perhaps someday Burris will straighten it out.

 

[culpeper]

Well, reading the article I was surprised to find out I had an account on this forum. The link to the forum in the article is broke is all. I just dug down and found the original quote. The article explains it just like you do. Whoever wrote the article gave you credit aka gunamonth. lol. I recognize sscoyote from another forum.

 

[sscoyote]

Yessir--maybe Snipershide, I thought?

I've only used the calcs on my 22's. A Ruger Mk III with 3X Nikon AR scope, Ruger Charger, and MR Picuda to maximize the turret's for very long-range shooting, and the calc./formula is always very close to desired MOA change needed.

 

[rkittine]

The new Burris XTR Signature Rings show they come with 0, 5, 10 and 20 in the 30mm size.

Bob

 

[sscoyote]

Finally--the 30mm 20's are way overdue!

 

[rkittine]

These rings though are 6 screw (three per side) and the inserts then are much wider than for the Standard Signature Zee Rings.

Bob

 

[culpeper]

What the proper way to measure the ring spacing. Inside to inside or middle to middle?

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

Pick a spot on the rings and use the same one for front and rear. So middle to middle or front to front or rear to rear.

 

[culpeper]

Okay, thanks. So...

ring spacing is 4.25"

Rear ring has = +.010" insert on bottom and -.010" insert on top. Rear of scope is pointing up .010"

Front ring is reversed: -.010" on bottom and +.010" on top. Front of scope is pointing down .010"

The entire scope is now pointing down a total of .020".

(.010" + .010")/4.25"

.020"/.4.25' = 0.00471"

0.00471'*3600" = 16.956" change at 100 yards.

I guess we can convert that to MOA? 16.956"/1.047" = 16.195 MOA

Used the above on a Clearidge scope that only had a total 45 MOA turret travel. I now have a total after setting 100 yard zero 28 MOA up travel on the elevation turret. I guess if I had used the "0" inserts front and back I would have lost 16 MOA up travel once zeroed at 100 yards? Or do I have this backwards. Should have checked with "0" inserts first.

 

[Dave Berg]

.020"/.4.25' = 0.00471"

Bit of a typo there with the extra decimal point but the answer is right.

The rest of the arithmetic is correct. I don't know how you arrived at having 28 minutes of up now but if it's from having fired the rifle then zero inserts would have only had 12 MOA out of a theoretical 22.5. That means that between the receiver, base, rings and scope misalignment you've lost about 10 MOA. Somewhat more than I would expect but it is what it is.

Or do I have this backwards.

You have it correct. Next time the question comes up it's your turn.