Help

[mr.frosty]

Ok heres my problem, on my 1895 I am,at 50 yards,
having trouble getting scope zeroed in, have elevation cranked up and still
need more to hit center. I have medium rings on it have switched to
high rings but they maybe to high. I have another set of medium rings
on another rifle I can try to see if that helps.
So gimmie all ya ideas what I need here.

[tallyho]

Here's a thread from the NEF rimfire forum about a similar situation. Might be some ideas there for you.

http://www.graybeardoutdoors.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=71086

Cheers
Kerry

[Keith L]

Many, many scope/mount combos need to be shimmed.  Changing to higher mounts will not help your situation.  Placing a few thousandths shim between the scope and the rear ring will get you where you need to be.  

I hear the hands wringing already.  Some will tell you that you need to buy the Burris mounts to get this job done.  And they do a dandy job.  But I have never had problems with a shimmed scope even on hard recoiling guns.  As to what material to use my favorite is brass shim stock, available at a well stocked hardware store.  Good luck.

[victorcharlie]

I put see through rings on my 1895 and had the same problem your having.  I had to shim with .025 shim stock to get it on target..........

[John C-S]

R U using? There are some possibilities here regarding the scope and the quality/range of adjustment.

[Keith L]

R U using? There are some possibilities here regarding the scope and the quality/range of adjustment.

You can have this with the most expensive quality scope you can buy.  It has to do with mount dimensions.

[John C-S]

So the mount could be one fix. The barrel to the receiver could be another. So could the scope itself. My thought was the rifle and the mount could be right on. And maybe the scope is not the type to have either the centering or ability to adjust internally because it isn't of the quality of the rifle or the standardized mounts and rings. You just plugged your own equation into this hurdle like it was the same problem you had. What if the other aspects are also possible? Why shim a substandard scope to a quality rifle and think the problem is fixed? And the mounts--today they are all designed within micrometers to align up with a barrel properly screwed into a receiver. You gave your opinion. I am giving mine. What makes you think you are right and I am wrong?

[John C-S]

So the mount could be one fix. The barrel to the receiver could be another. So could the scope itself. My thought was the rifle and the mount could be right on. And maybe the scope is not the type to have either the centering or ability to adjust internally because it isn't of the quality of the rifle or the standardized mounts and rings. You just plugged your own equation into this hurdle like it was the same problem you had. What if the other aspects are also possible? Why shim a substandard scope to a quality rifle and think the problem is fixed? And the mounts--today they are all designed within micrometers to align up with a barrel properly screwed into a receiver. You gave your opinion. I am giving mine. What makes you think you are right and I am wrong?

[Keith L]

I have mounted hundreds of scopes and have had to shim about a third of them.  It has never been the scope.  It normally is variation in the mount or the surface on the gun that the mounts attach to.  I have seen this on the best scopes, and the cheapest.  

You could be right I suppose, but it doesn't match my experience.

[victorcharlie]

Why shim a substandard scope to a quality rifle and think the problem is fixed? And the mounts--today they are all designed within micrometers to align up with a barrel properly screwed into a receiver. You gave your opinion. I am giving mine. What makes you think you are right and I am wrong?

My Marlin 1895 sports Weaver see thru rings, and a Leupold VariX-III 1.75 X 6 X 42.......not what I consider to be substandard scope or mounts.........the cheapest easiest way to fix this, if in fact there is not another problem with the rifle or mount, is to shim it..........Maybe someone who is using different mounts that works will clue us in........

[John C-S]

Scopes myself, maybe about a houndred or less. Your assessment is most likely. I have had scopes at fault however. I just wanted to add that.

[John C-S]

Scopes myself, maybe about a houndred or less. Your assessment is most likely. I have had scopes at fault however. I just wanted to add that.

[Keith L]

My Marlin 1895 sports Weaver see thru rings, and a Leupold VariX-III 1.75 X 6 X 42.......

My recommendation with that setup is to ashcan the see thru rings and get a pair of Burris Signatures with the excentric bushings.  That will give you a great setup!

If your stock is low enough for the see thrus to work it is to low for a good cheek weld when using the scope.  I understand the desire to use both sighting systems, but have found that setup compromises both.  Good luck to you.

[victorcharlie]

You know Keith......you are 100% correct..........the high rings don't allow for a good cheek "weld"........I've thought about replacing them several times.......I'm a poor boy now.....might take awhile, but that's probably what I'm going to do..........So you like the Burris rings huh?  I've heard a lot of good things about them.........

[mr.frosty]

heres my setup:
millett 4x32 leopold rifleman medium rings shot 2 boxes still 2 inches low at 50 yards.
installed high rings aint gonna use the high rings too tall for my liking.
noticed that the leo med rings are about between .10 and .20 difference
from the millet rings I have on my 300 wsm in height have to check which is which again so i may use the millett rings on the 1895 maybe enough
to make a difference whether or not i hit center. if not then i am going to shim the base and go from there.