Author Topic: Scope Ring Placement (Read 1704 times)

MarkA · « **on:** May 10, 2004, 03:26:20 AM »

I have been struggling with scope ring placement on a NEF 223. While at the range on Friday, a fellow shooter suggested that the front ring be as close as possible to the adjustment section of the scope (where the windage and elevation knobs are). He stated that it was common knowledge that the front ring should always be placed here. The reason for this was to keep the scope from moving due to recoil effects. Is that true? Is there a preferred position for the rear ring? Just trying to learn something new!

scruffy · « **Reply #1 on:** May 10, 2004, 03:42:36 AM »

That's a new one on me. I always put the the front scope ring in the second forward slot (first slot is unsupported by the barrel), and have the rear ring in the last back slot. Then slide the scope forward and back until the eye relief is right with my hold.

Maybe if you were shooting a 7lb 10 gauge or 12 gauge 3.5" mag turkey gun or extreme 45-70 hotloads with 60+lbs of recoil it would make a difference having the scope mounted like the guy was saying, but certainly not a 223.

One thing you can do on these nef's is add a third ring. Like have two rings in the first two slots on the front of the mount rail and one in the back slot. Three rings will ensure the scope doesn't slide. But on a 223 you'll never have a problem with good rings.

later,
scruffy

MSP Ret · « **Reply #2 on:** May 10, 2004, 03:44:08 AM »

Thats a new one on me MarkA but I have only been shooting about half a century now. usually try to space my scope rings as far apart as possible. My thinking is it may hold the scope steadier with less chance of a bump moving it. As long as you don't interfere with any adjustment knobs or out any undue strain on the scope you are probably not going to adversely affect it's operation. That other fellow may have been thinking of times long past when some scopes were 2 pieces of tube screwed together into the center section that housed the adjustable reticle. It may have been better under that instance to place your scope mounts close to the weakest point which could have been bent more easily but I'm not sure. Currently all (?) scopes are made from one solid tube of metal.
Think of this. hold a broomstick out in front of you with both hands close to each other near the middle. Now have someone grab the ends and try to move the broomstick around. They have the advantage of leverage and can move the broomstick quite easily. Now spread your hands out closer to the ends and have the person try the same thing, it is much more difficult for the broomstick to be moved out of position because your leverage has been increased, my thought is it is the same with a scope.
Of course every one here has an opinion and this is mine. Your job is to decide what you think is correct....<><.... :grin:

marv · « **Reply #3 on:** May 10, 2004, 04:44:01 AM »

i place rings as far apart as possible, only time is to get eye releif.
I like H&R - NEF bases better than weaver because the adjustment
for eye releif. Just my ideas, May be wrong, I have a few times in my
70 odd years. marv.

Fred M · « **Reply #4 on:** May 11, 2004, 04:38:38 PM »

This definitely not common knowledge. Eye relief and comfortable head position is why you have all the slots in the Weaver rail. I do like to stay away from the power selector ring a bit. The rings can be anywhere on the tube and as far apart as possible. The turrets are not designed for a recoil stop. A very poor place to put the rings.

marv · « **Reply #5 on:** May 12, 2004, 01:51:10 AM »

Fred M
All of the Weaver rails I have seen only have two cross X- slots,
The rails from H&R, NEF have multi X- slots which I think You have more
leeway eye releif and head position for comfert,
And I like to keep keep scope rings at least 1/8 prefer 1/4 inch
Bells & turrets The is opinion May not be worth 2 cents.
Marv where the wind blows when I want to shoot.

Haywire Haywood · « **Reply #6 on:** May 12, 2004, 08:29:58 AM »

I recently purchased a scope ring alignment tool from Midway. I was using Millett rings that aren't murphy proof. I found that my rings were misaligned on the Max, either the ring or the scope was going to distort when I tightened them. I have heard that misaligned rings can really mess up a scope. I'm glad I bought it. This has nothing to do with where to position the ring on the scope but is kinda related.

Ian

JPH45 · « **Reply #7 on:** May 13, 2004, 05:44:31 PM »

Haywire, sounds like an interesting tool to have, did using it make any improvemnet in how your Max shoots?

Haywire Haywood · « **Reply #8 on:** May 13, 2004, 10:35:24 PM »

http://www.midwayusa.com/rewriteaproduct/557622 Here's the link. It didn't improve groups any but gave me peace of mind that the expensive scope I bought wasn't being bent or distorted by the rings.

Ian

Fred M · « **Reply #9 on:** May 14, 2004, 07:41:59 AM »

Marve.
What I meant was Weaver style rail with the multi slots like the H&R.
The multi slot rail was invented by a guy Picatany ( not the right spelling).
NER also makes a multi slot rail with 40 min taper for most high power
long range target rifles.

They are used with the Leupold Mark 4 rings. All steel Base and rings about $ 400.00. By the way these Mark 4 rings fit the H&R rail. The two rings weigh 7oz and clamp on with a socket wrench.
Talk about skukum. If you want to add some weight to a rifle you got a 1/2 lb right there. They only cost $180 or so.:lol: Fred M

safetysheriff · « **Reply #10 on:** May 14, 2004, 10:35:13 AM »

I've had good results on my Handi's with three rings per rifle. I put two out front of the turrets, but one of those two is just ahead of the turrets to limit flexing of the scope there due to the mass of the front lense and the bell. The third ring is as far back on the scope as I can get it. I really believe the scope has much less flexing when three rings are used.

I use Millett angle-loc's; so I spend at least $30 to put rings on a rifle.

Winter Hawk · « **Reply #11 on:** May 14, 2004, 11:35:59 AM »

Fred M, would that be Canadian dollars or USA dollars?

Winter Hawk (Also in the true North)

Fred M · « **Reply #12 on:** May 14, 2004, 01:33:16 PM »

Winter Hawk.
Can. $449.50 with the Leupold Mark 4 base. The NER base is $250 US.
Mark 4 Rings is $249.95 Can about $186 US. They are designed for big tactical kickers like the 338 Lapua. I have a set that I had on a 243AI with a 15 min taper for a Rem 700 SA action. The base has three screws for front and back instead of the usual two. The base is so solid it will actually stiffen the action. The NER base is made in Sackatchewan and sold in the US.

I love Alaska, was there last year. Going fishing for Kings end of June on the Taku river. 35 miles east of the Alaskan border in BC. Fred M.

Fred M · « **Reply #13 on:** May 14, 2004, 02:10:25 PM »

safetysheriff.
Three rings sounds like a good idea for a bulky scope. Since the scope rail is in solid contact with the barrel the difference of the expansion coefficiant, for steel and alu will flex the scope rail when the barrel gets hot.

It would not be a bad idea to elongate the two front screw holes in the base to allow for expansion?

But that is only theory and perhaps not noticable on a Handi.

But then these rifles are single shot and should never be rapid fired and never allowed to get really hot. Two shots out of a cold barrel should be it. Fred M.

whitedogone · « **Reply #14 on:** May 14, 2004, 02:58:32 PM »

Here's my .223 setup.

Swift Premier 2.5x10x50 w/ 30mm Med. ht. Millet rings

I like to get them as far apart as I can. I used JB Weld to build up the area under the front of the Handi base.

P.S. You can see the grey JB Weld under the front of the base. I'm using the front and the rear slots.
WDO

quickdtoo · « **Reply #15 on:** May 15, 2004, 10:45:14 AM »

Quote from: Haywire Haywood

I recently purchased a scope ring alignment tool from Midway. I was using Millett rings that aren't murphy proof. I found that my rings were misaligned on the Max, either the ring or the scope was going to distort when I tightened them. I have heard that misaligned rings can really mess up a scope. I'm glad I bought it. This has nothing to do with where to position the ring on the scope but is kinda related.

Ian

Hi all, I'm new here, just bought a .223 Ultra and have been looking around for info on loads and any thing else I can absorb. I was surprised in this thread that no one mentioned the Burris Signature Zees as an excellent option for preventing scope damage due to slightly misaligned mounts. Is anyone using them on their NEF/H&R and are you using 2 or 3?

Thanks, Tim

whitedogone · « **Reply #16 on:** May 15, 2004, 12:28:44 PM »

Quick2, Welcome! Make sure to burn some of the Winny USA 45gr Value Pack through that Ultra. Most of our rifles will shoot this stuff real well. Pick some up at your local Wally world.

quickdtoo · « **Reply #17 on:** May 15, 2004, 02:38:30 PM »

Thanks, Whitedog1, I've already got a box, been reading a while before I bought the rifle! Along with some other factory ammo that the saleman shoots in his. Paid $239 for the ultra varmint, was only $20 more than the Handi-rifle in .223 at Sportman's Warehouse. I haven't decided on the scope yet, I have an S&W 6-24x42 and a Bushy Scopechief 6-20x40 that I'm considering mounting on it. Which ever doesn't go on it will go on the 25-06 rem barrel that I'm ordering Monday along with a trigger job. I figgered a trigger job would cost $50 or so, for double that and some I can get an extra barrel for some more shootin' fun! I thought about doing the trigger myself but I thought for a change I'd get a professional job done and if I don't like it, I'll touch it up myself. I ordered the burris sig zees for both barrels, got em on my 17hmrs and love them! Thanks for the welcome.....tim