Scope clearance

remingtonman_25_06

Handloader
Nov 17, 2005
2,804
391
How close is to close? I always try to mount my scopes as low as possible for the obvious reasons. 2 of my rifles only have about .005"-.010" clearance from the bell to the barrel, or the 20 MOA rail. Wondering if maybe that has something to do with the scopes coming loose? You can see day light so I figured it was ok. Thoughts and opinions welcome...
 
.005" might be a little close.... scopes flex under recoil.

I prefer enough room to easily get a cover over the scope.

Also, I use purple loctite on scope bases.
 
I'm not sure what the correct answer is Jorey. One would think that would be enough clearance but I'm sure recoil pulse gets factored into the equation. A 300 RUM might flex the scope more than a 7mm-08. Proper torque of the rings and base would also be key.
Are you using a specific torque on the rings and base?

JD338
 
On my 7-300 which is braked, it's about .010" clearance to the rail...On the 7-08 which is also braked, it's about .005" from the barrel...I do properly torque base and rings with a Fat Wrench. But these 2 rifles I just noticed that my scopes were slipping forward my last trip to the range. So I'm not exactly sure WTF is going on with my base/ring set up. The 7-300 has weaver 20 moa base and low 6 hole picatinny rings, and the 7-08 is on low talley lightweights. I've never had an issue with scopes slipping in 20 years...why now?
 
I just dissembled my 7-300 base/rings and I put red loctite on the base, and then I put nail polish on my ring cap screws. Will see how it holds up...If it doesnt then, I dont know what to do from there. I'm at a loss as it is...
 
I think the 7-08 is too close for sure.

Did you lap the rings? Doing so often means more contact area between the rings and scope, which means more grip on it.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 
On the 7-300... you could take a file to the front of that base and give it some more room....its also too close in my opinion.... knocking that edge down 30 to 50 thousandths wouldn't hurt the base at all as far as function goes.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 
Talley recommends NOT lapping their rings...So I have not. I've also read about taking a file to the base...Thanks for the ideas and opinions guys.
 
I may end up getting a better quality base/rings for the 7-300 if it doesnt stay put as well...Just dont have the extra $200-250 for a set of Leupold, NF, Seekins etc...
 
Close
 

Attachments

  • 20200324_175322.jpg
    20200324_175322.jpg
    2.8 MB · Views: 307
  • 20200324_175334.jpg
    20200324_175334.jpg
    2 MB · Views: 307
Each to their own, but you couldn't pay me to run those tight of tolerances on a hunting rifle I was depending on.

I don't intentionally jack up a scopes height, but neither do I worry about it. A quick glance when settling in, and the human eye will pick up on anything off level, same way it naturally centers the front sight when looking through a peep sight. It's just a conscious part of shooting, same as squeezing the trigger.

I'm loading for a buddies 17 hornet that has been maintaining sub 1/2" at 100. The scope is certainly not close to the bore on this gun.



The best shooting and most consistent rifle I have in a bigger bore, across numerous loads is a M70 in 30-06 that was my Father in law's. Fantastic shooting rifle. He had see thru mounts on it so I've left it that way so far, even though I detest see thru mounts. That scope obviously sits higher yet.
 
Is your Weaver a Picatinny or the standard Weaver base. Weaver base and picatinny is not the same. Try lapping your ring. If that doesn't work bed it with epoxy.
 
Back
Top