Rifle Scopes Cabela’s Covenant 7 issue

Did you measure the ID of the rings? Good chance they're actually smaller than 34mm or the scope measures larger than 34mm.

What bases/rail are you attaching these to? Is everything squared up?

Maybe try to lap the rings

918v said:

What bases/rail are you attaching these to? Is everything squared up?

Click to expand...

this. check this

before you fuck anything up by lapping

This happened to me when I had one. The scope body is so weak, the ring clamps and fucks up the internal of the parralax and you can hear clicking. I’m assuming you are using a torque wrench but your not able to clamp them to spec due to poor design of the scope

Start factoring out variables, then move the remaining variables to one side of the equation.

Try torquing the ring caps to spec with the rings on the scope tube, but not mounted to the base. See of the problem persists.

If the problem still exists, the scope is likely the problem. If not, the base and/or rings are likely the problem.

If the problem is still there after the base has been factored out, move the rings to a different spot on the scope tube, and retorque, again without the base. Typically, moving the rings further away from the turret housing helps.

It's usually a tight fit between telescoping tube assemblies inside a scope. If the outer tube is sufficiently wimpy that the rings are compressing the outer tube into a clamping situation on an inner tube, things will bind. Moving the rings further away from the turret housing can help/eliminate the binding.

Once you've found a location that allows free movement of the parallax knob, remount it to the base keeping the rings in that location.

What he said ^^^^^ ?

I’d pay cabelas to mount it and if they can’t make it work say give me my money back!

I have the same scope but used Vortex rings, but I did lap them first and did not have a problem mounting it. I was a little hesitant
purchasing it but have been very pleased with it. I ran tracking tests and so far it tracks well and turrets work good but could have better
audible clicks and glass is clear. Good luck figuring it out.

browning442 said:

@ken226 definitely tried a lot of combinations... nothing seems to work

Sam19kilo... I think this is the problem.


I actually tightened the ring very lightly on just the scope, no rail involved, and when I put maybe 3-4 inch pounds on it, it gets tight and the focus won’t move more than a tiny but in either direction.

I thought about lapping rings, but not sure I want to bother with an extremely weak-tubed scope. Maybe horizontal rings would work better, but at this point nervous about construction overall.

I moved the ring all the way forward to the bell of the objective and tried, same thing. Not sure how confident I can be with it. Unfortunate because it seems decent otherwise. Get what ya pay for I guess.

in regards to base... it’s on a Curtis vector pic rail. My meopta optika 6 mounted on it with vortex pro series rings with ease, and I torqued them nice and snug with no issues.

Click to expand...

Are you using vertically split rings like these from Warne?

They are known to magnify this issue on scopes suceptible to it. If you have standard horizontally split rings, try them.

There is a known issue with the vertically splint rings causing internal binding on some scope models.

Here's a copy/past from the site owner, from a long time ago:

• #27

"During the June classes, we had many scopes go down. In one class, 5 out of 15 scopes failed to return to zero. We try to diagnose the problems, and when relating the stories, we often get the attention of the various manufacturers. They will call me directly when reading the posts on Sniper’s Hide, usually within minutes of me posting. The June class was no different. I was in direct contact with the companies explaining my observations.

We found the biggest contributor to the problem was vertically split rings. I know right, who would have guessed? I was never a fan of them, they aren’t precision. They started out as affordable AR rings and then somehow morphed in to go to precision rifle equipment. I never advocate inexpensive for the sake of cost, as you get what you pay for in this case. Stuff designed for the AR crowd is not my idea of quality in the context of a precision rifle. The Airsoft stuff used is worse.

No this does not include the ARC rings, they are not true split rings which were the root of the problems. Since that class, we have paid more attention and in July we replaced two sets of split rings and loaned a good scope to a shooter with a third set. Clearly, they are turning out to be an issue."

I had Leupold mark whichever rings on the covenant I had (7-35,34mm tube) and literally tried every covenant 5 & 7 and just couldn’t get it to work. Which is unfortunate because I liked the features and looks a ton. Just couldn’t get it to quite work for me

browning442 said:

Interesting bit on the vertically split rings... i've never had issues with them but probably don't do as much shooting as PRS guys.

In the end i think i'll send the scope back... Having to fidget with it just to get it to work seems like a lot of fuss. Probably just have to spend a little more money and get a PST or something along those lines.

Thank you guys for the replies, all the info is greatly appreciated.

Click to expand...

I went from Covenant series trying to save money, wasting money by wasting time. Than jumped on a PSTgen 2 and it has treated me soooo well. And than off to a mark 5. I still come back to the PST because it gets the job done. I did however order an Arken I’m waiting to see how well it is

browning442 said:

Interesting bit on the vertically split rings... i've never had issues with them but probably don't do as much shooting as PRS guys.

In the end i think i'll send the scope back... Having to fidget with it just to get it to work seems like a lot of fuss. Probably just have to spend a little more money and get a PST or something along those lines.

Thank you guys for the replies, all the info is greatly appreciated.

Click to expand...

While I dont believe the warnes have the issues like the Larues do. I'd test a pair of normal rings before sending it back unless you're approaching a return period or something but I'd guess it has a decent warranty

I have mine in a 50 dollar pair of eotech light weight rings and it works just fine. Been shooting it for 2 years now on my anni 17hmr.

I've mounted the covenant 7 on my tikka t1x with Dip rail and high seekins precision rings. The scope mounted easily and torqued the rings to 15in/lbs. I've run the elevation to the limit, 17mil remaining, and it'll come back to within .1mil after all the cranking. I'm still pushing it out and back, but haven't had any issues with mine yet.

Well I recently ran into the same problem. I bought a covenant 7 3-21x50 mounted with MDT rings and torqued them to 15 in/lbs and it worked amazingly well. While then I helped my friend to mount his 3-21 with the verticle split rings and then the side focus stoped functioning. It freezed. I then searched online and thankfully found this post, loosen the front ring to about 13 in/lbs and the focus worked again.

Something unrelated to this thread but I wanted people to know:
Mine covenant 7 has 38 MILs elevation adjustment (6 rotations plus ~2 MILs) while my friend's max out at around 32 (5 rotations plus ~2 MILs). Zero stop scews were removed from the scopes for testing maximum adjustment. I tested the 5-35x56 as well, it has only 26 MILs (4 rotations) which to me it is unacceptable. When I tried to play around the windage and elevation turrets on the 5-35 and to force it a bit to see if there is any chance to get more MILs out of it, I cracked the reticle glass. I did a box test on two 3-21x50, they both track nicely.

The elevation turret on mine is very crispy and it has a black finish coating inside, while my friend's one is just brass while it is very mushy even if I took the o-ring out. Removing the o-ring will improve the turret a bit but it will lose the waterproof ability. I think the quality control on these scopes is a nightmare. Well if you are lucky as I do, you might get a really good scope with hugh amount of elevation adjustment. If there is no delay on the Arken, I will definitely buy the Arken scope instead.

First image is 3-21x50 at 21x looking at a building 7.6 km away from my apartment. Second one is 5-35x56 at 35x.
Eye box on both scopes become somewhat tight pass 12x. Tightness doesn't change a lot after then. 35x to me is fine (I've never owned an expensive scope so)

Last two images are taken from my SLR (as long as the aperture is full opened, you can get such a result on every scope)

browning442 said:

I sent the covenant back and never looked back. Got a pst Gen 2 which worked fine but ended up swapping it out for a Bushnell LRTS. Great scope for the money

Click to expand...

That is a good decision. The fact that covenant does not provide lifetime warranty is a big no to most of the people. But since I just want a cheap scope for my .22lr so it should be fine.

Phew! Thank god I didn't buy the Covenent 5 that was on sale during Cabela's 10% off Tuesdays for $239.99 this week. Eventually went with a Diamondback Tactical FFP 4-16 for my 8yr old's .22. (I am using Warne split rings too).