Problems with Burris rings...

[Wannashootit]

Burris ring problems...anyone else?

Just received a used Savage 10 that I'm going to use for a build. Came with Burris dovetail rings/mount plates.

I noticed when mounting the (new) Nitrex scope that I really had to fight it to get it lie in the front ring. Little tight, thought I...even made a damn mark on the scope tube. Should have looked at it closer...

Get to the range yesterday and I can't zero the windage. Run completely out of right adjustment, and I'm still a foot left of the target at 100M.

So I decide to check to see if something's loose, etc. I pull the front dovetail ring/mount. A blind man could see this thing is so far out of square it's ridiculous. Tweaked counter-clockwise. You can see it in the photo, trust me it looks worse close up. No wonder I couldn't zero the optic.

I just hope it didn't fuck up the scope tube.

These aren't precision rings, I know...but they're not NC Star, either...

I don't know whether to contact Burris about this...or just throw em in the trash. The whole dovetail assembly just doesn't look like it's capable of precision alignment since it's two pieces pressed together.

I'm thinking I should just get an EGW 20moa base, and use a set of Leupold picatinny rings I already have.

Point of the post:

Anyone else have issues with Burris rings?
Could this have permanently bent the scope tube, and should I put this back on Burris?

EDIT: Almost forgot...Merry Xmas to everyone here at the Hide...and may next year be a better one for all of us...

 

[Shortdraw]

Re: Problems with Burris rings...

That is way off center. Send em back and pick something else.

 

[Muttt]

Re: Problems with Burris rings...

I'd take pics of the scope damage and send Burris a bill.

 

[jasonZ]

Re: Problems with Burris rings...

I run the xtr's on a lot of guns with no problems. Never used their other stuff Su h as those.

 

[Wannashootit]

Re: Problems with Burris rings...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mnshortdraw</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That is way off center. Send em back and pick something else. </div></div>

That's what I was thinking. Not as much concerned about the cost of the rings, as much as possibly warping the scope tube.
Rings came with the rifle and weren't new like the scope, but I'll check the Burris warranty to see if it's lifetime.

In retrospect I feel like a real dumbass for forcing the scope into the rings when I should've known that it was overly tight and that something was wrong-not the first optic I've mounted.

 

[deadeye]

Re: Problems with Burris rings...

I've used Burris for more years than I can remember - never a problem.

I am not following your statement about them: "Tweaked counter-clockwise."?

They are not sold as one piece - you buy bases and rings separately and assemble them yourself and YOU decide how square they are to the base by when you stop turning them.

What I see in the picture is a ring that hasn't been properly turned to square with the base - that is the job of the scope installer (you) - to make sure they are square - nothing to do with Burris.

Maybe I am not following you but this looks like you need to put the bases on the gun, take a one inch dowel and turn it square with the base - check it with a scope alignment tool like this then adjust accordingly and install your scope.

 

[asbestosglove]

Re: Problems with Burris rings...

^^^Dovetails cam in and out of bases. You didn't show the rear base. Double dovetail bases "cam in" front and rear. Traditional systems have a dovetail for the front and a windage rear, with a big screw on each side of the base to grossly adjust windage. The front ring/dovetail base then pivots accordingly as the windage rear is adjusted.

 

[Wannashootit]

Re: Problems with Burris rings...

Hey guys...thanks for explaining...never used dovetail bases before, and as I said they came with the rifle.

When I looked at the base, the "lumpy" projections on either side of the dovetail looked like little tack welds to me. I tried to rotate the ring in the base, and it would not move. I didn't put a breaker bar on it obviously . Is what I think are welds on the side a piece of the "shelf" the dovetail sits on that's left exposed?

You're telling me that with whatever force is necessary, this ring will rotate in the base?

I'm trying to figure out the rationale behind that. I'm incapable of perfectly aligning the ring to be at 90 degrees to the bore.

Anything other than that is unacceptable- it would be no different than if the base mounting holes were drilled out of parallel to the bore; the ring ends up at something other than 90 degrees.

Having rings that aren't self-aligning to be EXACTLY 90 degrees to the bore just makes no sense to me. Not me turning it in a base and saying "looks good enough to me"..

Someone please explain what I'm missing here....maybe I need to have a few more cocktails to understand why rings would ever be designed this way...

 

[asbestosglove]

Re: Problems with Burris rings...

They may be little tack welds, I don't know. I do know, however, that the ring is designed to cam into the base after the base is secured to the rifle. Sometimes a curl of metal is displaced when the ring cams into the base. Perhaps that is what is shown. If they are welds, some judicious dremeling should loosen it so that it will turn to a true 90deg.

Designed in 1909, this type of ring has been installed on millions of rifles, regardless of what you think of the design.

 

[Wannashootit]

Re: Problems with Burris rings...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: asbestosglove</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They may be little tack welds, I don't know. I do know, however, that the ring is designed to cam into the base after the base is secured to the rifle. Sometimes a curl of metal is displaced when the ring cams into the base. Perhaps that is what is shown. If they are welds, some judicious dremeling should loosen it so that it will turn to a true 90deg.

Designed in 1909, this type of ring has been installed on millions of rifles, regardless of what you think of the design. </div></div>


I understand the design has been around for decades. Just never used them.

My point was that even if I <span style="font-style: italic">could</span>turn the ring in the base, how am I going to determine where 90 degrees is, and lock it in place? Put a square on it?

But still seems to me that if you're going to have a two-piece dovetail design like this, that there <span style="font-weight: bold">must</span>be a distinct way to "lock" the ring into a precise 90 degree position to the base, or it's a useless piece of crap. Maybe other dovetail designs are different.

Iron sights have adjustable windage and elevation for obvious reasons. Windage and elevation adjustments for scoped rifles- at least "modern" scopes with adjustable reticles- are made with the reticle- not the bases.

Having bases that are "adjustable" for windage and elevation still make absolutely no sense IMO, and I fail to understand how it's possible to rationalize otherwise.

If there's some physics I'm missing here, I'm all ears.

 

[asbestosglove]

Re: Problems with Burris rings...

Scopes don't all have 100MOA windage and elevation internally, therefore gross adjustment was available in the windage base. Put a square on it if needed to get it to 90deg. It's not rocket surgery.

 

[Wannashootit]

Re: Problems with Burris rings...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: asbestosglove</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Scopes don't all have 100MOA windage and elevation internally, therefore gross adjustment was available in the windage base. Put a square on it if needed to get it to 90deg. It's not rocket surgery. </div></div>

I'm not trying to start a holiday argument here, but I think it <span style="font-weight: bold">is</span> rocket surgery, as you put it.

The scope MUST be perfectly parallel to the bore. Not close, but perfect. If I was only going to zero for 100 yards and shoot paper at that distance and nothing else, it wouldn't matter.

But for a long-range setup, if it ain't "right"- then one click of windage isn't going to be one click at any given distance.

The line of sight through the scope is not going to be parallel with the bore. Normally, windage is adjusted to zero and can be left there unless compensating for external influences (wind)...

If the scope's line of sight isn't parallel, then windage will only be accurate for the range at which the scope is zeroed.
Go out an additional 400 yards, and the windage will not even be close.

Even having a scope offset, but still parallel, to the bore causes this issue, but it is minor. Having a scope that's not perfectly parallel just doesn't work.

 

[woodsy]

Re: Problems with Burris rings...

I’ve used those kind of bases and rings for years without any problems.

It really is simple – install bases, partially install front and rear rings, install a tool like deadeye has shown, turn rings until the tips of the tool meet in the center. Then install scope in rings, adjust eye relief and level the reticle, tighten rings and go shoot. Easy-peasy and solid.

Seem to me like you’re splitting hairs on this subject so I recommend that you trash those bases and rings and get something that meets your standard of “perfect”. Seems like you’ve already talked yourself into hating this design anyway so why fight it?

Don’t waste Burris’ time as they’re likely to tell you to go pound sand. What you have there is not their fault and they’ll know it. If someone did put a tack weld in that dovetail they must have been drinking heavily as it surely is not needed.

 

[SCOTTx88]

Re: Problems with Burris rings...

This is the same rings and bases on a 375RUM, they work. Brothers Gun.

My 300RUM Sendero

 

[Wannashootit]

Re: Problems with Burris rings...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: woodsy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I’ve used those kind of bases and rings for years without any problems.

It really is simple – install bases, partially install front and rear rings, install a tool like deadeye has shown, turn rings until the tips of the tool meet in the center. Then install scope in rings, adjust eye relief and level the reticle, tighten rings and go shoot. Easy-peasy and solid.

Seem to me like you’re splitting hairs on this subject so I recommend that you trash those bases and rings and get something that meets your standard of “perfect”. Seems like you’ve already talked yourself into hating this design anyway so why fight it?

Don’t waste Burris’ time as they’re likely to tell you to go pound sand. What you have there is not their fault and they’ll know it. If someone did put a tack weld in that dovetail they must have been drinking heavily as it surely is not needed. </div></div>


Well, "hate"'s a strong word, I just don't understand it- at least the ones I have. No issue with a dovetail two piece design, but seems like it would make more sense to have it self-align somehow so you know it's at 90 degrees without needing an alignment or lapping tool to do it.

Anyway, horse is dead. Thanks for explaining.

 

[JeffP40]

Re: Problems with Burris rings...

I would change one thing on what deadeye said. Don't use the points, use the flat backs. The points can be together but still not be parallel. With the backs, if they are aligned, they are parallel in three dimensions. The dual system has been used for a long time, the single front dovetail was used to get an initial course windage adjustment when scopes did not have much internal windage. Neither one is even close to my favorite, just because of the problem of getting it all lined up correctly. They have a tendancy to gall when turned in, although a little lube does help. The pics above are of the Signature variety that have the inserts, so the problem is basically non-existent with them.
I think there are much better systems to use, and they are easier to fit. That being said, there is nothing wrong with yours, you just have to know what you have. If I were you, I would buy a set of Signature rings to fit the bases. Problem solved.

 

[buffybuster]

Re: Problems with Burris rings...

These Rotary Dovetail mounts were designed a 100yrs ago to meet the needs of the scopes of that time. In the early days of internal adjustment scopes, they have a very limited amount of travel built into them. While elevation adjustments could be made my shimming, there was a need to windage adjustable mounts, which the Rotary Dovetail design provided.

The front ring is the "rigid" mount keeping zero and absorbing the majority of the recoil force. The rear ring is the "floater" to adjust for gross windage via the screws and shim for elevation. They work well for what they are designed; holding the small scopes of that era. The fact they still generally function as they should holding the larger scopes of today is a testament to their basic sound design. But they were never originally intended to hold 32oz scopes with 50mm objectives and it is up to the user to get everything aligned properly.

An evolution of this design is the Dual Rotary Dovetail rings, which have the rigid ring both front and rear. This makes the rings tolerate more recoil, but at the expense of adjustability. With these type of rings, it's very important the front and rear base holes are aligned or either scope damage or inability to zero could result.

These type of rings/mounts are marketed by Leupold, Redfield and Burris. They are very similar but not interchangeable. Burris updated the design with their Signature Line with the polymer inserts. These inserts largely eliminated the scope tube damage issues (unless there was gross misalignment). I have a few sets on hunting rifles but not on any precision/tactical rifle.

 

[Wannashootit]

Re: Problems with Burris rings...

Thanks again.
I looked at the rear mount, and see that it is adjustable for windage, just by tightening/loosening the set screws on each side to set the base off-center.

But as Buffybuster said, the design looks to be a throwback in time...why deal with issues of base alignment when I can't see a practical reason. Not knocking those that have and like them- but they're not for me.

Just ordered an EGW 20 moa mount, and I have a set of Warne QD rings lying around that should set me up.

FWIW, if anyone wants these- they're 1", for Savage short action, flat base receiver (non-AccuTrigger), PM me and I'll send them to you.