Rifle Scopes Switched rings, had a huge POI change.

[jsimonh]

I've been using NF ultras 1.125 for a while but decided to move up to something close to 1.5 to relieve a little neck tension. Anyways I settled on M10s and got everything setup tonight. The elevation was off by a couple of tenths which was expected but the windage took a .9mil R to correct it back on target. I thought that seemed like a lot. Everything was torqued down properly and double checked. Just curious if anyone else has had something like this happen.

 

[Covertnoob5]

I don’t think anything is out of the norm. I’ve seen big shifts swapping rigs.

 

[brian1]

If not lapped, every set is an imperfect fit

 

[Rob01]

That's not an issue at all. Rezero and go shoot. Don't stress it. That's not huge.

 

[forthehunt]

Always a shift when changing rings. Even when I dismount for cleaning or whatever stupid reason I come up with, I will still get a shift when I remount. Exact set up, all torqued with precision drivers.

 

[jsimonh]

Thanks fellas. I don’t ever switch my mounts after I get them all setup. I was just surprised that 2 high quality sets of rings would have a mil difference at 100 yds.

 

[samnev]

Every time I've taken a scope of a rifle wether it be reposition it, to switch to another mount or even to retorque the rings I've had to make E and/or W adjustments. so just make whatever adjustment you need to rezero.

 

[Baron23]

I was just surprised that 2 high quality sets of rings would have a mil difference at 100 yds.

With respect, I don't think you have sufficient information to attribute the shift to the quality/precision of the rings....there is also variance in exactly how they are aligned on the rail when mounted.

 

[jsimonh]

With respect, I don't think you have sufficient information to blame the rings....there is also variance in exactly how they are aligned on the rail when mounted.

I don't think I was trying to "blame" the rings at all. I expected some what of a shift, just not a MIL of windage. To a reasonable degree I wouldve thought the rings would be centered up over the rail fairly closely between the 2 sets. More of an observation on my part that didn't jive with what I thought would've happened. Elevation was close enough to barely adjust with the windage being a massive difference. The guys that have done it have spoken above and I'm good with it, but I did want a little confirmation that it was "normal" just for my OCD.

 

[Baron23]

I don't think I was trying to "blame" the rings at all. I expected some what of a shift, just not a MIL of windage. To a reasonable degree I wouldve thought the rings would be centered up over the rail fairly closely between the 2 sets. More of an observation on my part that didn't jive with what I thought would've happened. Elevation was close enough to barely adjust with the windage being a massive difference. The guys that have done it have spoken above and I'm good with it, but I did want a little confirmation that it was "normal" just for my OCD.

Fixed it

I don't think you have sufficient information to attribute the shift to the quality/precision of the rings

 

[brian1]

If not lapped, every set is an imperfect fit

and even when lapped, once you loosen the bottom halves, you'd need to relap.

 

[Rob01]

No need to lap todays rings. If there is a misalignment most always in the base to receiver and bedding that will relieve it and not ruin a set of rings. Haven’t lapped rings on many years and never damaged a scope and I move scopes around a lot.

 

[DeathBeforeDismount]

Rob is right. You haven't needed to lap rings for like 15+ years. Modern rings are good to go.

Most issues are like he said, reciever issues. Part of the mounting process is measuring rail trueness and bedding if nessisary. Most people using factory actions have crooked rails due to rail flex. Bedding fixes this.

 

[b6graham]

If not lapped, every set is an imperfect fit

please no. no. don't lap your M10 rings (or your NF rings for that matter)

 

[jsimonh]

please no. no. don't lap your M10 rings (or your NF rings for that matter)

I'm the OP and have zero intentions to lap rings if this was directed at me lol.

To the point of the receiver/rail, this was a TL3 with thier 20moa base. I have a lot of confidence in the system as far as tolerances go. Thanks for all the replies!

 

[b6graham]

the other factors at play are also any cant in the system (before or now) and minor difference in front to back of where the scope sits

if everything is torqued correctly i wouldnt worry too much

if you really wanted to check you could swap mount back. and then again to the M10 and see how that repeatability goes

 

[TheOE800]

if you really wanted to check you could swap mount back. and then again to the M10 and see how that repeatability goes

Yeah, who cares what the difference is between mounts. What’s important is that the current mount/rings display(s) either no zero shift or repeatable zero shift.

 

[jsimonh]

the other factors at play are also any cant in the system (before or now) and minor difference in front to back of where the scope sits

if everything is torqued correctly i wouldnt worry too much

if you really wanted to check you could swap mount back. and then again to the M10 and see how that repeatability goes

I used my typical mounting system technique that includes a scope leveling kit and a level at 50yds both verticle and horizontal for double checking. To say i get a little anal about mounting my scopes would probably be an understatement lol. I verified my NF setup before pulling it just so I'd be certain, mounted the M10s on top of where the NFs were. I'm definitely confident in it, again I just figured high quality rings would've been a little closer on POI than that. Whenever I set up my mounts I buy what I want and rarely change unless I get a new scope. Once I get it set I don't mess with it. This was different as I'm 6'7" and decided to try the taller rings, like many others I was a closest to the barrel mount kinda guy. Going for pure comfort when shooting now.