Last edited:
Picatinny ‘Scope’ Mounting
- Thread starter Roebuck
- Start date
And similar to the step at the front of the dovetail rails on the Steyr SSG69. But I can recall that when I fitted a moderator to my SSG69 308 there was definitely some rearward movement of the scope/rings. I fitted the MAK steel picatiney rail/appropriate pic rings to it and it stopped any movement.
I guess the SSG69 rifles were produced before moderators became popular and perhaps the moderators produce some barely discernable forward movement (like a muzzle brake) of the rifle and subsequent rearward movement of scope/rings.
8x57
Distinguished Member
My first centrefire rifle was a Parker Hale 1200 in .270Win. It had the standard Parker Hale blocks and rings which were made of alloy with a steel recoil pin that fitted into a hole in the front block.
The effects of recoil over time resulted in the steel recoil pin peening and slightly puckering the front of the hole into which it fitted, clearly indicating that on firing the rifle recoils reward and the scope tries to stay in the same place. Therefore I would say that this video is wrong.
The real moral of the story is, that whatever you know to be true, there's someone, somewhere on the internet saying you're wrong.
Do what works, don't do what doesn't work, and don't listen to anybody else
PS - be sure to subscribe to my YouTube channel. Next week's video "BREATHING - YOU'VE BEEN DOING IT WRONG YOUR WHOLE LIFE"
Do what works, don't do what doesn't work, and don't listen to anybody else
PS - be sure to subscribe to my YouTube channel. Next week's video "BREATHING - YOU'VE BEEN DOING IT WRONG YOUR WHOLE LIFE"
chaz243
Well-Known Member
Interesting.but with a heavy scope like the alpex then upon recoil the scope by virtue of it's inertia wants to stay put and let the rifle "slide" backwards beneath it hence forward on the picatiny.Damn it - I’ve always been in the march back camp until recently following advice on here - I rezeroed all my rifles forward.
Have to say there was bugger all in the difference in zero - maybe a couple of clicks.
As he notes, if it’s torqued up correctly there should be no real drama.
Stalk soon FB ....eh .
bennyblanco
Well-Known Member
Maybe it'd be scientific to mount them back and repeat the experiment, he'd definitely tighten them up more though.
The bullet puller demonstration is bs, you'd need to start the hammers journey by firing it from a shot gun cartridge to have any analogy of recoil and a rifle being slowed by a shoulder.
The bullet puller demonstration is bs, you'd need to start the hammers journey by firing it from a shot gun cartridge to have any analogy of recoil and a rifle being slowed by a shoulder.
Stalker-of-the-deer
Well-Known Member
Needs to be mounted forward because of the inerertia of the rifle scope.
Its simple physics.
Its a really big factor on light rifles with heavy scopes which seems to be the rage at the moment, and protects the scope from damage through reppetedly being hit essentially
Its simple physics.
Its a really big factor on light rifles with heavy scopes which seems to be the rage at the moment, and protects the scope from damage through reppetedly being hit essentially
You have a good mind
Some people beg to differ but I agree with you!!!You have a good mind
Similar threads
