Your favourite method for preventing a scope slipping in the rings?

[paul o']

If its thin double sided to need the 3m foam car trim stuff is way to thick , I have an ultra thin real sticky stuff as thin as tissue but sticks like crap to carpet, I could send it you if you wish ? but i wish it back just use what you need and return the rest .
Word of warning you need to clean all parts with nail varnish remover first but you wont be able to peel it off and re-use it so test before you fit it will wash off but there is no way to rotate scope or move once you remove backing tape .

 

[HandB]

Thanks Paul - that's very kind, I've dug out some of the thin double sided tape from one of my cupboards so I will try that first.

 

[Sonicdmb73]

I use masking tape, and it works for me, but I'm curious, when I use rings, it always takes me a few goes to keep the reticle level, as I tighten, and torque the screws.

What is the trick to getting it spot on first time, so that you don't have a nightmare using double sided tape ?

A mate of of mine suggested a spirit level the type that clamps to the tube.
The method is as follows.
You need a way of holding your rifle steady bipod and rear bag for instance.
Set it up so you can see through the scope without moving it.
Loosely fit the scope in the rings.
Set up a spirit level or a plumb line (weighted rope).
Look through the scope and plumb it to your level.
Carefully fit the scope level to the tube. Double check it’s level.
Once you have that set take it out to of the rings set the rifle level off the top of the action. Without moving the rifle set the scope level with the bubble tighten it up. You should have a scope which is set level to your rifle.

 

[Lateral]

I have a set of levels for checking the scope. That's the easy bit. But I find as you tighten the screws, the scope tends to rotate, as the ring clamps down, as hard as I try to tighten them evenly, side to side.

Mounting a rail scope is bliss.

 

[enfieldspares]

What is the trick to getting it spot on first time, so that you don't have a nightmare using double sided tape ?

Slowly slowly catchee monkey they used to say. Slowly slowy stopee turnee. If the 'scope is still turning you're still making too much haste. Go slower. And if using Redfield/Leupold type turn in rings lay the 'scope in the two sets of lower rings before putting either top ring in place to visually check if they, the rings, are aligned. If they're not though DO NOT use the 'scope as a Tommy bar to do so! Use a appropriate size piece of dowel or metal tube.

So do it a little at a time on each screw. So that you gradually bring down the top ring an equal amount on both sides as you tighten. If you're really a bit obsessive compulsive (or just in fact like a neat job) you can use feeler gauges or slips - even small denomination coins - so that the gaps where the rings are screwed down are all equal.

You wouldn't fit a sidelock or lockplate to a gun in by screwing the one pin (screw) furiously until it can't move and then screwing the other pin (screw) in furiously until it can't move.You do them evenly. You should do the same with triggerguard on a gun or, yes, 'scope rings or anything else where it uses two or more screws to fix it.

A 'scope that turns as described is usually a misalignment issue with the bottom rings or their mounts. You've not done it correctly. But, as on a .30-06 rifle P-Hale M81 Classic I own (that Norman Clarke rectified for me), in the worst case it can be misaligned tapped mounting screw holes on the receiver from when it left the factory.

 

[Markfox]

The very best way that I’ve used to stop a scope moving in the mounts is to throw the ring mounts away and buy a Swarovski Rail mount scope that sits on teeth on a rail so 100% impossible to move anywhere

 

[Muir]

Just located the following info sheet that I've been looking for since I responded to a similar question a couple of years ago and received 'unhelpful' SD comment for daring to suggest smearing rubber inertube repair cement on the inner rings. This is what comes with a set of S&K scope rings and take it from me it works:

K

I have never had a scope slip in the rings when I have tightened the screws properly. Be warned that some companies like Vortex (in particular) will void yhour warranty of the scope is, or was, mounted with more than 18 in-lb torque on each screw.~Muir

 

[Border]

I use masking tape, and it works for me, but I'm curious, when I use rings, it always takes me a few goes to keep the reticle level, as I tighten, and torque the screws.

What is the trick to getting it spot on first time, so that you don't have a nightmare using double sided tape ?

Same here, I use Talleys and Optilocks, the former often requiring more than one re positioning due to wonky reticulitius
I dont use masking tape though. Horizontally split rings being a lot easier than the vertically split Talleys where you need at least 3 hands.....
As Enfieldspares says though, I tighten each screw a little at a time and dont overtighten.

 

[Edinburgh Rifles]

nothing wrong with PH rings
if only all rings were made with the same tolerances

are you sure you dont have 26mm rings on a 1" tube?

to put that into context I still use the same .270 I grew up shooting that wears PH rings (single clamp screws) and a Nikko stirling scope
I would say the scope has been in place for 40+ years and seen literally thousands of rounds.....

as you have bases with a single recoil pin you can find numerous weaver style rings with no pin that will fit the bases
or if you must change you can get weaver bases with a slot rather than hole for the cross bar or bolt

ill take the rings if you dont want them!


as to stopping the scope moving
Google "cylinder head bolt tightening order"!
same principle
you are trying to clamp without lateral tension
tighten diagonally opposed screws a little at a time

 

[Lateral]

The very best way that I’ve used to stop a scope moving in the mounts is to throw the ring mounts away and buy a Swarovski Rail mount scope that sits on teeth on a rail so 100% impossible to move anywhere

This assumes there's a mount available, for your particular rifle.

 

[bluesako]

heres an idea, a square tube on the scope, and square rings? would it work, ? i wonder if anyone else has thought of this bs

 

[VSS]

heres an idea, a square tube on the scope, and square rings? would it work, ? i wonder if anyone else has thought of this bs

Better get your patent application in quick!

Mind you, some funny ideas involving firearms have been tried in the past, such as "trounds", which were triangular 22 rounds. Triangular in cross section, that is!

 

[John Gryphon]

I had Buehler mounts first up on my .358 Norma Mag a calibre which are renowned for booting a bit more than ave. My smith advised this when he built the rifle and fired it. I joined him and test fired also and noted the 'mark' had moved. The Zeiss scope was moving under recoil when fired. Next stage was a Leupold mounting system @ $100 odd dollars that was employed and nothing has moved since.
Good rings should grip without anything further added.

 

[enfieldspares]

Heres an idea, a square tube on the scope, and square rings? Would it work, ? I wonder if anyone else has thought of this...

Yes. Partly. The Germans. WWII. Google ZF4 Telescopic Sight. The body was square. They are really an odd sort of thing when you first pick one up. As we've all grown up with round body tubes on 'scopes they just look Heath Robinson. As if they are a toy 'scope. But there's enough Allied soldiers in the military cemeteries of France, Germany, Russia, Italy and elsewhere to gainsay that.

Here's a video of one. All very Vorsprung durch Technik. Mounted on something that back in 1988 Mrs Thatcher thought that we "plebs" could be no longer trusted with.



Also the American post-WWII "Wide Field" 'scopes used a standard round lens that the top and bottom had then been ground off to give a rectangular lens to make a rear eyepiece that looked like an old time television set. For a supposed wide angle. In fact it wasn't a wide angle it was just a standard 'scope with the top and the bottom of the field of view sacrificed. But sold to the punter as wide angle of view.

 

[Klenchblaize]

Also the American post-WWII "Wide Field" 'scopes used a standard round lens that the top and bottom had then been ground off to give a rectangular lens to make a rear eyepiece that looked like an old time television set. For a supposed wide angle. In fact it wasn't a wide angle it was just a standard 'scope with the top and the bottom of the field of view sacrificed. But sold to the punter as wide angle of view.

Yes, that was a nice bit if marketing by Redfield but the arrangement does allow for extra-low mounting provided your bolt lift can cope with it. To this day I still love the aesthetic of those early 70's Redfield scopes but sadly the optical properties are very poor compared to a Zeiss of the same period.

K

 

[HandB]

nothing wrong with PH rings
if only all rings were made with the same tolerances

are you sure you dont have 26mm rings on a 1" tube?

to put that into context I still use the same .270 I grew up shooting that wears PH rings (single clamp screws) and a Nikko stirling scope
I would say the scope has been in place for 40+ years and seen literally thousands of rounds.....

as you have bases with a single recoil pin you can find numerous weaver style rings with no pin that will fit the bases
or if you must change you can get weaver bases with a slot rather than hole for the cross bar or bolt

ill take the rings if you dont want them!


as to stopping the scope moving
Google "cylinder head bolt tightening order"!
same principle
you are trying to clamp without lateral tension
tighten diagonally opposed screws a little at a time

Thanks, I took the scope out of the rings and it was mounted with little strips of paper soaked in oil. Presumably it’s to take up any voids between the rings and the scope tube whilst still allowing the scope to be levelled, and also to stop water ingress. Unfortunately it also slipped. The irony is that the scope tube is a snug fit so it doesn’t need shimming because its too loose. Instead I presume the paper/oil combo means the scope tube and rings takes up space created because the scope tube is difficult squeeze all the way down into the rings.

I have cleaned off the oil and refitted the scope with nothing between the rings and scope tube. We probably will find it slips but at least it’s a start.

 

[enfieldspares]

Are you sure you dont have 26mm rings on a 1" tube?

P-Hale rings are numbered after their letter type prefix with a number from 1 to 5. That number indicates the size of 'scope tube they fit. From memory I know that 3 is 1"and that 4 is 26mm. 2 is, I think 22mm which are some Pecar and 1 is the American Weaver B4 type tube of 7/8" but I may be quite wrong on those two but certainly ONE of them is for a 22mm 'scope. Last 5 is, I think, the rings for an ex-military No53 anti-tank gun telescopic sight sold post-WWII as surplus.

 

[HandB]

Thanks, the scope rings are Parker Hale RALS3 which are a good fit for the rifle as they allow a nice low mount of the scope.

 

[enfieldspares]

Correction....as I can't re-edit the post. The Weaver B4 'scope is 3/4". So:

P-Hale 1 = 3/4" - Weaver B4
P-Hale 2 = 22mm - PECAR 3x36
P-Hale 3 = 1"
P-Hale 4 = 26mm
P-Hale 5 = British No53 Telescopic Sight (I think 1 1/16")

 

[Muir]

Also the American post-WWII "Wide Field" 'scopes used a standard round lens that the top and bottom had then been ground off to give a rectangular lens to make a rear eyepiece that looked like an old time television set. For a supposed wide angle. In fact it wasn't a wide angle it was just a standard 'scope with the top and the bottom of the field of view sacrificed. But sold to the punter as wide angle of view.

That's not quite accurate. The field of view was wider than that of a scope that was round and would mount to the same height. ~Muir