Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Question on lapping Talley ltwts...

OK, not to re-stir this pot, seriously, but thought I try (again) lapping a set on my latest rifle (Montana 7mm-08 with a VX3 2.5-8 going on it). With the bttm halves mounted, try to lightly lap but the bar doesn't bottom out in the ring halves - bottom 1/3 (side to side) shows no lapping, only the outter 1/3 of each one shows any lapping. Leaned onto lap bar to see if that change - nope, still nothing on bottom. Installed the top halves, tightened as much as possible and still able to move the lapping bar, still not touching the bottoms.

So are you guys lapping the crap out of 'em? That's the only way I'm seeing to "fully" lap the bottom ring halves. I tried lapping a set years ago and remember having the same results.

TXRam,



Yes. I start with fine. If I get nowhere I switch to 220 grit to get close to the whole surface. Then clean as clean as I can get it and switch to 400 grit to polish it.

The 1" required lots of attention, like maybe an hour. The 34mm didn't need any 220 grit. They maybe took six or eight minutes.

I lap them until just a faint strip of anodizing is apparent in the bottom. Never an issue with that method.

You'll hear folks say they are easy to "over lap," but I've always still had a decent gap on either side between halves after torqued to spec when stopping the lap after just making full contact with the bottom.

Why do you think they need to be lapped?

That wasn't my question, and I'm not going down that path.

This is the way I do mine also. I have never had a set of Talley Lightweight ( and I own a lot ) that would allow the scope to bottom on the rings without causing flex on the sides of the mounts or stress on the scope itself. Without lapping I would assume the scope would go to the bottom of the ring but stress is obviously a resulting condition, in my opinion. I also have a gap between my top and bottom half of the rings after lapping similarly to what is described above, and I have never had one slip.

Those that tell you their rings and bases are perfect and do not need to be lapped are telling you they are perfect as they come out of the package, and with todays manufacturing I am sure they are. But put them on a rifle who tolerances in the receiver are not perfect, and I am sure most are not, then the rings will not line up perfectly especially with two piece bases. Now if you bed your bases you may not have to lap them except in the condition described above with the width of the Talley Lightweights.

Anyway that is my experience.

IMO, I'm far more concerned about the rifle mfg getting the mounting holes lined up/same height than I am with the ring mfg getting concetric rings produced. Either one has the same result/fix though.

JGRaider,

I agree the mounting hole alignment is of a major concern. I think most all scope mount manufacturers produce a very accurately machined product, the problem is we all know that many rifle manufacturers have issues and it is this interface that is the problem in my opinion.

I have lapped at least a dozen sets of Talley LW's and each set has worked perfectly. Never had a scope move and they have never had ring marks when removed either. YMMV

Is there a good thread on here on how to properly lap?

ask Talley.

or any of the ring makers.

they'll steer you right

Not sure if it's "good" but this thread shows how I lap Talley's.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...0774858/1/Kimber_Montana_Bedding_And_Pre

I absolutely lap all rings, including Talley's. As mentioned in this post, I don't like how much "pinch" they have when mating a scope to them un-lapped. Point is to not get carried away with the lapping process... aluminum doesn't need much!

Thanks Brad!

You bet man, Merry Christmas.