Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Scope ring torque confusion

I just got a Vortex scope (my first) and the instructions with the scope say to tighten rings to 18" pounds.

However, DNZ recommends 30-35 for their rings.

Who is right? Who is wrong? Should I consider different rings because of the large discrepancy??

I would go 18-20 inch lbs 30-35 likely to dent the scope I would think.

Go by the scope manufacturers recommendation.

That is what I'll do.....I'll use Vortex recommended 18" pounds.

Thanks for your input.

Personally since I graduated from “farmer tight” and “oilfield tight”, I would definitely not go above 20 inch pounds.
That is my current maximum. And I have several secured with 17 inch pounds, my default. And more than one at 15 inch pounds.
These are on 30mm tubes, from about 16 to 21 once scopes. From 270’s to 458 Lott.

No telling how tight I use to twist them. But, as I “discovered” totally unnecessary and often detrimental.

Warne recommends 25 in/lbs.

I use 20 inch pounds on scope rings.

Some of the manufacturers of heavier 30mm-tube scopes recommend a little more than 20 IP. Nightforce suggests 25, because their scopes not only weigh more, but have much thicker tubes.

But that ain't much difference. Have had NF scopes hold perfectly with 20 IP, I suspect partly because the rings and scopes were both matte-finished.

Nightforce scopes have much thicker tubes? Do you happen to know what that thickness would be? I can't find it anywhere on their site, but I did see where they make that claim, along with stating they use 6061-T6 aluminum.

I would not be surprised if their 30mm tubes are the standard 2mm thick. My NXS appeared to be that thickness. It's only when you get to 34mm tubes that you have thicker walls.

Not all rings clamp with the same pressure or have the same screws. Go by the scope ring manufacturer's specs. Some ring caps call for 15 in/lbs some call for 45 in/lbs, it all depends on the design. There is no universal standard.

A few years back, maybe 6 or 7 my son bought a new Vortex from Euro Optics and i mounted it as i had always done with just a regular screw driver. But i couldnt get the windage to work after mounting it.
I called Euro Optics and they had a factory rep call me that evening. He told me to loosen the ring screws and see if the reticle moved after doing that and it did. He then told me to get an inch pound torque driver and tighten the screws to 15#. Problem was that since the gun was a magnum the scope slipped in the rings due to recoil.
If we tightened the screws to where it wouldnt, then the adjustments wouldnt work. We had no choice but to swap out the scope to a Nightforce which dosent mind the rings being tight.

Same dilemma for me. Just received my DNZ Game Reaper for a Remington 600/Mohawk action. Package says 35 inch pounds for rings. Scope (Swarovski) instructions say maximum 17.7.

Had I known beforehand that DNZ recommends crazy top-ring torque to hold a scope in place, I'd have gone a different route!

I'm gonna try 17-18 inch pounds for starters and keep a close eye out for movement.

This is the bottom line, no need to read any further. The differences between manufacturers are too great to settle for a one size fits all.

I have had an old Leupold VARI X II Power ring get really stiff when tightening see through mount (junk, I know) rings. If I torqued any more than 20 lbs, the power ring friction got noticeably more tight.

That depends on which Warne rings. For their vertical split Maxima rings that is the recommendation, and I generally find it to be too much on the top screws.

15"lbs for the rings.
30-35"lbs should be for the base.

You know better than the manufacturer?

I like those Burris rings with nylon inserts on a rifle with heavy recoil.

I have always been of the opinion that torquing scope rings (or for that matter, anything on a gun) is all bullchit.

How do we know if or when it is too much?