With 2 piece Weaver bases, using a boresighter, I shim and glass bed them so they are parallel with the bore and there is no bind on the rings.
With a scope adjusted so the crosshairs are in the center of the tube, the rifle starts out on the paper.
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. -Ernest Hemingway The man who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything.-- Edward John Phelps
With 2 piece Weaver bases, using a boresighter, I shim and glass bed them so they are parallel with the bore and there is no bind on the rings.
With a scope adjusted so the crosshairs are in the center of the tube, the rifle starts out on the paper.
That's what benchrest shooters do with their rifles. Good point. It reduces angular offset in the scope to bore axis relationship. The least amount of angular offset you have, the better it is on your equipment. Mainly because you can keep the scope centered, which reduces stress. Less stress on everything is a good thing, thus the reason you also bed your bases and I'm sure you also properly glass bed your action in a stress free manner. All good things when considering shooting "long range". When you bed your bases for proper alignment, I bet you don't have to lap those rings. Something you left out of your post.
Originally Posted by raybass
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style.
Originally Posted by Pharmseller
You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole.
I almost never lap rings but I do usually glassbed the scope into the rings. As to how much it helps accuracy; it depends on where you started from. If initial alignment was really bad, the benefits are more likely to be apparent than if the alignment was decent to start with. GD
Everybody likely knows but I say it anyway, if you remove the scope/rings make sure to not mix up the direction the rings were facing and the correct orientation of the top ring half.
PRESIDENT TRUMP 2024/2028 !!!!!!!!!!
Posted by Bristoe The people wringing their hands over Trump's rhetoric don't know what time it is in America.
Rings as a whole,are rather surprisingly straight. Receivers however,are NOT. Them who haven't seen a woe,simply haven't shot much of anything,or are "blessed" with crossed-eyes...the "lucky" kchunts. Hint.
'Horn rings very obviously have no equal,due their surface area and self aligning nature,with the ability to coax erector travel and mechanically center windage in copious Robustitude. Hint.
I also hear they can take a lick. Hint.
If only to the chagrin of the High Heel Haybale & Crockett crowd. Hint.
Fhuqking LAUGHING!.................
Brad says: "Can't fault Rick for his pity letting you back on the fire... but pity it was and remains. Nothing more, nothing less. A sad little man in a sad little dream."
Stray Dog: Virtually impossible to "quantify"! But I lap all my new ring/mount/scope installations - so many mysterious "problems" have disappeared from my Rifle shooting hobby since I started doing so 30+ years ago! Lapping rings - of course and for sure. Hold into the wind VarmintGuy
Maximum surface contact is the goal with lapped rings. I've never noticed a different when fielding the rifle, but when initially setting one up and getting it mounted, lapped rings let the scope move smoother than unlapped rings for sure. At least that's what I've experienced. I don't purposefully buy lapped rings, if they come to me lapped, fine. I won't lap them either. YMMV.
Not just that. Alignment of the holes through the rings a goal, so when the rings are tightened they do not bind the scope.
binding the scope is the no 1 thing that what you do not want
I don’t know. But my most accurate rifle has the rings Lapped. It’s also the 2nd cheapest rifle I own. Wish my buddy wouldn’t have moved away with his tool.
Last edited by Dre; 09/10/22.
All of them do something better than the 30-06, but none of them do everything as well.
Lower ring halves have x amount of surface area. If both front & rear halves are in perfect alignment with one another the maximum amount of surface area offered by both rings is available. There is no more. Less would mean misalignment.
Is not using 100% of the available surface area of both rings ...maximum contact?
I know a very accomplished long range benchrest shooter that'll weigh and sort primers but doesn't lap rings.
If it makes ya feel good, have at it. If you buy a decent set of rings, it's probably not going to help anything.
If he's a serious long range benchrest shooter it's very likely he's using a precisely machined custom action and similarly well made bases and rings. Can you see how this would lead to good alignment from the start?
A really good set of rings won't straighten out the dimensional problems with an off the rack factory action.
