Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Leupold scope.

It is just a Vari-X II, not a IIc. Good to know on both those pieces of info. Thanks!

If that's correct that would be the logical explanation as to why the Tasco that was mounted in the same rings and bases on that rifle had lots of adjustment left when zeroed at 100.

If I can't get it satisfactory I might look into the signature rings, because if that's the case that might be the simplest fix.

A Vari-X II is an antique

It may be time to upgrade

Yeah but it's on a 50's era FN Model 51. Goes well with it, but I know what you're saying. I have a NIB Burris FF II sitting on my bench waiting to go on something, but a newer matte scope just doesn't seem the same on those kind of rifles.

I'll figure something out. It's okay for now as it's right on the money as far as height with 180 RN but if I go to 150's it's gonna be high and I can't go any lower.

Did I miss it or has the exact type of scope base(s) and rings you're working with not yet been identified?
When you say FN M51, I am guessing you mean the JC Higgins Model 51 marketed by Sears which is a LR Mauser. Is this correct?

Thanks,
Rex

if you send it back you will probably get a new matte one anyway

It MAY have identified that it ran out of adjustment, but it didn’t identify WHY it ran out of adjustment. It still could be mounts ( or scope).

Vari X II scopes didn’t have that much adjustment to begin with. That was one of the advantages of moving up to a Vari X III….more adjustment. I’ve had to shim a number of Vari X II’s along the way for north/south adjustment issues. No need to buy brass shim material…just get a pair of scissors and cut shims from an old beer or coke can and you’re in business.

In my little world, I’d buy some better mounts, then zero the scope internally, mount it and see where you are, like Al suggested.

I would never leave a scope near the limits of adjustment because that could leave the spring(s) compressed (depending which direction it’s adjusted).

The springs of any scope can become weak if left in that position. No different than leaving a firearm cocked with the firing pin spring compressed.

Yes a JC Higgins. I believe on that rifle it's weaver bases and weaver quad lock rings.

For a quick and easy check you could pull the bolt and sight through the bore at a target, and secure the gun with sand bags or something to prevent movement, and use a straight edge along the side of the bases, to verify L to R base to bore alignment, and do the same on top of the bases for the vertical.

Any issues should show up rather quickly.

I always center a used scope prior to mounting it on another rifle. I read to do this many years ago and just thought it was the way you remount a scope. I dont know if it is necessary or not but after about 20 times doing it on many different scopes , rings and rifles and never having an issue I reckon I will just keep doing it.

Some might say its a waste of time to recenter but I reckon I got the 10 or 15 seconds it takes to center it. Even with my busy life. LOL.

If the scope base screw holes are drilled true to the receiver, the barrel could have an non centered bore. That could account for the rifle shooting high and windage also off. (you never mentioned left or right)

Did you check the Tasco to see how far from center it was adjusted? You can quickly see it by placing the front objective against a mirror and noting if the two reticle images are far apart. If you did center the Tasco did it require quite a bit of adjustment to center it?

Two of my rifles that were rebarreled have the bore off enough to require quite a bit of windage to compensate. Luckily the elevation adjustment for them was fine.

It is conceivable that some scopes, like your VX-II could run out of adjustment travel.

Not saying it's a bad thing or not a good thing to do. More than likely it is. Certainly wouldn't hurt. Likely will double check it from here on out.

But here's the facts of my life. I'm 53 years old, like many I grew up without a lot of means to be spending money. Scopes got used and remounted on a variety of rifles as time went on depending what I needed at the moment. From high powered rifles to 22's, and vice versa.

As time went on I purchased more rifles along the way, many with scopes on them. More often than not they had those super high see-thru mounts on them. Scopes got re-mounted on rifles with low bases, or re-mounted on the existing rifle after I put normal bases on them.

Never ever did I center a scope prior to zeroing it for that rifle it got put on. Only once did I run out of adjustment prior to this. That was way back when I was around 16 on a Savage 99 E, one of those ones with a cheap birch stock. I had to shim the scope I put on that rifle. Maybe I've just been lucky.

It's kind of like those guys that killed deer for years, then got a chronograph and read some gun mags and discovered their go to load was wrong all that time because it was way too slow for that cartridge. I have a scope now on a 22 that I've had for probably 35 years. Been on a lot of different guns. A 3-9 that all the magnification numbers are wore off it's been used that much.

I checked the Tasco, it was laying on the bench just how it had came off the rifle. Did not check it like you're saying, but ran the vertical adjustment down because on the Leupold I'm almost bottomed out going down. The Tasco had LOTS of room to go down yet. No where close to bottomed out.

I think sending to Leupold is the obvious answer but before I did that I would probably use the mirror method to see just how far the scope is from being centered. Maybe compare that to the Tasco - even if for no other reason as an experiment.

So, update on this. I think I figured some things out. Appears to be a problem with both the rings and the scope, but in this case I put more blame on the scope.

I took the top rings off and carefully checked some things. First off the rear top dual rings seemed to snap off and onto the rear scope tube, whereas the front just easily slides on and off.

Sitting in the bottom rings, and looking at the back of the rear ring base, the Leupold seems to be just slightly sitting up off the saddle of the rear ring. There is a ever so slight gap around the bottom. If it's sitting slightly high in the rear, putting the crosshairs low, that would cause me to shoot high, which in turn would cause me to go down on the adjustment and I ran out of room.

When I sit the Tasco in the bottom rings, it sits in flush all the way around the bottom. I also have a Bushnell 4-12 that came on a rifle and is junk, I never used it because I can see it was overtightened and visibly see, and also can feel where the tube is bent from the rings. When I sit that scope in the rings of this rifle but off of the original mounting area where it was dented, it also sits flush all the way around.

So next I took both the Tasco and the Leupold and sat them in the bottom rings close to where I would've had them sitting before. Marked that spot on each scope where it sits in the rear ring. Took my calipers and measured that spot side to side like it would sit across the rings. Measured both scopes multiple times.

Sure enough, the Tasco measures .985-.987 at that spot on the rear. The Leupold measures 1.005-1.007. A difference of .020 in width at that spot on the scope tube. So the Leupold is tight on the sides not letting it sit down in the saddle of the rear ring as intended. Rings too small, scope too large, which to blame, but that appears to be the problem with that particular scope in those rings.

Another update. Yesterday mounted that old Tasco back on this same rifle, base, and rings.

Bore sighted it at the bench @ 25 yds with the bolt out. Had to come up a lot on the bore sighting to get it close, not down. That was likely from me running the turret down before, then back up some checking how much room I had compared to the Leupold.

1 shot at 25 after bore sighting, adjusted down some, 1 shot at 50, adjusted down some more to be close at 100. Not anywhere near being ran to the bottom of adjustment.

Then shot 3 groups of 3 at 100, with 3 different charge weights testing a new to me powder with a 30-06. Two groups were under an inch, 1 not over by much. The Tasco works with no issues. The Leupold will work, just not on this setup.

Sold the Leupold today within 5 minutes of walking into a flea market. Will likely use the money to buy a new Burris.