Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 43

Thread: Lowering a scope?

  1. #1
    Member Smokey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Central Illinois
    Posts
    3,334

    Default Lowering a scope?

    OK fellas, maybe I am just too tired to think tonight but I know with the wisdom this site has I will get the correct answer's

    If, you have a scope set in Medium rings and zero'd at say 100yards and you replace those rings with Low mounts won't the gun shoot low then at 100 until you re-site it in?
    And, how much change should one expect ? And yes its a centerfire rifle question...

    PS, Midway has Talley 2 pc mts right now for $31.99 on sale FYI for Rem 700's - good buy!
    When asked what state I live in I say "The State of Confusion", better known as IL....

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Eureka MT
    Posts
    3,048

    Default

    Because of manufacturing tolerances it's hard to say for sure where it will hit. In a perfect world it would hit lower but the world isn't perfect.

  3. #3
    Moderator stid2677's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks Area
    Posts
    7,274

    Default

    Smokey, I have found that one of those inexpensive universal laser bore sighters are worth every penny. I use one all the time and it has more than paid for itself in saved ammo. I use an old car license plate to use to shine it on in bright daylight.

    I can see it on the plate at 100 yards in bright daylight.

    Steve
    "I refuse to let the things I can't do stop me from doing the things I can"
    Founding Member
    http://www.residenthuntersofalaska.org/

  4. #4
    Member Smokey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Central Illinois
    Posts
    3,334

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stid2677 View Post
    Smokey, I have found that one of those inexpensive universal laser bore sighters are worth every penny. I use one all the time and it has more than paid for itself in saved ammo. I use an old car license plate to use to shine it on in bright daylight.

    I can see it on the plate at 100 yards in bright daylight.

    Steve
    Thx Steve, I just sent a real nice non-laser bore sighter, in with a gob of other stuff, to the chap in AK that his house burnt a couple months ago - LOL I guess this gives me a good excuse to buy another gizmo!
    I probably am crazy but my new Rem 700 280 ( that is driving tacks ) I put a med mount on and I usually have low on about all other stuff and for some reason I feel the need to try it on low too... I know, why fix what ain't broke right? Duh....
    Randy
    When asked what state I live in I say "The State of Confusion", better known as IL....

  5. #5
    Moderator stid2677's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks Area
    Posts
    7,274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Smokey View Post
    Thx Steve, I just sent a real nice non-laser bore sighter, in with a gob of other stuff, to the chap in AK that his house burnt a couple months ago - LOL I guess this gives me a good excuse to buy another gizmo!
    I probably am crazy but my new Rem 700 280 ( that is driving tacks ) I put a med mount on and I usually have low on about all other stuff and for some reason I feel the need to try it on low too... I know, why fix what ain't broke right? Duh....
    Randy
    Well good on ya for helping someone out. I hope you don't run into the issue I have with my Remington 700, the ejected cases are hitting the scope turret and falling back into the action. Going to change the scope out to see if that helps. Have a Model 70 30-06 that I might take sheep hunting this fall and going to have the Leupold custom shop fix me up one with a custom BDC reticle in it to match my load.

    Steve
    "I refuse to let the things I can't do stop me from doing the things I can"
    Founding Member
    http://www.residenthuntersofalaska.org/

  6. #6
    Member Smokey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Central Illinois
    Posts
    3,334

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stid2677 View Post
    Well good on ya for helping someone out. I hope you don't run into the issue I have with my Remington 700, the ejected cases are hitting the scope turret and falling back into the action. Going to change the scope out to see if that helps. Have a Model 70 30-06 that I might take sheep hunting this fall and going to have the Leupold custom shop fix me up one with a custom BDC reticle in it to match my load.

    Steve
    Hmmm now ya got me thinking? I bought the med mts to get enough scope clearance so scope caps would not be an issue. But, it looks like I would be fine on low. When I shoot it now I catch myself adjusting my face up a little higher than normal to get a perfect sight picture and I am afraid when hunting in a rush I may squiggle down too much and not recognize I have not got the full view and screw up? I will cycle some through mine and see where the cases go. Thx for the input!
    I put the custom turret on this gun - so far I like it. I do not like a bunch of stuff in my view in a scope picture....
    When asked what state I live in I say "The State of Confusion", better known as IL....

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,808

    Default

    Maybe, you've developed a habit of hugging your stock tight. ???

    When you mount the gun, is the stock fully on your shoulder, or just the bottom tip?

    Of course, it depends on how you,re built, and the stock, but higher rings work better for me. They're more comfortable, and faster, since I can keep my head upright when I shoot.

    The beegest issue for me, is the Front and back adjustment, for the correct FOV. And, the eye piece adjustment.

    I always use some kinda Weaver Style, mounts Some rifles have a large distance between the bases, so the mounting distance, on the tube, and the ring width, can be critical.

    rbuck351 is Right. If you switch rings, you're gonna have to start all over from the beginning to sight in.

    There is no percentage, in having a lower mount, just to have a lower mount. Is there a valid reason for doin it?

    Smitty of the North
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  8. #8

    Default

    I'm right with ya Smokey! I have all of my scopes mounted low and like them that way. When I shoulder the gun I want an automatic sight picture and the low mounted scope accomplishes that for me. We are all different....my brother does it just like Smitty and he thinks I'm nuts. I ain't denying anything in that regard but my scope is staying low.

    I have had several 700's with low mounted scopes and never had an issue with cases hitting the scope and falling back in the well. I wonder if that is more apt to happen in magnum chamberings.

  9. #9
    Member 1Cor15:19's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Dillingham, AK
    Posts
    2,482

    Default

    I think low is where it is at when considering mounting a scope. I've long been a fan of using the lowest possible setup. Among the reasons I use low rings are that it permits the most solid cheek weld possible, it is a more durable means to attach the scope as there is less leverage power with a low mounted scope when the inevitable bump against the scope comes along and also because a low mounted scope simply looks better. FWIW I currently have a Leupold 3.5x10X40 AO mounted in Talley LWs lows on a 700 in 270 Winchester (factory contour) that will eject cases w/o issue whether they are fired or loaded.

    I do not much care for scopes with objectives larger than 40mm and that means I can use most makers low rings, or quite possibly their extra low rings if they are available. I often say on this forum that less is more, and I think that is especially true when considering ring height...
    Foolishness is a moral category, not an intellectual one.

  10. #10
    Moderator stid2677's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks Area
    Posts
    7,274

    Default

    My ejection issue is most likely being caused by the turrets on the Zeiss scope. I measured them and they protrude further out than my Leupold scopes. The rounds and brass are contacting the turret without question.

    I like using the lowest possible mounting as well, I also prefer a Monte Carlo stock.

    Let us know how your setup works out Smokey.

    Steve
    "I refuse to let the things I can't do stop me from doing the things I can"
    Founding Member
    http://www.residenthuntersofalaska.org/

  11. #11
    Member Smokey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Central Illinois
    Posts
    3,334

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty of the North View Post
    Maybe, you've developed a habit of hugging your stock tight. ???

    When you mount the gun, is the stock fully on your shoulder, or just the bottom tip?

    Of course, it depends on how you,re built, and the stock, but higher rings work better for me. They're more comfortable, and faster, since I can keep my head upright when I shoot.

    The beegest issue for me, is the Front and back adjustment, for the correct FOV. And, the eye piece adjustment.

    I always use some kinda Weaver Style, mounts Some rifles have a large distance between the bases, so the mounting distance, on the tube, and the ring width, can be critical.

    rbuck351 is Right. If you switch rings, you're gonna have to start all over from the beginning to sight in.

    There is no percentage, in having a lower mount, just to have a lower mount. Is there a valid reason for doin it?

    Smitty of the North
    Hey Do Smitty!
    I have to confess to being a hugger - when the gals I dance with get hugged they know it!
    Seriously I think we all develope our own somewhat unique forms and I like a snug hold. Now, after years of competitive sporting clays shooting where I developed a more face up / both eyes open gun hold, I am not totally uncomfortable shooting this rifle with the med rings, but I have to be conscious of doing it that way and my fears are that I would revert to my old snuggle in tight rifle posture without thinking. ( Thinking can be hard on me at times - that's why I have a wife to help out )
    Again, we have the issue of consistency being the key to accurate shooting and I am simply afraid I may not be consistent in hunting scenario's? The bench shooting is a no brainer as time is not a factor usually...
    I also shoot very little laying prone - however I have had to and in this position I find it very hard to elevate my face so a med mount would add an additional challenge...
    Besides, if I get to site in all over again it means less time doing Honey-Do's right???
    When asked what state I live in I say "The State of Confusion", better known as IL....

  12. #12
    Member 1Cor15:19's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Dillingham, AK
    Posts
    2,482

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stid2677 View Post
    My ejection issue is most likely being caused by the turrets on the Zeiss scope. I measured them and they protrude further out than my Leupold scopes. The rounds and brass are contacting the turret without question.
    I'm not doubting you stid2677. Each setup is its own boss I guess. My 3.5x10 has M1 turrets (elevation & windage) and it clears easily.
    Foolishness is a moral category, not an intellectual one.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Northern Rockies
    Posts
    97

    Default

    I had a problem with ejecting shells hitting the turret of the Leupold I put on the 307 Winchester. They still went out, but were clearly hitting the scope and not going out as far. I rotated the scope 90* left and it's good. May not work if you have adjustable turret covers, but helped in this case. I didnt want to use higher rings, it fit well as it was.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,808

    Default

    Gentlemen:
    Perhaps you are unaware of the pending National Legislation, in both the US Senate and the US. House of Representatives.

    I think it may have been sponsored by the American Dental Association, because of many cases of broken jaw teeth, caused by rifle recoil.

    As a solution, the law will Ban, LOW mounted scopes, to protect TRENDY Riflemen from themselves.

    Smitty of the North
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Veneta, OR
    Posts
    1,156

    Default

    Smitty of the North - I am right with YOU on this one - After enduring numerous evening headaches on varmint trips I discovered the culprit was my "scrunching" to get in the sight picture ... I changed to high mounts and it is a better world now - took me all of 4 shots to re-sight each rifle (4 a piece that is) and it didn't change anything I can tell on my hits at any range

  16. #16
    Moderator Paul H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    5,594

    Default

    I love the talley ring/mounts and use them all almost all my rifles, and in the low configuration.

    As far as the effects of changing mounts on point of impact, if my math is correct, with rings nominally spaced 5" apart, for every 0.001" the front/rear is off, your point of impact changes ~12" at 100 yds. What this means is if your current bases/rings are perfectly perpendicular to the bore, and the new ring/bases happen to be off 0.001" in the front or the rear, you're shots will be 12" high or low depending on which way the scope now tilts. Odds are the tollerences between the old ring/bases and new will amount to the scope being in slightly different alignment with the bore than they were before, and you'll have to make some correction with the scope.

    Man, my math was way off, I kept thinking the difference couldn't be that much, and it isn't, I was calculating for a target 1 mile away I either need stronger coffee or more sleep

    Ok, for a 100yd target, 0.001" difference in base height equates to 0.72", so unless the old bases or new bases are way off, you should be within a few inches of your old point of impact, possible less than an inch off.

  17. #17
    Member Smokey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Central Illinois
    Posts
    3,334

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty of the North View Post
    Gentlemen:
    Perhaps you are unaware of the pending National Legislation, in both the US Senate and the US. House of Representatives.

    I think it may have been sponsored by the American Dental Association, because of many cases of broken jaw teeth, caused by rifle recoil.

    As a solution, the law will Ban, LOW mounted scopes, to protect TRENDY Riflemen from themselves.

    Smitty of the North
    As my hero John Wayne would say: Shoot low Shorty, they're ridin Shetlands!
    When asked what state I live in I say "The State of Confusion", better known as IL....

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by back country View Post
    Smitty of the North - I am right with YOU on this one - After enduring numerous evening headaches on varmint trips I discovered the culprit was my "scrunching" to get in the sight picture ... I changed to high mounts and it is a better world now - took me all of 4 shots to re-sight each rifle (4 a piece that is) and it didn't change anything I can tell on my hits at any range
    Watta relief, that somebody, agrees with me.

    I lost EKC, and Smokey way back there.

    I sure envy you guys, who've done a lot of huntin and shootin.

    Smitty of the North
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul H View Post
    I love the talley ring/mounts and use them all almost all my rifles, and in the low configuration.

    As far as the effects of changing mounts on point of impact, if my math is correct, with rings nominally spaced 5" apart, for every 0.001" the front/rear is off, your point of impact changes ~12" at 100 yds. What this means is if your current bases/rings are perfectly perpendicular to the bore, and the new ring/bases happen to be off 0.001" in the front or the rear, you're shots will be 12" high or low depending on which way the scope now tilts. Odds are the tollerences between the old ring/bases and new will amount to the scope being in slightly different alignment with the bore than they were before, and you'll have to make some correction with the scope.

    Man, my math was way off, I kept thinking the difference couldn't be that much, and it isn't, I was calculating for a target 1 mile away I either need stronger coffee or more sleep

    Ok, for a 100yd target, 0.001" difference in base height equates to 0.72", so unless the old bases or new bases are way off, you should be within a few inches of your old point of impact, possible less than an inch off.
    I've found Math to be very unreliable. (When I do it.)

    Smitty of the North
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  20. #20
    Member Smokey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Central Illinois
    Posts
    3,334

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty of the North View Post
    I've found Math to be very unreliable. (When I do it.)

    Smitty of the North
    To get smarts I found out ya had to actually "read" a bunch of boring books that had few pictures - definitely no swim suit issues - and the first book I read said: Figures lie and lier's figure - so I immediately quit reading so I would not get to smart to function properly!
    I have a fairly thick jaw so recoil has never been much of a problem up to 300win mag stuff - on firearms with low scope mounts,
    and another benefit of a "tiny" brain is tiny headaches so I am good in that department also! I think???
    And, EKC lives in Iowa for Pete's sake - so its obvious he's not playing with a full deck!
    When asked what state I live in I say "The State of Confusion", better known as IL....

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •