Quick question for those saavy in the way of scope mounting.

I recently put a new scope on my Rem. 700.  As I was attaching it, I started thinking.  Then I thought about the way they tell you to always have the reticle (vertical post) perpendicular to the bolt.

All the sudden, I didn't know if it was best, to have that EXACTLY perpendicular to the action (thus making you hold the gun closer to straight up and down)  OR, is it best to maybe let it to the side a very little bit, to where a natural stance with the rifle is achieved??

I've heard not having it exactly right hurts your accuracy but not from reliable sources, is this true???

Also, I bought redfield solid steel rings that were a FRACTION of an inch too short, the adjustable objective were touching the barrel.  SO, i shimmed both the back and the front bases (weaver) with a couple pieces of Aluminum under the bases and then sinched down the bolts.  I still ended up shimming the front one "aluminum can side" taller so the objective would clear.  Is this okay, will it hurt the scope/accuracy/mounts/anything?  

It's just that it is now so incredibly close the barrel (best lineup with bore), I thought it would be best to leave it this way.  What do you think??

Gundraw

I would advise against shimming one ring more than the other. It is important that that both rings be concentric when mounted to the gun. If they are not, you will unnecessarily stress both your scope and rings.

I believe that placing the vertical crosshair perpindicular to your bolt is a good rule to follow. However, the important thing is to have the intersection of your cross hairs directly above the axis through your barrel. To accomplish this, it is important to hold your rifle as close to staight up and down as possible. If your vertical cross hair is rotated it shouldn't affect accuracy as long as you consistently hold the rifle in the same orientation that was used to sight it in. If rotating the scope helps you to hold your rifle more closely to vertical, go for it.

-Gil

So you think there is enough stress on the tube I should probably invest in another set of rings??

Gundraw

Invest in another set of rings? I'm not sure I'd go that far. I'd try to shim each ring an equal amount.

If one ring is shimmed even just three or four thousandths more than the other, I'd say its a bad thing. The residual stresses that result in a situation such as this are very undesireable, particularly because we're talking about a precision optical instrument. If you MUST shim one ring more than the other, place the rings as far apart as possible on the rail.

If shimming the rear ring to make it the same height as the front noticably pushes your objective back down, there was certainly too much residual stress in your setup. Also, unequal shimming would move your scope away from parallel in relation to the barrel. Even a few seconds of angle could affect accuracy. It just comes down to shimming the rings as equally and as precisely as possibly.

-Gil

To properly align the reticle, you need a tool such as this:
[img]http://www.brownells.com/Images/Products/289100000.jpg[/img]
[url]http://www.brownells.com/aspx/NS/store/ProductDetail.aspx?p=6097[/url]

It sits on the scope and rifle and has a bubble level so that you know the scope is directly above the barrel.

You then sight in at a plumb line or something else you know is perfectly plumb.  When the reticle is aligned to the plumb line and the bubble says the rifle is level, you are good to go.

Well, i don't know what to do.  I already have 3 pieces of alum in the front and 2 in back.  I had to do that because the adj. object was just BARELY rubbing.  I'd probably have to shim both with about 3 or 4 to get the proper height, I was scared that would be too much.  Suggestions.  

Gundraw

P.S. Not that it's relevant, but I am getting REALLY tired of dinking with these mounts.  I swear I've almost worn out the "redfield" wrench.   [banghead]

Aligning the cross-hairs of your scope perfectly perpendicular the your receiver is only important if you shoot multiple ranges. For instance, a hunter who zero's his rifle for 100 or 200 yards can get by w/ eye-balling the scope because he sets it and then forgets about it.

A long range shooter using the most popular LR scope, a Leupold w/ mil-dots and turrets, who is constantly cranking the elevation turret up and down had better have his scope perfectly perpendicular to the receiver or he'll be constantly having to adjust for windage, not because of the wind, but because his scope is "canted."

There are several methods for mounting your scope, tools such as the one above, a weighted string hung from the ceiling will work, or my method requires the purchase of 2 string-levels from HomeDepot or Lowes.  

I use the Stanley, aluminum cased string-levels, clip/snip the hangers (for the string) off, place one on the flat portion of receiver, (after removing bolt) level rifle on bench using your front and rear bags or rests, place second level on scope elevation turret/knob (w/ cap removed) and align scope and receiver so both are level w/ each other, what could be easier.

Cost of 2 string levels, $8-10 bucks and you can use them for the rest of your life and never worry about "canting" (scope to receiver) again.

As to shimming, my CR-6724 which has one-piece Colt scope mount is shimmed 40 thousandths in the rear w/ rings lapped to prevent torquing of scope tube. It's an old leupy VX-III and needed more elevation travel to reach the 1000 yard line.

Best option here IMHO is Badger/Leupold/or other rings which have the built in elevation adjustment. But done properly shimming is okay, as long as ya place the scope, square the scope and make certain scope and mounts are Lock-tited and torqued properly, then left alone.

my 2 cents,
Mike