Rifle Scopes I've been Vortex'd

[carbonbased]

Here you go ... though you may not like the source : https://rokslide.com/forums/threads...aid-about-my-rifle.326323/page-2#post-3262169

Lol yeah, you’re right about that. I have always wondered if that constant (generous Loctite application) is the thing that is messing up Form’s reviews. As in squeezing scope tubes and messing with erectors.

Plus it’s really hard to take anyone seriously that calls himself scary/dangerous/terrible/causing dread via a Latin-based username lol.

I mean…what if my username was “TheScary” or “CausingDreadinU” or even just “Dangerous”? Would you take me seriously or would you wonder exactly why I’d choose such a name?

Here’s some stuff that says the opposite, but I did find people with opinions like Form’s as well.

Do you reduce the recommended scope ring screw torque when using loctite? - AR15.COM

Firearm Discussion and Resources from AR-15, AK-47, Handguns and more! Buy, Sell, and Trade your Firearms and Gear.

www.ar15.com

Ask Kevin: If I Lubricate Threads, or Use a Threadlocker, Should I Reduce the Tightening Torque?

www.cycleworld.com

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/loctite-on-bolts-effect-on-torque-values.187098/

I find it interesting that I can’t find this info on Loctite’s site. To me this implies some sort of subtly going on with the “correct” advice and the lawyers then just don’t want any official advice to expose them to liability.

 

[carbonbased]

I can't compete with the self made internet engineers. Never mind that threaded joint engineering is one of the things I've done for a living.

Oh c’mon! Please! I want to know! I cannot find official advice from Loctite in this.

There’s a bunch of second hand info with people saying the Loctite engineers telling them to reduce torque values by 20% with locktite, but nothing straight from the horse’s mouth.

 

[Baron23]

Lol yeah, you’re right about that. I have always wondered if that constant (generous Loctite application) is the thing that is messing up Form’s reviews. As in squeezing scope tubes and messing with erectors.

Plus it’s really hard to take anyone seriously that calls himself scary/dangerous/terrible/causing dread via a Latin-based username lol.

I mean…what if my username was “TheScary” or “CausingDreadinU” or even just “Dangerous”? Would you take me seriously or would you wonder exactly why I’d choose such a name?

Here’s some stuff that says the opposite, but I did find people with opinions like Form’s.

Do you reduce the recommended scope ring screw torque when using loctite? - AR15.COM

Firearm Discussion and Resources from AR-15, AK-47, Handguns and more! Buy, Sell, and Trade your Firearms and Gear.

www.ar15.com

Ask Kevin: If I Lubricate Threads, or Use a Threadlocker, Should I Reduce the Tightening Torque?

www.cycleworld.com

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/loctite-on-bolts-effect-on-torque-values.187098/

I find it interesting that I can’t find this info on Loctite’s site. To me this implies some sort of subtly going on with the “correct” advice and the lawyers then just don’t want any official advice to expose them to liability.

One interesting point is Ted advises to put a drop of oil on the inside face of the heads of the screws and the threads in his M-10/M-Brace rings and specifies 55 in/lbs.

Of course this flies in the face of most (all?) scope manf ring torque specs but they are based on traditional ring designs.

With my ZCO's 36mm tube, I found that on initial installation, and when I went immediately to 55 in/lbs, I got some binding on the parallax function. Backed off, came up incrementally, and no problem. I still decided to back off to 45 in/lbs and the scope has never moved a bit.

My cousin is a retired mech engineer with a number of patents to his name. He was very good and rose to a director slot in management. I think I'll ping Lou on this subject.

Cheers and best of luck.

 

[carbonbased]

Of course this flies in the face of most (all?) scope manf ring torque specs but they are based on traditional ring designs.

@Baron23 knows this, but to make it really clear for others: since Ted specifies a lubed bolt (it’s in the instructions) he unsurprisingly calculates the torque value for a lubed bolt. His method is different (re: see “flies in the face” above) but seems to be sound. Or at least I haven’t seen other engineers voicing complaints. I’m not an engineer!

Other manufacturers leave us in the dark. Except Spuhr…they mention that they wax their bolts and not to remove the wax.

I had been ritually degreasing the F out of all scope bolts. And then I learned that dry fasteners realize much lower torque values (and maybe even less consistent too).

So there’s a chance Formidilosus is right (if manufacturers actually secretly specify a lightly lubed bolt AND Loctite = lightly lubed bolt). But we don’t know what most of the scope AND scope ring manufacturers specify (dry or lightly lubed) PLUS we don’t know what Loctite’s effect is (=lightly lubed or =dry?).

I mean…backyard torque engineering would suggest Loctite = light lube. Spread it on some non-porous surface, glove up, and see how slippery it is. But, life is a mystery and there are people way more knowledgeable than I.

Love this video and the username “Applied Bolting Technology “ lol

 

[Baron23]

Yeah, but one knows Ted wants a lubed bolt (it’s in the instructions) and thus he calculates the torque value for a lubed bolt.

Uh…yeah, I know…that’s where I got the spec.

Absolutely agree that most others leave us in the dark.

I like Ted….weird ass engineer that he is.

 

[carbonbased]

With my ZCO's 36mm tube, I found that on initial installation, and when I went immediately to 55 in/lbs, I got some binding on the parallax function. Backed off, came up incrementally, and no problem. I still decided to back off to 45 in/lbs and the scope has never moved a bit.

As you know (ran across your posts during a search) is a known issue with ZCO and afaik it’s not an ARC defect.

But for others, there was a big brouhaha over some ZCO scope’s lenses breaking due to some combo of rings being in certain spots on the tube, certain torque values, and small manufacturing defects upon the lens-holding bits. Not sure if updated torque values are in zco’s manual now.

Not sure it was correlated only with ARC rings or not. And I’m not sure of the current ZCO recommendation…last I heard was 35 in/lbs with Arc rings. Could be wrong.

 

[carbonbased]

Uh…yeah, I know…that’s where I got the spec.

Oh, ha! sorry. That came across sort of “blame-y” or “Ackshually” didn’t it? Whoops!

Didn’t mean that. Might edit the post.

Need more coffee.

 

[Baron23]

As you know (ran across your posts during a search) is a known issue with ZCO and afaik it’s not an ARC defect.

But for others, there was a big brouhaha over some ZCO scope’s lenses breaking due to some combo of rings being in certain spots on the tube, certain torque values, and small manufacturing defects upon the lens-holding bits. Not sure if updated torque values are in zco’s manual now.

Not sure it was correlated only with ARC rings or not. And I’m not sure of the current ZCO recommendation…last I heard was 35 in/lbs with Arc rings. Could be wrong.

Thanks, my intent wasn’t to bring back up the whole ZCO debate in that other thread but rather to illustrate how this subject is kind of all over the place and it’s hard to get solid clarity.

And no worries, I wasn’t offended at all, hence the wink and thumbs up. All good, mate

InnDr office now so bowing out for now.

Cheers

 

[Trigger Monkey]

I'm not sure how different Permatex Blue is from Loctite Blue but Permatex states that no compensation is required...so there's that.

https://www.permatex.com/wp-content/uploads/tds/24210.pdf

 

[beetroot]

I didn't realize lactate was such a controversial subject, I better not being up what torque wrench I use (or don't)...

Might be safer to cross drill some machine screws for .020" lockwire.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Orange loctite is the shit. It’s stronger than blue but doesn’t get as hard and brittle over time.

 

[Makinchips208]

I didn't realize lactate was such a controversial subject, I better not being up what torque wrench I use (or don't)...

Might be safer to cross drill some machine screws for .020" lockwire.

Lactate? Is that your final answer?

 

[Dobermann]

Plus it’s really hard to take anyone seriously that calls himself scary/dangerous/terrible/causing dread via a Latin-based username lol.

I mean…what if my username was “TheScary” or “CausingDreadinU” or even just “Dangerous”? Would you take me seriously or would you wonder exactly why I’d choose such a name?

That's exactly the kind of combination of ad hominem attack and and distraction that I'm talking about.

Plenty of people here use similar names for their accounts ... it's just the internet. But then, what would I know, because I'm clearly a dog.

 

[carbonbased]

That's exactly the kind of combination of ad hominem attack and and distraction that I'm talking about.

Plenty of people here use similar names for their accounts ... it's just the internet. But then, what would I know, because I'm clearly a dog.

You dog you! lol sorry

You are right, trying to refute Formidilosus’ test solely because of his username would be an ad hominem attack. I should’ve provided more context. I have a bit of history debating this and sort of stupidly assume people know my whole argument (see links below).

I’m saying that he, independent of his test, as an online entity, has less credibility to me a bit because of his username plus a some of other facts that matter more.

It’s a shame because I like the spirit of his test. I want to believe, but can’t due to his apparent (not necessarily true) character.

Anyway, I hope you can see the difference between saying:

“Because of ScaryBob’s username, ScaryBob’s argument is bunk.”​

​

and​

​

“ScaryBob seems a little sketchy in general (mainly facts a, b, c), but also factoring in his username too. So, I don’t really trust what ScaryBob writes.”​

The naming of things does matter, though. For example, @Bigfatcock is one of our SH members (pun intended). Bless his soul. He provides humor to us all. Manna from heaven. I hope he visits us and cracks a joke.

The following are some of the other more important aspects as to how Formidilosus conducts himself that gives one pause:

1) Given free NF scopes (but not other brands, apparently):
https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/vortex-lht-4-5-22-durability-test.7105709/post-9960245

But Formidilosus says here on his point #1: “I have never been paid or compensated any way, shape, or form from any optics company whatsoever.”


2) Keeping his identity secret (his prerogative, but it hurts cred in this case).


3) 8000 rds without cleaning a 308 (more now, one supposes):
https://www.rokslide.com/forums/threads/barrel-break-in-does-it-matter.234680/post-2289886


4) Formidilosus never answers the Loctite question (my first question, #1). Ignoring questions is never a good sign:
https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/vortex-lht-4-5-22-durability-test.7105709/post-9959959
NEW INFO: see this post of mine, which the result of my research into Loctite and how it changes torque readings. Doesn’t let Formidilosus off the hook for not answering on the other thread, but a man’s gotta honestly report what he discovers.

Of general interest: Formidilosus vs. Frank vs. Koshkin (at the time of writing, things may have changed):
https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/vortex-lht-4-5-22-durability-test.7105709/post-9962639

I can take a look at his tests, and on the face of it, without giving it too much thought, be swayed.

But when one adds in his entire online picture, well…Formidilosus does himself no favors.

 

[Scopeye]

I'd personally want to eliminate the scope variable and just send it in for warranty since Vortex pays for shipping anyway.

 

[carbonbased]

Lactate? Is that your final answer?

@beetroot is Loctite lactate intolerant.

 

[carbonbased]

Orange loctite is the shit. It’s stronger than blue but doesn’t get as hard and brittle over time.

You talking about orange Permatex thread locker?

Permatex® High Strength Removable Threadlocker Orange Gel, 5 G – Permatex

www.permatex.com

 

[redneckbmxer24]

You talking about orange Permatex thread locker?

Permatex® High Strength Removable Threadlocker Orange Gel, 5 G – Permatex

www.permatex.com

Yes forgot that was permatex. It’s good stuff, been using it for several years now in place of blue.

 

[beetroot]

@beetroot is Loctite lactate intolerant.

I'm not going to go back and edit my post, I think it adds some pizazz to the discussion.

 

[carbonbased]

I'm not going to go back and edit my post, I think it adds some pizazz to the discussion.

Personally, I think it adds more “jazz hands” than pizazz. “”

Tomato, Jizzato

 

[308pirate]

@Baron23 knows this, but to make it really clear for others: since Ted specifies a lubed bolt (it’s in the instructions) he unsurprisingly calculates the torque value for a lubed bolt. His method is different (re: see “flies in the face” above) but seems to be sound. Or at least I haven’t seen other engineers voicing complaints. I’m not an engineer!

Other manufacturers leave us in the dark. Except Spuhr…they mention that they wax their bolts and not to remove the wax.

I had been ritually degreasing the F out of all scope bolts. And then I learned that dry fasteners realize much lower torque values (and maybe even less consistent too).

So there’s a chance Formidilosus is right (if manufacturers actually secretly specify a lightly lubed bolt AND Loctite = lightly lubed bolt). But we don’t know what most of the scope AND scope ring manufacturers specify (dry or lightly lubed) PLUS we don’t know what Loctite’s effect is (=lightly lubed or =dry?).

I mean…backyard torque engineering would suggest Loctite = light lube. Spread it on some non-porous surface, glove up, and see how slippery it is. But, life is a mystery and there are people way more knowledgeable than I.

Love this video and the username “Applied Bolting Technology “ lol

Applying lubricant to threads has a different effect on the torque/strain curve than applying it to the underside of the head.

This is why I don't wade into these discussions any more.

 

[308pirate]

Here you go ... though you may not like the source : https://rokslide.com/forums/threads...aid-about-my-rifle.326323/page-2#post-3262169

Yeah there's an authoritative reference.

 

[AleksanderSuave]

Yeah there's an authoritative reference.

His gunsmith whos won many competitions (and couldnt be named because he swore on his first born to secrecy) said so. Whats not trustworthy about that?

FWIW, Im pretty sure my oldest set of seekins rings came with a one time use pack of loctite too.

I dont believe they do so anymore.

The question is, did they rule it unnecessary, or did they remove it due to cost cutting? Either one is possible.

Im also not an internet engineering expert, but most of the service manuals I referenced when working on my last few cars, specified "wet torque"..and in many cases torque to yield fastener use also called out dry torque..to avoid overtorquing. Just my experience.

I dont loctite my scope rings. I havent seen a single one back out or get loose yet, but I do use a torque wrench to install them.

If it ever happens, I might change my mind on the subject.

 

[Trigger Monkey]

I was perusing the interwebs looking into info about threadlockers and came across this gem of an article:

Threadlockers: A Guide for AR-15 DIYers - The Shooter's Log

An AR-15 is pretty much pinned and threaded together. This post talks about keeping those threaded parts together with DIY "glue" known as threadlockers.

blog.cheaperthandirt.com

So I opened it up and knew right away that I could discount anything that was in it after I saw this picture.....

 

[Tx_Aggie]

I was perusing the interwebs looking into info about threadlockers and came across this gem of an article:

Threadlockers: A Guide for AR-15 DIYers - The Shooter's Log

An AR-15 is pretty much pinned and threaded together. This post talks about keeping those threaded parts together with DIY "glue" known as threadlockers.

blog.cheaperthandirt.com

So I opened it up and knew right away that I could discount anything that was in it after I saw this picture.....

View attachment 8245857

View attachment 8245864

That's how Alexander Arms put their factory uppers together years ago (no idea if they still do it this way). Their slick G10 handguards used a smooth barrel nut designed specifically to take glue. They also glued the gas blocks onto the barrel. Everyone of of those uppers I came into contact with shot, but they were intended to be a permanent assembly and so were a bitch to change parts on.

 

[Trigger Monkey]

I've used red for installing a Lancer rail but that's not how you should assemble one of those types of rails though, it's totally unnecessary to use threadlocker on that barrel nut. At most I'd use it on the anti-rotation screws that screw into the side of the rail. Point is, I wouldn't use that article as a guide for anything other than how to make your life harder down the road.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Yeah there's an authoritative reference.

That dude is a giant fucking faggot with a cult following of cocksuckers ready to swallow his every load.

He thinks he's an expert but does drop tests that an actual optics engineer that knows how scopes are built has said any scope can fail so it's basically luck when one passes. But when he does it it's authoritative.

Furthermore he claims to have a Tikka 223 with well over 20K rounds on it and still shooting 1/2moa just like day 1. A barrel with a typical barrel like of 5000-6000 rounds of normal shooting. All while claiming to be shooting 10-30 round grounds which only accelerates wear. He also claims that lighter barrels don't shift or lose accuracy from heat whether its a 5 shot group or a 30.

He also claimed sportsmatch manufactured AI mounts when he called me out for calling them airsoft rings to which I replied with a screenshot from Tom Irwin president of AI stating otherwise and had nothing further to say.

His best moment was a recent range test with several rifles where they did some next level bubba shit and the T3X 223 with an SWFA that is praised to never lose zero was about .3mil left and not clearly not zero.

Not a single word that fudd says should be trusted.

 

[beetroot]

I dont loctite my scope rings. I havent seen a single one back out or get loose yet, but I do use a torque wrench to install them.

If it ever happens, I might change my mind on the subject.

I've never used it either and never had a problem, until now.

I used to use Tikka factory 1" rings in a previous life, I'd heard people had issues with them so recommended not using them.
I never had a problem with them, until I did.

It's hard to dissect internet hearsay from legitmate advice.

 

[AleksanderSuave]

I've never used it either and never had a problem, until now.

I used to use Tikka factory 1" rings in a previous life, I'd heard people had issues with them so recommended not using them.
I never had a problem with them, until I did.

It's hard to dissect internet hearsay from legitmate advice.

Valid point.

 

[carbonbased]

That's exactly the kind of combination of ad hominem attack and and distraction that I'm talking about.

Plenty of people here use similar names for their accounts ... it's just the internet. But then, what would I know, because I'm clearly a dog.

So! I have done some research on Loctite with two engineers and want to fix something on my list here:
https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/ive-been-vortexd.7184035/post-11160691

Both said that adding blue Loctite to scope ring caps probably wouldn’t change the bolt torque in a way that would damage the scope. Probably. It might, given certain surface finishes, but probably not. Every joint is different.

But I’m giving Formidilosus a pass here and will adjust the earlier critique.

 

[supercorndogs]

Any manufacturing production/mechanical engineers here to comment?

@308pirate , et al?

The article I posted was literally published in an engineering magazine as cited at the end.

 

[supercorndogs]

Torque/tension relationship - the forgotten factor

lotusmarques.com

 

[Baron23]

The article I posted was literally published in an engineering magazine as cited at the end.

Oooh, an engineering magazine. You don't say.

You clearly have never worked with very many engineers and have not witnessed the knock down, dragged out, battles over what is correct and proper. My experience is that its not as clear cut as you seem to think based on an article in a magazine no matter its original source

As for myself, I'm not a mech engineer (I was Proj/Prog Manager for telco network core equipment manf) and do not feel qualified to confidently interpret and understand an article in an mech engineering magazine. You?

Also, neither of us know the basis for torque spec issued by various gun/gun part manf. Was it based on dry fastners (yes, taking into account friction from threads and bolt head) or was it based on the assumption that the end user was going to use lubricant. you don't know, I don't know, and neither does the author of this article.

The only gun part manf I'm aware of (and there well may be others) who do specifically address the lubrication issue is Ted at ARC and the specs for his rings (which call for a small amount of oil on threads/under bolt head).

But I'm very glad to have provided you with some hilarity.

Carry on

 

[supercorndogs]

Oooh, an engineering magazine. You don't say.

You clearly have never worked with very many engineers and have not witnessed the knock down, dragged out, battles over what is correct and proper. My experience is that its not as clear cut as you seem to think based on an article in a magazine no matter its original source

As for myself, I'm not a mech engineer (I was Proj/Prog Manager for telco network core equipment manf) and do not feel qualified to confidently interpret and understand an article in an mech engineering magazine. You?

But I'm very glad to have provided you with some hilarity.

Carry on

So, you would consider comments from this forum and other to be more authoritative?

"Clearly, Loctite anaerobic thread-lockers perform a task which is more important than maintaining bolt tension, they provide a reliable means of controlling friction forces so that, once again your torque wrench allows you to achieve the correct tension."

If you can't understand that I am surprised you found your keyboard.

 

[Baron23]

So, you would consider comments from this forum and other to be more authoritative?

"Clearly, Loctite anaerobic thread-lockers perform a task which is more important than maintaining bolt tension, they provide a reliable means of controlling friction forces so that, once again your torque wrench allows you to achieve the correct tension."

If you can't understand that I am surprised you found your keyboard.

GTFO.

Ah....I believe I asked for mech engineers to weight in....not much insult in that, eh? Yeah, I cited @308pirate because I understand that he was/is a manf engineer with a background in fastners.

And did you catch the "et al" which is short for “et alia,” which means “and others.”

I say again...when you see a torque spec for...e.g. ring bolts...with the exception of ARC you have no idea if the design engineer generated this spec based on an assumption that the end user would or would not lubricate the thread and bolt head.

So, you a mechanical engineer...maybe part of that "et al"? No...didn't think so.

Now go away and bother someone else.

 

[beetroot]

Oooh, an engineering magazine. You don't say.

You clearly have never worked with very many engineers and have not witnessed the knock down, dragged out, battles over what is correct and proper. My experience is that its not as clear cut as you seem to think based on an article in a magazine no matter its original source

As for myself, I'm not a mech engineer (I was Proj/Prog Manager for telco network core equipment manf) and do not feel qualified to confidently interpret and understand an article in an mech engineering magazine. You?

Also, neither of us know the basis for torque spec issued by various gun/gun part manf. Was it based on dry fastners (yes, taking into account friction from threads and bolt head) or was it based on the assumption that the end user was going to use lubricant. you don't know, I don't know, and neither does the author of this article.

The only gun part manf I'm aware of (and there well may be others) who do specifically address the lubrication issue is Ted at ARC and the specs for his rings (which call for a small amount of oil on threads/under bolt head).

But I'm very glad to have provided you with some hilarity.

Carry on

I'm not a mechanical engineer, in manufacturing or anything like that, but I do work in Aviation and have a lot to do with a vast variety of people who have Engineer as part of their job title (including myself).

You could have 1000 meetings about what best practice is, get input from all the manufacturers in the world and eventually come up with a final solution.

Meanwhile some monkey who is actually installing the parts is just going to do what they've always done, or do what's easiest for them (this where I fit in).

Just put the damn loctitie on FFS.

 

[308pirate]

So, you would consider comments from this forum and other to be more authoritative?

"Clearly, Loctite anaerobic thread-lockers perform a task which is more important than maintaining bolt tension, they provide a reliable means of controlling friction forces so that, once again your torque wrench allows you to achieve the correct tension."

If you can't understand that I am surprised you found your keyboard.

What's the k factor for loctite? You know so that I can correct the slope of the torque/strain relationship by accounting for the lower frictional losses in the joint.

 

[supercorndogs]

GTFO.

Ah....I believe I asked for mech engineers to weight in....not much insult in that, eh? Yeah, I cited @308pirate because I understand that he was/is a manf engineer with a background in fastners.

And did you catch the "et al" which is short for “et alia,” which means “and others.”

I say again...when you see a torque spec for...e.g. ring bolts...with the exception of ARC you have no idea if the design engineer generated this spec based on an assumption that the end user would or would not lubricate the thread and bolt head.

So, you a mechanical engineer...maybe part of that "et al"? No...didn't think so.

Now go away and bother someone else.

Studies done tell me if they aren't lubricating their fastens they should be. I am not sure if you didn't read, didn't understand it, or if your are just being obstinate.

 

[supercorndogs]

What's the k factor for loctite? You know so that I can correct the slope of the torque/strain relationship by accounting for the lower frictional losses in the joint.

Table 2 – Typical “K” values
Substrate​	Lightly oiled​	Lightly oiled and Loctite 243​	Dry, degreased​	Dry, degreased and Loctite 243​
Steel Fastener​	0.15​	0.14​	0.20​	0.20​
Phosphated Steel​	0.13​	0.11​	0.24​	0.14​
Cadmium Plated Steel​	0.14​	0.13​	​	​
Stainless Steel 404​	0.22​	0.17​	​	​
Zinc Plated Steel​	0.18​	0.16​	0.17​	0.15​

 

[Makinchips208]

Just tighten till the screw starts creaking then that’s good. Paint pen to watch for loosening.