Rifle Scopes Mounting Help: Scope Rotates w/ XTR Signature Rings

[Dimefox]

Need some help from the brain trust. Trying to mount an EP5 5-25 with Burris XTR Signature rings on my CZ 457. As I tighten down the ring, the scope rotates a bit as I snug the screws down, knocking it out of level with the gun. I've never had this issue before with a scope. When everything is torqued down, the scope is still "level" within the lines of the bubble, but it is obviously favoring one side of the level (rifle level still centered).

The rings are the correct size for the scope (34 mm). I've verified that the rail is tight on the gun and the ring bases are properly torqued to the rail. I have the gun in a vise, get it level, set the ring inserts that I want (30 moa in this case) into the bottom of the ring, make sure they are level. Set the scope in and press it into the base/inserts, then level the scope (making sure the rifle is still level). Sometimes those plastic inserts slip around the scope when you put it in, and one side ends up being maybe an 1/8" proud on one side...so I fiddle with that to get it back to being flush. Once all that looks good, put one of the top ring halves/insert on the the scope and get the screws started.

Then I start torquing the screws, little by little in a crisscross pattern. At first I was using a Wheeler fat wrench, now I'm using the blue Fix It stick torque thing (6-25 in-lbs I believe). Pattern was something like this:
1 5 3
SCOPE
4 6 2

If I tighten one screw too much, I can watch the bubble move. I was to the point where I would tighten one screw until I barely felt any resistance, went to the next screw, etc, then once they all had some resistance, started applying a small amount of torque to each until torqued to 15 in-lbs. For some damn reason, if I ever get to the point hitting 15 in-lbs, the scope always moves.

Then I switched to trying to tighten the two center screws to maintain level, and tightening the remaining screws just enough until resistance is felt, then going back to the center screws. This was a little better, but the level was still off center when I was done.

Oh, I got one of those Ariska scope leveling gizmos I stuck between the rail/scope bottom and that still doesn't seem to help.

Any ideas? Like I said...never had this problem with a scope before. Also never used XTR rings with inserts before...they seem like part of the problem. I'll admit my OCD might be getting the better of me and I could get it "close" and say fuck it, but that would nag the shit out of me at the range (if I could even get it into "fuck it" territory).

 

[Gohring65]

Sometimes you have to anticipate the movement and put the scope slightly off level the opposite direction and keep trying until it hits. I’ve never seen one rotate with the Ariska kits though.

 

[B y r o n]

Another thing you could try is wiping off the inserts and rings with alcohol to remove any mold release agent that may be on them. Hopefully this will minimize slipping.

I do have these rings and believe I had a little bit of the same issue myself. I'd stay with the middle screws first then cross wise on the outer screws. According to Burris site 45 in. lbs. on the base screws first then 20 in. lbs. for the cap screws.

Be patient and you will get it right.

 

[Rob01]

Tighten one side a little then go to the other side watching the level and keeping it level. It's about going slow and back and forth. Not too much on one side. I usually use one screw on each side of a ring on one ring and tighten it down and keep it level and then go to the other ring and tighten them all down completely as there will be no movement as the other ring is holding it level. Then go back to the original ring and loosen the two screws and then tighten them all down. Been doing it this was for decades and works fine. Takes me about 10 min to mount a scope with diopter adjustment

 

[FuhQ]

Need some help from the brain trust. Trying to mount an EP5 5-25 with Burris XTR Signature rings on my CZ 457. As I tighten down the ring, the scope rotates a bit as I snug the screws down, knocking it out of level with the gun. I've never had this issue before with a scope. When everything is torqued down, the scope is still "level" within the lines of the bubble, but it is obviously favoring one side of the level (rifle level still centered).

The rings are the correct size for the scope (34 mm). I've verified that the rail is tight on the gun and the ring bases are properly torqued to the rail. I have the gun in a vise, get it level, set the ring inserts that I want (30 moa in this case) into the bottom of the ring, make sure they are level. Set the scope in and press it into the base/inserts, then level the scope (making sure the rifle is still level). Sometimes those plastic inserts slip around the scope when you put it in, and one side ends up being maybe an 1/8" proud on one side...so I fiddle with that to get it back to being flush. Once all that looks good, put one of the top ring halves/insert on the the scope and get the screws started.

Then I start torquing the screws, little by little in a crisscross pattern. At first I was using a Wheeler fat wrench, now I'm using the blue Fix It stick torque thing (6-25 in-lbs I believe). Pattern was something like this:
1 5 3
SCOPE
4 6 2

If I tighten one screw too much, I can watch the bubble move. I was to the point where I would tighten one screw until I barely felt any resistance, went to the next screw, etc, then once they all had some resistance, started applying a small amount of torque to each until torqued to 15 in-lbs. For some damn reason, if I ever get to the point hitting 15 in-lbs, the scope always moves.

Then I switched to trying to tighten the two center screws to maintain level, and tightening the remaining screws just enough until resistance is felt, then going back to the center screws. This was a little better, but the level was still off center when I was done.

Oh, I got one of those Ariska scope leveling gizmos I stuck between the rail/scope bottom and that still doesn't seem to help.

Any ideas? Like I said...never had this problem with a scope before. Also never used XTR rings with inserts before...they seem like part of the problem. I'll admit my OCD might be getting the better of me and I could get it "close" and say fuck it, but that would nag the shit out of me at the range (if I could even get it into "fuck it" territory).

Yeah, if you’re having issues with traditional rings, scrap them and get a set of the American Rifle Company M-Brace rings. Their design is simple. Once you get your scope leveled in them, tighten one ring to about 10 inch-lbs. Then tighten the other to 10, and check the scope and then run them up to like 35, then 55 inch-pounds.

Do yourself a favor and get a set of Fix-It-Sticks. I’ve found their torque limiters to be more precise and accurate than my old Wheeler FAT Wrench.

 

[Dimefox]

Good idea on trying to wipe off the mold release, didn't think of that. I did consider putting a bit of rosin on there, but didn't know how stupid that was.
Max torque on the Arken is 18 in-lbs, so I'm staying under that.

Those M-Brace rings are sweet...but damn expensive.

 

[B y r o n]

Arken scope rings are straight aluminum and the Burris rings are a combination of aluminum with polymer inserts. Aluminum will not compress where the polymer inserts will and hence a different torque setting.

 

[carbonbased]

Mold on your rings? Are you guys deep in the shit wearing Ho Chi Minh Road Sticks, trading fire with Charlie, and dreaming of some “boom boom”?





Ok, yeah, I know it can mean both fungi and object forms. A little in-flight humor.

The seatbelt sign is now off; feel free to move about the cabin.

 

[carbonbased]

I tolerate the Signature rings. I went full-on ARC rings and love them dearly.

As mentioned above, the Signature rings seem to be more fiddly than normal multi-screw rings. And don’t keep on going over the ring screws with your torque driver. You’ll find you can slowly keep on tightening, and tightening, and tightening…

They are nice to limit ring marks, however.

 

[FuhQ]

Good idea on trying to wipe off the mold release, didn't think of that. I did consider putting a bit of rosin on there, but didn't know how stupid that was.
Max torque on the Arken is 18 in-lbs, so I'm staying under that.

Those M-Brace rings are sweet...but damn expensive.

The scope might only have 18 in-lbs torque specs, but that is a torque spec for traditional rings that only put vertical pressure on the tube in 1 direction, compressing it between the 2 individual parts of the rings.

The ARC rings encompasses the whole tube in 360°, which distributes the pressure evenly around the entire tube. So, with the ARC rings, they recommend using 55 in-lbs for both the base clamp and ring cap screws.

 

[Birddog6424]

I have multiple sets of these and have no issues going from one side to the other while tightening.

 

[Rob01]

I got my first set shipping from Burris/Expertvoice today so we will see how they work when they come in.

 

[Baron23]

I tolerate the Signature rings. I went full-on ARC rings and love them dearly.

As mentioned above, they seem to be more fiddly than normal multi-screw rings. And don’t keep on going over the ring screws with your torque driver. You’ll find you can slowly keep on tightening, and tightening, and tightening…

They are nice to limit ring marks, however.

ARC rings are fiddly…who said that?

Trad rings and the scope rotating is fiddly to me. I got tired of trying to use feeler gauges, my fingernail, whatever to keep the scope from rotating. Not much, but enough to drive me crazy (which ain't a long drive! haha)

ARC rings are to my mind the opposite of fiddly.

Did I misunderstand?

 

[spife7980]

ARC rings are fiddly…who said that?

Trad rings and the scope rotating is fiddly to me. I got tired of trying to use feeler gauges, my fingernail, whatever to keep the scope from rotating. Not much, but enough to drive me crazy (which ain't a long drive! haha)

ARC rings are to my mind the opposite of fiddly.

Did I misunderstand?

I think he meant the xtr signatures are fiddly.

I too noticed that I canted the scope with my first interaction setting them up so when I redid it I just took a little time to watch it and torque them evenly and it went fine.

 

[Baron23]

I think he meant the xtr signatures are fiddly.

I too noticed that I canted the scope with my first interaction setting them up so when I redid it I just took a little time to watch it and torque them evenly and it went fine.

Yep, I sort of thought that was a typo too. Cheers

 

[carbonbased]

ARC rings are fiddly…who said that?

Trad rings and the scope rotating is fiddly to me. I got tired of trying to use feeler gauges, my fingernail, whatever to keep the scope from rotating. Not much, but enough to drive me crazy (which ain't a long drive! haha)

ARC rings are to my mind the opposite of fiddly.

Did I misunderstand?

Ok, I clarified/edited the post. And yeah, the ARC rings are the opposite of fiddly.

The Signature rings are about as fiddly as Spuhr mounts, at least to me. Which is pretty fiddly. ARC rings are bang done!

 

[Taylorbok]

Do you run a scope level?
It doesn't matter if your bore is aligned under your scope, what is important that the reticle runs plumb to gravity. So if you have a clamp on scope level true that to a plumb line using the reticle and then mount the scope where ever you like.
I like to get into a common shooting position and make it so my natural position makes the reticle level, I shoot a ton of prone

 

[Dimefox]

In hindsight this is kind of a "no shit sherlock" idea...but I just ended up grabbing the damn scope while I tightened the screws and resisted whichever way it wanted to turn. It's levelness appeases my OCD.

I guess I was worried before that grabbing it would make it more unlevel.

 

[NateVA]

I exclusively use ARC rings on all my rifles for this reason. It's just plain annoying.

 

[Nik H]

I use both ARC and SPUHR...never found either to be "Fiddy". The ARC rings are a model of simplicity in action. The Spuhr mounts are something I have used for a long time and I have never had a scope rotate when I use their wedge.

I will be trying an MBRACE mount on my next rifle when it shows up

 

[Baron23]

I have never had a scope rotate when I use their wedge.

@Dimefox - Now this is an idea for keeping the scope from rotating when tighten rings....I have a set and they work like the Spuhr wedges. You do need enough room under your scope to get it in there (not a lot but if real low it may not fit) and it assumes that the scope rail is perpendicular to the vertical axis of your action and that bottom of your erector housing is flat and perpendicular to your reticle's vertical stadia which should both be true in a quality action and scope (but...).

Amazon product ASIN B00W8AXZ98
Even with ARC rings, I found this kit to be very helpful in maintaining level position when installing a scope.

 

[srt-4_uk]

In his first post, he says he was using the Arisaka leveling wedge.

 

[st1650]

Burris XTR signature rings are actually pretty legit on a 22lr for the extra cant they provide. That being said I use ARC rings on all my builds except Hawkins for my ultra lightweight hunting rig.

 

[koshkin]

Interesting. I have about half a dozen of XTR Signature rings and I have not had any issues with them rotating as I tighten things down. Never tried Hawkins. Won't touch Spuhr with a ten foot pole. I do have ARC Mbrace mount. The accessory mounting interface is legitimately clever. The rail clamp is a little questionable (almost all clamps with a single long bar are). The ring portion is convenient for people who remove, then remount scopes a lot. Beyond that, I think it is a solution looking for a problem. The hinges worry me a little especially in cold temperatures, but where I live it is not an issue.

ILya

 

[st1650]

I do have ARC Mbrace mount. The accessory mounting interface is legitimately clever. The rail clamp is a little questionable (almost all clamps with a single long bar are).

ILya

Interesting.. why ? I have 3 of these and I’m constantly switching scopes to different barrelled action and haven’t had an an issue yet.

 

[Baron23]

In his first post, he says he was using the Arisaka leveling wedge.

LOL.....so, once again I'm:

 

[Baron23]

I do have ARC Mbrace mount.

Maybe try the rings....I know many like one piece, big huggin', scope mounts but I prefer rings (and may think differently about it if I shot an AR type rifle but I don't). At least your concern about one long clamping bar would be addressed.

I'm not sure what aspect of the ring portion you think is a solution looking for a problem. Can you elaborate?

The hinges worry me a little especially in cold temperatures

What exactly are you worried about? That they will crack in the cold?

Cheer

 

[TheOE800]

I have checked my scopes using the Arisaka wedge and I’m not saying it’s not straight, but between multiple geometries and a reticle there’s a lot of room for error in what is essentially an idiot-proof system.

 

[Nik H]

@Dimefox - Now this is an idea for keeping the scope from rotating when tighten rings....I have a set and they work like the Spuhr wedges. You do need enough room under your scope to get it in there (not a lot but if real low it may not fit) and it assumes that the scope rail is perpendicular to the vertical axis of your action and that bottom of your erector housing is flat and perpendicular to your reticle's vertical stadia which should both be true in a quality action and scope (but...).

Amazon product ASIN B00W8AXZ98
Even with ARC rings, I found this kit to be very helpful in maintaining level position when installing a scope.

I use this on non-Spuhr but it mounts on the pic rail and is taller so it sometimes won't work. It is also a bit more wobbly than Spuhr's system which rides in a purpose built groove in the mount

 

[Nik H]

I have checked my scopes using the Arisaka wedge and I’m not saying it’s not straight, but between multiple geometries and a reticle there’s a lot of room for error in what is essentially an idiot-proof system.

It only gets you in the ballpark.

Unless you true the reticle against a plumb line when the rifle is shouldered, you can't be sure it is right.

 

[koshkin]

Maybe try the rings....I know many like one piece, big huggin', scope mounts but I prefer rings (and may think differently about it if I shot an AR type rifle but I don't). At least your concern about one long clamping bar would be addressed.

I'm not sure what aspect of the ring portion you think is a solution looking for a problem. Can you elaborate?


What exactly are you worried about? That they will crack in the cold?

Cheer

I bought the single piece mount because I was interested in the accessory attachment and that serrated interface is very clever. That's the one part of this mount I actually like. For ARs, it does not work well since there really is no cantilever to speak of. It is probably fine on large frame ARs.

Instead of two ring halves, you have three pieces. If everything is in spec, it should not be an issue. If anything is out of spec, there is more to go wrong. There are a lot of these out there and they seem to work fine, which just shows you there is more than one way of doing it.

As far as the steel pivots go, yes I have heard of a couple cracking in the cold, but I have not chased that down. I have an environmental chamber at work. Next time I have a couple of days in the office, I'll torque them down and cycle them.

ILya

 

[Baron23]

I bought the single piece mount because I was interested in the accessory attachment and that serrated interface is very clever. That's the one part of this mount I actually like. For ARs, it does not work well since there really is no cantilever to speak of. It is probably fine on large frame ARs.

Instead of two ring halves, you have three pieces. If everything is in spec, it should not be an issue. If anything is out of spec, there is more to go wrong. There are a lot of these out there and they seem to work fine, which just shows you there is more than one way of doing it.

As far as the steel pivots go, yes I have heard of a couple cracking in the cold, but I have not chased that down. I have an environmental chamber at work. Next time I have a couple of days in the office, I'll torque them down and cycle them.

ILya

Thank you for the reply.

 

[6.5SH]

Need some help from the brain trust. Trying to mount an EP5 5-25 with Burris XTR Signature rings on my CZ 457. As I tighten down the ring, the scope rotates a bit as I snug the screws down, knocking it out of level with the gun. I've never had this issue before with a scope. When everything is torqued down, the scope is still "level" within the lines of the bubble, but it is obviously favoring one side of the level (rifle level still centered).

The rings are the correct size for the scope (34 mm). I've verified that the rail is tight on the gun and the ring bases are properly torqued to the rail. I have the gun in a vise, get it level, set the ring inserts that I want (30 moa in this case) into the bottom of the ring, make sure they are level. Set the scope in and press it into the base/inserts, then level the scope (making sure the rifle is still level). Sometimes those plastic inserts slip around the scope when you put it in, and one side ends up being maybe an 1/8" proud on one side...so I fiddle with that to get it back to being flush. Once all that looks good, put one of the top ring halves/insert on the the scope and get the screws started.

Then I start torquing the screws, little by little in a crisscross pattern. At first I was using a Wheeler fat wrench, now I'm using the blue Fix It stick torque thing (6-25 in-lbs I believe). Pattern was something like this:
1 5 3
SCOPE
4 6 2

If I tighten one screw too much, I can watch the bubble move. I was to the point where I would tighten one screw until I barely felt any resistance, went to the next screw, etc, then once they all had some resistance, started applying a small amount of torque to each until torqued to 15 in-lbs. For some damn reason, if I ever get to the point hitting 15 in-lbs, the scope always moves.

Then I switched to trying to tighten the two center screws to maintain level, and tightening the remaining screws just enough until resistance is felt, then going back to the center screws. This was a little better, but the level was still off center when I was done.

Oh, I got one of those Ariska scope leveling gizmos I stuck between the rail/scope bottom and that still doesn't seem to help.

Any ideas? Like I said...never had this problem with a scope before. Also never used XTR rings with inserts before...they seem like part of the problem. I'll admit my OCD might be getting the better of me and I could get it "close" and say fuck it, but that would nag the shit out of me at the range (if I could even get it into "fuck it" territory).

FWIW the gimbals can make it a "3 handed job" and I've not found the Arisaka level that useful even when it does fit.

The simple tool that has worked the best for me when there is enough room to use it is the flat bar on the Kleinendorst Remington bolt disassembly tool. If you don't have one a similar size piece of brass or steel flat stock from the hardware store works fine. For tighter spaces an allen key that just fits can be twisted leveling the scope bottom to the rail. For the tightest spaces a small stack of business cards or paper is another answer.

 

[209jones]

Scopes wanting to rotate are part of the setup when doing rings, as far back as I can remember, just a matter of using some patience tightening them down. The XTR's are a good ring, certainly cheaper and more versatile than most, never had any issue with regular Signatures either.