Rifle Scopes Rings at 20 in/lbs too tight?

[ColdBlood]

Long story short, my brand new Zeiss HD5 doesn't hold a zero. Shoot 3, 5, maybe 10 shots and it'll hold under MOA at 100 yards...then zero just jumps (we're talking 2-3" at times). Almost every time I pick the rifle up, the zero has to be tweaked because it's off again.

I've mounted a lot of scopes (I was the scope mounting guy at my dad's gun shop for almost 10 years) and I've rarely seen this type of issue. The guy at SWFA is telling me that 20 in/lbs is too tight and that's causing the issue. They already agreed to replace it, but it chaps my hide a bit that these guys are basically telling me it's my fault.

FYI - The mount is an AD Recon (AR15) mount and it's a 223 AR-15.

I've already wasted two boxes of Black Hills 77 grain on it...as hard as it is to find that ammo right now, I'm hesitant to dip into my last two boxes. Is it worth re-mounting the scope (I already boxed it up), and potentially wasting more ammo, or should I send this back and get the return/exchange process started?

What say you guys?

 

[ColdBlood]

20-25 inch lbs is what American Defense recommends - try adjusting your rail locking levers to be tighter (perhaps your rail is slightly out of spec?). I have 2 ADM mounts and I have the rings on both set @ 20 inch lbs w/no issues.

http://www.americandefensemanufacturing.com/docs/instructions/autolock.pdf

my $0.02

AvsFan

Yep, that is exactly what AD recommends and I do have the AD mount locked down TIGHT (I'm no stranger to AD mounts...have several of them, never had this problem before). I wouldn't have bothered calling SWFA until I had tried everything....I even blamed it on wind until the elevation started changing by 2-3 MOA (8-12 clicks!). Really, that's the kicker of this whole thing...I know I'm using quality QD mounts, I know I had them torqued correctly, and I stick with the brand I'm familiar with. And knowing all this, SWFA still tells me it's my fault. I just don't understand what they have to gain by wasting more of my time....and I'm only going to be more annoyed if I waste another $40-50 box of ammo.

It's a brand new receiver....I'd say the chances of the rail being out of spec are far slimmer than Zeiss putting out a bad scope.

I was just curious to see if anyone has ever heard of 20 in/lbs causing zero to jump around 2-3" at a time, before I tell SWFA what I really think.

Here's the rifle in question...

Another little guy with an AD Scout-X mount...

Noveske marked AD Recon on a rifle I sold a while back...looking at these pics makes my shoulders fatigue. I don't think I could've built a heavier AR15 if I tried. lol

 

[DrDanMD]

I've had the same problem recently, although on my new bolt gun. I have a Weaver 3-15X50 FFP Illum/mil/mil/EDMR Reticle, Seekins 20 MOA base, and Vortex precision matched rings all on top of a Savage 10FCP SR (box mag version). My first time out everything worked perfect (60 rounds including break in) until my last 5 shot group that was about 2-3" off of my original zero. I sent the scope back to Weaver and they said it was in spec. Took it out this last weekend, and it only took about 15 shots to lose my zero 2" to the right, then just wasting ammo for another 10 rounds. Weaver Support is great however, and they are sending me out a brand new scope. I'm just so damned frustrated, but I don't know what the hell is the problem with 100% certainty. Oh BTW, my Vortex rings were out of spec, so they are getting shipped back for replacement as well... Why can't the sh1t just work!?! It was dead nutz accurate when it WAS working, however.

Good luck buddy, just wanted to let you know I feel your pain

 

[ColdBlood]

I've had the same problem recently, although on my new bolt gun. I have a Weaver 3-15X50 FFP Illum/mil/mil/EDMR Reticle, Seekins 20 MOA base, and Vortex precision matched rings all on top of a Savage 10FCP SR (box mag version). My first time out everything worked perfect (60 rounds including break in) until my last 5 shot group that was about 2-3" off of my original zero. I sent the scope back to Weaver and they said it was in spec. Took it out this last weekend, and it only took about 15 shots to lose my zero 2" to the right, then just wasting ammo for another 10 rounds. Weaver Support is great however, and they are sending me out a brand new scope. I'm just so damned frustrated, but I don't know what the hell is the problem with 100% certainty. Oh BTW, my Vortex rings were out of spec, so they are getting shipped back for replacement as well... Why can't the sh1t just work!?! It was dead nutz accurate when it WAS working, however.

Good luck buddy, just wanted to let you know I feel your pain

Thanks, man. Having a scope not retain zero is extremely frustrating...you feel like telling them they owe you some ammo by the time you figure it out.

The fact that SWFA is actually trying to blame me, and being talked down to by a guy who apparently knows less than myself about the mount I'm using...well, that's just rubbing salt in the wound. This will likely be my last purchase from them. Too many customer-oriented places with just as good, if not better, selection of scopes.

 

[DrDanMD]

Wow, that's not cool... I get that the guy is an idiot, which is why I would just try to talk to somebody else.. I'm sure they will make it right. Some places don't follow the carnal rule of "the customer is always right", so what I do is kill them with kindness and I usually get what I want... Every time.

I have the worst luck with guns and gun equipment, it seems like everything I buy has to go back to the factory, be inspected, or get replaced... But I always try to keep a positve attitude as hard as it is while still letting them know my frustration and 99% of the time the mfg will help me out, and sometimes they throw in "I'm Sorry" gifts... ha ha.

Good luck with SWFA though, never had to use their customer service (knock on wood)

 

[M1Amen]

if the mounts are locked down tight, sounds like the scope is the weak link.

M1Amen

 

[Temp9]

You knew you were having scope issues and never tried remounting the scope over the course of two boxes of ammunition? Could have been a small piece of debris between the cap and scope or at any other interface. Also, make sure the scope is pushed forward before locking the lever down. Of course, you probably already know this since you've been a scope mounter upper for almost a decade....

Also, why is your bipod mounted so close to the mag well? I mount vertical foregrips further up than that.

Oh, and man up and stop bitching about what the guy said to you. The bottom line is that they're replacing it for you. They're not trying to "gain" anything, just offering a potential solution to save YOU the inconvenience of shipping the thing back and waiting for another one. Ever dealt with customer service from pretty much anyone outside the shooting industry? Offering free replacements is pretty much unheard of. And no, you are NOT entitled to free ammo because Zeiss may or may not have put out a bad scope.

Best of luck.

 

[Rob01]

My 2 cents, 20 in/lbs for ring caps isn't too much. I have been using 20 for years on multiple scope brands without problem.

 

[pawprint2]

I'd be surprised if any of the Quality ring manufacturers say 20 inch pounds is too much. In fact most that I've used (have not used them all) suggest a range, and 20 in pounds is in that range. I don't have a problem at all with your "bitching about what the guy told you", as one poster put it. That is one of the purposes of this web site, your incident can help the next guy from not suffering the same problem. Just because they are going to "fix" the problem by replacing the scope (as they should), they haven't fixed the problem with the "expert" on the other end of the phone, if he is telling you this, he's telling others the same thing, perhaps your taking the time to post this, may very well help the next guy.

 

[Temp9]

I'd be surprised if any of the Quality ring manufacturers say 20 inch pounds is too much. In fact most that I've used (have not used them all) suggest a range, and 20 in pounds is in that range. I don't have a problem at all with your "bitching about what the guy told you", as one poster put it. That is one of the purposes of this web site, your incident can help the next guy from not suffering the same problem. Just because they are going to "fix" the problem by replacing the scope (as they should), they haven't fixed the problem with the "expert" on the other end of the phone, if he is telling you this, he's telling others the same thing, perhaps your taking the time to post this, may very well help the next guy.

While I agree that 20in-lbs should be fine, I find it puzzling that the OP is actually getting offended by the CS rep offering advice. The CS reps are not R&D experts or technicians, they're simply people hired to take phone calls and emails. They have their own opinions and experiences like anyone else (they are people, after all). It should've been obvious that the CS rep was offering a possible issue to check, not saying that an overtightened ring cap was the definite problem. After all, why would he offer a replacement if he knew what the problem was. This is no different than if the OP would've posted the issue on the Hide and got suggestions for his issue.

Even though SWFA is offering a free replacement, the OP still finds a reason to complain about their CS. If I can get a replacement on a product without having to talk six levels of employment, that's decent to me.


That said, I have actually had one scope that would bind the parallax adjustment (knob turned, but no adjustment occurred) when I torqued the rings to 20 in-lbs. Never had any zero problems, though. I stand by the other posters here in saying that your problems are scope related. Now get that thing boxed up and get a new scope already!

 

[Strykervet]

I called the manufacturer on each scope I've mounted to get the proper torque. I use a good torque wrench made in US.

I've also had problems with another company I won't mention --because almost all of you have dealt with them and not had problems. I, however, have been run through the mill with them and won't touch them with a ten foot pole.

I think Larue said they use 20, USO uses 15 on the caps and 30 on the mount. However, those specs can change by as much as five to ten pounds if you use any thread locker or oil, which will reduce the rotational movement while retaining the torque. Which means a screw tightened to 20 pounds using Loctite is actually akin to a bare screw tightened to 25 to 30 pounds.

I don't think being that far out of spec on the torque would cause much issue provided all of them were torqued the same.

Something is out of spec. provided you are in spec. It could be your scope, your mount, your receiver, your barrel, your bolt. Is your barrel nut tight? Headspace is good? Most folks forego the use of the go no-go gauges with milspec rifles, but that could weed out another problem. Nevertheless, those barrel nuts have a hell of a range and I've seen that problem throw off more rifles than anything else. They just get loose over time, especially ones that have had good knocks on the barrel (IMT maneuvers, or just a lot of shooting --my Beowulf is infamous for loosing the nut). That could most definitely cause your problem.

I was an SDM instructor and I've seen a LOT of shit with the M4, I'm very familiar with it. When you have to make a milspec 14.5" weapon into a 600m shooter using just military gear, you have to get smart or just give up. We never had a problem we couldn't fix by tearing it down and going back one bit at a time either.

Those damn barrel nuts get loose on their own, particularly if it lines up right on the first hole, it generally is about 40 pounds. Some go 80 foot lbs. I actually don't use a torque wrench on barrels due to this issue anymore, once I saw the SF gunsmith build 'em this way. That guy forgot more shit about the M4 than I'll ever know, but I'm sure glad I got to know him.

Now we kept records of each shot made with these weapons in dope books using irons and optics (ACOG mostly in this case). So tracking problems became much easier as we went along. I guess I learned as much being an instructor as I did a student.

Finally, he can mount the fucking bipod wherever he wants. Some guys keep their irons on the rail too, I mean the carry handle type. We taught to use the bipod as a makeshift grip also because with a short rail the grip is mostly in the way for long shots. and more open tube is desirable. I don't like mine where he has it, but I've seen it before often enough with other folks and they liked it, particularly when used against doorways or as a makeshift grip.

 

[Strykervet]

Oh, and if that is a Noveske upper, I think they spec all their shit and weed out even cosmetic flaws. So you can probably safely consider that solved. Or just mic it yourself.

 

[8541recon]

You knew you were having scope issues and never tried remounting the scope over the course of two boxes of ammunition? Could have been a small piece of debris between the cap and scope or at any other interface. Also, make sure the scope is pushed forward before locking the lever down. Of course, you probably already know this since you've been a scope mounter upper for almost a decade....

Also, why is your bipod mounted so close to the mag well? I mount vertical foregrips further up than that.

Oh, and man up and stop bitching about what the guy said to you. The bottom line is that they're replacing it for you. They're not trying to "gain" anything, just offering a potential solution to save YOU the inconvenience of shipping the thing back and waiting for another one. Ever dealt with customer service from pretty much anyone outside the shooting industry? Offering free replacements is pretty much unheard of. And no, you are NOT entitled to free ammo because Zeiss may or may not have put out a bad scope.

Best of luck.

A lot of guys mount the bi-pod back that far, it allows you to shoot steeper angles if you somewhere other than the concrete slab at your local range. The fact that you use a vertical grip makes most of what your saying suspect.

I also don't think the "you should be happy they are fixing it at all" mentality is right either just because other companies may have worse customer service. The guy spent time and money on a defective product. I am not saying I would expect free ammo, but i sure as hell wouldn't call someone bitching because they are upset. It should have been right from the get go.

 

[samnev]

My 2 cents, 20 in/lbs for ring caps isn't too much. I have been using 20 for years on multiple scope brands without problem.

Same hear, over 20 years with no problem on many different scopes and mounts.

 

[mouse07410]

Same hear, over 20 years with no problem on many different scopes and mounts.

AFAIK, 20 in/lbs shouldn't break anything in a good scope, but I see no reason to torque the scope rings above 12 in/lbs.

Rings-to-base usually go to 50-60 in/lbs.

 

[fuzzytek]

I was setting both my scopes with 15in/#. Both had scopes slipping. First is a generic set that cause a ruined day of shooting. The other set are an old school set of Leupold Mark 4 steel rings. Called Leupold and they torque to 28in/lbs on the rings and 65 to the base. Hearing this is what made me check the first set and noticed slipping there too. So much for not wanting ring marks.

 

[ColdBlood]

Just saw this ancient thing in my profile and felt like a dick that I never chimed back in. In the end, I remounted it and scope was the issue, so they took it back...no harm, no foul. Rifle was a shooter before swapping scopes and I ran the scope on a couple guns to make sure, so I knew the problem wasn't with it.

And, oh, the bipods were back toward the receivers on those guns because they were being fired from tower blinds at short-medium range. First reason is you want the muzzle brake as far out the window as you can get it...forget your ears, from a 14.5" barrel it'll rattle your teeth in an enclosed space like that.

The further from the muzzle the bipod is, the less stability you have because it moves your point of contact (even an AR15 wants to rock like a teeter totter from the recoil). However, it does have the major advantage of making it easier/faster to swing (or pivot) around to make a short range shot, which is especially nice in a tight space. If you're shooting coyotes within 200 yards, sometimes with one sprinting from left to right at 35-40 yards out, giving you no time to move or readjust, you figure out really quickly that the rules are quite different than if you're sniping them at 400+.

If you're shooting for precision, that's definitely not where you want the bipod...but if it's speed/agility you need, and you're firing from a window, that's exactly where you want it (assuming your targets can't shoot back). Basically, you need to find a happy medium between stability and mobility in a scenario like that.

That was before I got my Atlas Silo device about 4 years ago, which is what I've been running ever since. It's basically a little bean bag with barricade teeth on the front end that attaches where the bipod would go...great little invention, rides a window sill a lot better than the legs of a bipod.

 

[oniak]

Have you shot the rifle with a different scope? I would also shoot it without that surefire brake on there. Surefire brakes can do bad things to accuracy sometimes.

 

[PAYDIRT]

Talk to Brianna at SWFA she takes care of business.

 

[Spblademaker]

Thank god. I’ve been waiting 5.5 yrs. now I can unwatch this thread. ?

 

[PAYDIRT]

Thank god. I’ve been waiting 5.5 yrs. now I can unwatch this thread. ?

Good eye lol.

 

[ColdBlood]

Have you shot the rifle with a different scope? I would also shoot it without that surefire brake on there. Surefire brakes can do bad things to accuracy sometimes.

Oh yeah, that was 5+ years ago....that black rifle in the pic (the one wearing the Zeiss in question) is actually quite the shooter, which I didn't really expect from that lightweight stainless barrel. I'll have to post pics of it sometime...it now wears a KAC URX 3.1 handguard, is dipped in Kryptek Mandrake and is wearing a Leupold VX-R patrol. I gave longer range AR duty to one with an 18" barrel.