Rifle Scopes Scope Clearance: Barely Enough Room for a $1 Bill?

[HumbleEinstein]

I mounted my Vortex Razor GenII 4.5-27x with Seekins 1" rings over an M24 6.5 CM barrel. With the aadmount caps, which I have already sanded down as much as possible, I barely have enough room to slide a dollar bill between the scope and barrel. The scope cap is not contacting the barrel, but it is extremely close. I can just barely see light coming through.

For you guys with a lot of experience running low scopes: Do you expect I will run into an issue?

Thanks.

 

[agbm]

As long as it does not flex and touch you are good to go.

 

[LawnMM]

I'd get a higher set of rings.

 

[918v]

Mee too.

 

[Elite_KG]

With the scope cap removed it looks fine to me. If your barrel or mount flexes that much you have bigger problems. You can shave the bottom of the scope cap if it is the flip style and will not be removed during firing.

 

[Toast]

This is my Beast atop a DTA 338LM. I won't shoot it like this. I removed the sun shade and it gave it much more clearance. Last thing I want to do is beat up a fine scope/glass. Get yourself some higher Nightforce ultralight titanium rings. If you want stronger/bigger, Spuhr. I LOVE my DTA rings. Rock solid.

Don't chance it. Get higher rings.

 

[HumbleEinstein]

Does anyone have actual experience running a scope this low either with or without issue? So far I'm mostly seeing expressions of caution. I do appreciate it, but I'm more interested in experiences.

 

[918v]

No one should have experience running a scope that low. It's too low. Remember that when you fire everything vibrates. The scope too.

 

[LawnMM]

It's borderline without the cap, its too low with it, sell those rings, buy a higher set

 

[0311 Hesco]

Just shoot the thing. It's not touching.

 

[rainer]

I have the same issue on my Sako A7-308. I was concerned just as you are. After sighting it in I have removed the scope to see whether there are signs of contact - there are none.
Stopped using scope caps years ago and switching everything to Scopeshields(of Alaska). They are more practical for hunting uses than caps.

 

[HumbleEinstein]

I'm going to suck it up and get new rings. I never get them right the first time. Too bad I sanded the hell out of my aadmount caps for no reason. To their credit, I can affirm that they manufacture these things about as thin as you can get then. There just isn't that much material to remove. Mostly what came off is just the finish.

 

[rmfield]

A dollar bill is about .004" and that is probably not enough for deflection of the barrel and scope tube. I think you need .015" minimum and preferably .025" for your setup. Anything more than that is unnecessary. It appears that you have plenty of clearance from the scope bell, so you might consider a different cap setup if you can't get the Aadmount caps to go.

 

[918v]

You could always file a relief cut on the barrel. Just kidding.

 

[damoncali]

Somewhere on here someone posted some high speed photography of a scope flexing during firing. After watching that, I go with a minimum of 0.100" clearance.

 

[swamp donkey]

I had a very small clearance on my TRG 42 where I could 'just' squeeze a five pound note through. After about 20 shots, I removed the scope, and the finish was wearing off after contact with the barrel during firing. New mounts, and it shoots tighter, so it was obviously doing something it shouldn't.


Regards

Pete


www.varmintinguk.co.uk

 

[19Scout77]

This is my Beast atop a DTA 338LM. I won't shoot it like this. I removed the sun shade and it gave it much more clearance. Last thing I want to do is beat up a fine scope/glass. Get yourself some higher Nightforce ultralight titanium rings. If you want stronger/bigger, Spuhr. I LOVE my DTA rings. Rock solid.

Don't chance it. Get higher rings.

Id be very curious as to how a free floating handguard such as that found on a dta is going to flex when fired. That would require one helluva barrel whip.

 

[samnev]

I wouldn't take the chance of possibly damaging the scope with the clearance shown. I think you made the right decision to get higher rings.

 

[damoncali]

Id be very curious as to how a free floating handguard such as that found on a dta is going to flex when fired. That would require one helluva barrel whip.

It won't move much, but the scope will.

 

[Rob01]

Shave the bottom of the scope cap if it bothers you but that scope is plenty far off the barrel from that picture. Have had more than one like that and no problems. Example


And before anyone does a request to not post that stupid ass video of the scope apparently flexing in slow motion. It's BS and if you actually look at it it's the mount flexing and you get the "bending pencil" effect on scope. That rifle above will have nothing like that.

 

[damoncali]

Semantics. The point is that stuff moves. Scopes, mounts, barrels, stocks. They all move. Give it a little clearance.

 

[shootin]

This one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5pVya7eask

Regardless of what's flexing the distance between the scope and other components is definitely fluctuating which means a little distance is a good idea.

 

[holy cow]

This dude is shooting a fuckin cannon.

 

[my human host]

That looks closer to 15 thou clearance to me and probably 60 or so to the bell itself. It's your scope and you are free to do as you like.

 

[Mute]

I've had scopes mounted that close before. I've never had a problem.

 

[rainer]

The gap is barely visible, there is no contact at all.



The ScopeShield substituting caps.

 

[HumbleEinstein]

This one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5pVya7eask

Regardless of what's flexing the distance between the scope and other components is definitely fluctuating which means a little distance is a good idea.

I have to agree with Rob on this. You can clearly see the back of the rail flexing up. The only thing this video proves is that that's a poor design for a rifle.

I really like the scope where it is. In light of the real life experiences of some of the posters above and my conversation with vortex today, I think I'm going to run the scope where it is and see what happens.

I'm confident that the bell has more than enough clearance. I've been unsure on if the cap would touch under recoil.

Unfortunately, I think I've already removed as much material from the bottom of the cap as I can. The integral rail, relatively light recoil of 6.5 CM, brake, and heft of the overall package work in my favor.

I'll probably start firing the rifle without a front cap. Then I'll add the cap and see if POI shifts. If there is no shift then it will be safe to assume it's good to go.

I'll report back.

 

[rmfield]

Good plan.

 

[Javelin]

This one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5pVya7eask

Regardless of what's flexing the distance between the scope and other components is definitely fluctuating which means a little distance is a good idea.

That's a damn 50bmg automatic and the entire receiver is flexing. They are notoriously hard on scopes and everything else. I doubt a 30cal is going to do a 1/10th of that movement even at the tip of the barrel lol

 

[win.308stealth]

You could always file a relief cut on the barrel. Just kidding.

I have actually seen that.

 

[HumbleEinstein]

I have actually seen that.

I suppose a perfectly centered straight flute right down the top center of the barrel could accomplish just that. Perhaps when I re-barrel.

 

[win.308stealth]

I suppose a perfectly centered straight flute right down the top center of the barrel could accomplish just that. Perhaps when I re-barrel.

No. This guy used a grinder and just took out a chunk of barrel.

 

[918v]

Barrels are consumable.

 

[shootin]

I usually just flute my scopes

 

[Jummy]

I found this pic from the Texas PRS Club On Facebook. I don't think you will have a problem as this guy uses this rifle for matches.

The rifle belongs to a Paul Reid.

 

[Rob01]

This one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5pVya7eask

Regardless of what's flexing the distance between the scope and other components is definitely fluctuating which means a little distance is a good idea.

That is a totally different rifle than the OP. Can you not see the difference?

 

[Rob01]

Semantics. The point is that stuff moves. Scopes, mounts, barrels, stocks. They all move. Give it a little clearance.

No it's called years of experience in shooting rifles with clearance like that. I am not talking from a theoretical point. I am talking from fact.

 

[peaceatwar]

Does anyone have actual experience running a scope this low either with or without issue? So far I'm mostly seeing expressions of caution. I do appreciate it, but I'm more interested in experiences.

I think everyone who has their scope all high and shit off their rifle is crazy. LOW is good! NOT BAD. I run my scopes with as minimal clearance as possible. Hell I sold my Spuhr Mount and run Spurh rings because I could notice the extra 0.18" and it bothered me.

TO each his or her own.

 

[JMGlasgow]

I had a Vortex PST that was closer than that. No contact, and no wandering zeroes.

 

[damoncali]

The bottom line is that if you run .003" of clearance, the scope will hit the barrel from time to time - quite possibly every shot. Up to you to decide if that's bad or not. As I said before, I leave a gap. To each his own.

 

[Rob01]

That is no where near .003" of clearance. It's more than enough to not hit the barrel.

 

[wvlapua]

Just leave it alone. It's not like you have a pencil weight barrel, or a rifle with alot of recoil. That is a stiff contour barrel and a pussy cat cartridge.

 

[perkantino]

I think everyone who has their scope all high and shit off their rifle is crazy. LOW is good! NOT BAD. I run my scopes with as minimal clearance as possible. Hell I sold my Spuhr Mount and run Spurh rings because I could notice the extra 0.18" and it bothered me.

TO each his or her own.

Why is low good? Can you explain?

 

[0311 Hesco]

The bottom line is that if you run .003" of clearance, the scope will hit the barrel from time to time - quite possibly every shot. Up to you to decide if that's bad or not. As I said before, I leave a gap. To each his own.

No, the bottom line is there is more that .003" there and like Rob said, experience with shooting with clearances like that tells you that his rifle/scope clearance is fine. Internet warriors bring up the hypothetical and theoretical and the hyper-ridiculous. To err on the safe side is good no doubt about that, but when does erring on the safe side become just dumb? No disrespect meant with this, but c'mon man.

 

[shootin]

That is a totally different rifle than the OP. Can you not see the difference?

Uh yes... I can see that... I was asking if that's the video you were referring to.

 

[Rob01]

Uh yes... I can see that... I was asking if that's the video you were referring to.

Sorry. Yes that was the video that always gets posted in topics like this and very rarely is relevant to the matter at hand.

 

[damoncali]

Yeah, that is not .003". But a dollar bill is. I'm just saying leave some clearance or risk the consequences of the scope hitting the barrel, whatever those may be. I don't think that's terribly controversial. I can't get a good sight picture on a high mag scope without a properly sized/adjusted comb anyhow, so I don't see what all the fuss is about.

 

[Irokcrawl]

Does anyone have actual experience running a scope this low either with or without issue? So far I'm mostly seeing expressions of caution. I do appreciate it, but I'm more interested in experiences.

My NF Beast on my Carbon XLR has just a sliver of light under the objective and ive tried to flex it into the handguard and its rock solid so its staying. Ive had zero problems with probably 1K rounds down that specific rifle/optic combo and its held zero perfectly, tracks perfectly and has showed zero signs of actually touching. Id run it..

 

[Rob01]

The fuss is about people telling the OP he needs higher rings just because there might be a problem. People who haven't used gear like that. People who have scopes set up like that and using them without issue are saying it's fine and the other group is arguing the actual use experience. That's the fuss.

 

[HumbleEinstein]

I got my busted dremel tool working again and managed to remove the last bit of material that can possibly be taken off. Now I have just over .013" of clearance. I can fit three $20 bills through when they are stretched thin. Considering how much this rig cost, I should be doing these tests with $100 bills.

I'm feeling better and better about this. I love how low the scope is. It's much more comfortable to get behind than my XLR which has a smaller bell and 1.26" height rings.