Scope mounting question

[9245]

I just mounted my scope recently, despite some hiccups I think I have it level, but the process made me wonder, why hasn’t the industry made it simpler?

Why must scope tubes be round on the outside? Why not have a machined spot that would interface directly with a scope mount so it would be level the first time every time without having to mess with levels and plumb bobs? Is there something I’m missing?

I saw a few old military scopes that were like that, flat on the bottom. Others that even had the bases machined right in to the tube itself. It seems like a smarter system. Why can’t a modern scope come with an integral picatinny mount for example? Or just be machined flat on the bottom and fit with matching shaped rings?

 

[Makinchips208]

Manufacturing that would likely be more difficult the way scopes are currently made anyways.

And, Square or not adjustable mounting solutions would also cause problems for many applications, due to irregularities in receivers, mounts, rails, etc. As it is now you can at least get it level.

Nightforce installs their reticles level to the bottom of the center section, below the turrets. So a feeler gauge set or playing cards etc between the scope and rail can be used to get it close enough for most users.
I would guess other manufacturers do something similar since there isn’t mucin else flat on the exterior of the scope?