-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Spuhr/ARC mount and Vortex Gen II Razor
- Thread starter SFree
- Start date
Different rings designs will have different torque specs. Just because different rings have different torque specs doesn’t necessarily mean they’d impacting the scope with more or less force.
Those specs are likely for Vortex rings. As diverdon and Afkirby have said, the torque specs are dependent upon the design of the rings/mount.
The dude answering that email probably has no clue what ARC rings are if he said 18 would be fine
Also. They want to sell their product not endorse something else
Vortex nor any other scope maker would/should put out ring torque specs for every ring available.
I have a Razor Gen 2 with ARC rings and I torqued it to ARC spec (either 50 or 55 inch pounds, cannot recall). No issues whatsoever.
I have a Razor Gen 2 with ARC rings and I torqued it to ARC spec (either 50 or 55 inch pounds, cannot recall). No issues whatsoever.
What matters to the scope is not the torque on the screw but the clamping force on the scope tube. The ARC has one screw to tighten rather than four.... so because there are only one quarter as many screws would you think that you need more torque or less torque to produce the same clamping force on the scope tube?
Now pretend you are an machinist: A screw is a simple machine where an inclined plane is wrapped around a cylinder. In smaller screws you have the plane wrapped more tightly. [ the pitch of the screw is higher ] Thus a smaller will generate more clamping force with the same torque than a larger screw would. Remember where I told you that the ARC has a larger screw-- well the larger screw has a courser pitch so it needs more torque applied to generate the same clamping force.
You also must consider the clamping elements. The conventional ring has two elements (call them top and bottom) drawn together by four screws. The ARC has three elements uniformly under tension from its single screw. Go get two eggs out of your fridge. lay one on your countertop, put a hand on top and hold the other one in your other hand. begin to squeeze and press with identical amounts of pressure, which egg broke first?
Finally, Ted (the ARC guy) started making scope mounts as a way to convince people of the quality of his brand so that he could be successful when he introduced his actions. Prior to starting his own company Ted was an aerospace engineer. So the quality and functionality of his mounts was crucial to the developement of his brand. Most of us think he got it right.
Now 55 inch pounds is the recommendation. If I was putting one on a .300 WM that is what I would use. But for the scopes I just put on .223's I just used 45 inlbs. If the scope ever moves (I highly doubt it) then I will go to 55.
Optic manufacturers are not going to care or recommend the torque requirements for any mount or rings they don’t make or don’t endorse.
ARC are fine to torque down to 55.
Also, rule of thumb, listen to the ring/mount maker specs as long as it’s a reputable company.
ARC are fine to torque down to 55.
Also, rule of thumb, listen to the ring/mount maker specs as long as it’s a reputable company.
Thank you for the replies, gentlemen.
Playing “devils advocate “ I guess because I have both ARC and Spuhr products. I’ve not had a problem with any scope in ARC rings, but using Spuhr for the first time so curious as to results with Vortex.
Playing “devils advocate “ I guess because I have both ARC and Spuhr products. I’ve not had a problem with any scope in ARC rings, but using Spuhr for the first time so curious as to results with Vortex.
Same here, with the exception of Spuhr mounts. They are of an equal quality as ARC. Most of my precision rifles wear ARC rings, with two wearing Razor HD’s set to ARC torque specs. No issues whatsoever.
Similar threads
