Rifle Scopes Vertically split rings

[Deleted member 10043]

EGW and Burris signature. The motherfucker is asking for practical advice for a Savage with no name. Nobody gives a fuck what you got talked into buying

 

[MachoKing]

It's a .260 by the way so no serious recoil, plus it's braked.

 

[mdmp5]

seriously, check out NEAR as an option along with everything else

 

[mcfred]

Another data point: I have used Warne vertically-split rings on a variety of rifles since 2004 without issue.

No problems with 3 different Nightforce NXSs, two low-end Vortex Vipers, a couple Leupold and Burris on rifles chambered from .22 Hornet to .338 Edge.
No issues holding zero, no malfunctions or returns to the factory for 'fixing.'
No ring marks on the main body tubes.
No issues even with the QD rings moving scopes between rifles.

What are you guys doing differently? So far it's all conjecture and anedotal evidence that VS rings are at fault for an unknown reason? I'd like to read Lowlight's thread. Anyone got a link for reference?

 

[MarinePMI]

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/dont-snipe-the-messenger.6537714/

 

[mcfred]

Thanks.

*Edit* Where is the subsequent thread where it was "discussed ad nauseum. [Where] all of the questions and points being brought up [were] discussed, answered, argued about, fought over and settled already." according to Lash?

There's a lot that a someone, who can't be bothered to read instructions, can do wrong when given a wrench. Not doubting Lowlight, I just want facts and context.

 

[lash]

In addition, there were discussions in these threads:

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/another-vortex-down.6871711/#post-6902522

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/lessons-learned-precision-rifle-training.6553194/

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/return-to-zero-failures.6483776/page-3#post-6938387

And if you just want to waste some time reading funny drivel, here's another that vaguely deals with the issue:

https://www.snipershide.com/shootin...y-split-rings-thread-disappear.6571456/page-2

And I will repeat myself from my post above (with additions for my own entertainment). There are currently no white papers, scientific studies, government funded boondoggles, or other "Proof" that this is an issue. So I think that everyone that has a problem with this assertion, should go out and support your favorite manufacturer of vertical rings and quit whining and crying and pointing fingers. Like I said before, I choose to use something that works every time without fiddle-fucking around with it. You should do exactly as you damn well please. Who cares what a bunch of forum lackeys have to say anyway?

 

[supercorndogs]

This subject really has my interest now.
I've done pretty thorough forum searching and googling and have found some good info on this.
But I still haven't been able find any thorough discussion about specific rings or mechanisms of failure that weren't conjecture. Could you please direct me to these ad nauseum discussions?

I'm debating whether or not to change my larue vertical mount at this point, but with the sunk cost of the old mount and the additional cost of a new mount, I'd really want to see more specific information, and see what the mechanical evidence is before taking that plunge.

Does your scope pass a tall target and return to zero? If yes there is no reason to change. If no you have a likely culprit that has given others the same problem.

 

[mdmp5]

There are currently no white papers, scientific studies, government funded boondoggles, or other "Proof" that this is an issue

This is Exactly the point I wanted to make but didn’t write enough. I simply stated that frank didn’t single any factor out nor provided a model or mechanism, but just told about his observations. I’ve read Frank’s posts for close to a decade now, and he’s not the kind of writer to ignore science. In this case, he pointed out that he observed a strong correlation between verts and scope failure. When all data is stratified, and there are no confounders present, correlation can be causation.

No we don’t know if everyone had all the correct torque values all of the time, as that data is purely subjective. However, if they did not have correct torque, then we have to assume that a good percentage of guys with standard rings don’t either, but the number of observed scope failures was less, according to what was written. What’s the other scenario? The guys using vert rings tend to be more terrible at following instructions? I think not homes

 

[mcfred]

Thanks guys, sorry to drag it out. Not making accusations or calling BS, just collecting data. if I can get tighter groups just by swapping rings, I'm all for it.

 

[lash]

This is Exactly the point I wanted to make but didn’t write enough. I simply stated that frank didn’t single any factor out nor provided a model or mechanism, but just told about his observations. I’ve read Frank’s posts for close to a decade now, and he’s not the kind of writer to ignore science. In this case, he pointed out that he observed a strong correlation between verts and scope failure. When all data is stratified, and there are no confounders present, correlation can be causation.

No we don’t know if everyone had all the correct torque values all of the time, as that data is purely subjective. However, if they did not have correct torque, then we have to assume that a good percentage of guys with standard rings don’t either, but the number of observed scope failures was less, according to what was written. What’s the other scenario? The guys using vert rings tend to be more terrible at following instructions? I think not homes

Here are some excerpts from some of the links I posted above:

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/return-to-zero-failures.6483776/post-6938736

Warne rings, as explained to me by one of their tech guys, rely on the scope tube flexing in order to hold the scope in place and also remain tight on the base. They are designed to clamp to the rail first, then the top screws are tightened to secure the scope in the rings. IF the scope tube does not "flex", the bottoms of the rings will separate as you tighten the top. This "deforming" of the scope tube affects moving internal parts.

Here's a video of what happens when you replace a scope tube with a steel bar and install ring per the instructions.

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/return-to-zero-failures.6483776/post-6938527

The base has nothing to do with it.

The gimbal, the parallax lenses, all are moving parts in front and behind the erector, you know where the rings go. The turrets push down on the erector which is being pushed back by a spring. if the erector is binding it does not move as prescribed.

In cases where the rings crush the back out of round, you get no issues dialing up and right, only issues coming back down and left. If they crush the front it cuts off the parallax, so you only get a limited amount of adjustment or none at all.

They don't return to zero because the rings impact the movement, doesn't matter the base.

So, I guess what I'm pointing out is that there is an idea as to causation and possibly a reason for correlation, it just hasn't been studied formally (at least that I know of) and published to tie it all together (assuming that is the result of a study).

 

[Lowlight]

The manufacturers are aware of this, the first question I was asked was, "Were these vertically split rings" and the answer was yes.

Then in the explanation of the symptons, it was explained how they pinch the internals and the scopes will actually work UP & RIGHT and not work left and down.

The Left and Down problem is why they did not return to zero. They will track out, but not back. It forced us to design the scope testing tool because it was getting worse. Up in Alaska, there are not a lot of high-end shops, most mail order their scopes and they buy the cheap rings at Three Bear.

We tested this, hardcore across multiple classes and students and saw it first hand.

We tested an entire class of scopes more than once and found them lacking just like the companies said

 

[lash]

Thanks guys, sorry to drag it out. Not making accusations or calling BS, just collecting data. if I can get tighter groups just by swapping rings, I'm all for it.

In a way, it's just as well. We can handle some spirited discussion and maybe this will serve to pull some of the different threads and posts together.

 

[Threadcutter308]

The manufacturers are aware of this, the first question I was asked was, "Were these vertically split rings" and the answer was yes.

Then in the explanation of the symptons, it was explained how they pinch the internals and the scopes will actually work UP & RIGHT and not work left and down.

The Left and Down problem is why they did not return to zero. They will track out, but not back. It forced us to design the scope testing tool because it was getting worse. Up in Alaska, there are not a lot of high-end shops, most mail order their scopes and they buy the cheap rings at Three Bear.

We tested this, hardcore across multiple classes and students and saw it first hand.

View attachment 6888662
We tested an entire class of scopes more than once and found them lacking just like the companies said

Perhaps "we" wish this subject to die off and not be protracted, but I am curious.....

Of the scopes that were found to be affected;

1. Were any of them permanently damaged ?

2. If undamaged, were they (re)mounted in "traditional" mounts and did they work correctly/as designed ? (I seem to remember seeing there were some that did work after being installed into "traditional" ring/mount setups....). There's no doubt that "pinching" (and releasing) the internals is a bad thing.

 

[Threadcutter308]

Here are some excerpts from some of the links I posted above:

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/return-to-zero-failures.6483776/post-6938736



https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/return-to-zero-failures.6483776/post-6938527



So, I guess what I'm pointing out is that there is an idea as to causation and possibly a reason for correlation, it just hasn't been studied formally (at least that I know of) and published to tie it all together (assuming that is the result of a study).

Just watched the video.......Jesus, that's terrible.

 

[Lowlight]

We swapped some out and they worked

we did not have enough spare parts to truly test this aspect of it on grand scale

We usually carry spare scopes in our rings to replace problems, we did not carry spare rings and to be honest you cannot slow a class down more than we already do fixing stuff

This last class we had 2 scopes with issues, we just replace them with spare scopes, we don't attempt to diagnose them, takes too long.

 

[MachoKing]

Here are some excerpts from some of the links I posted above:

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/return-to-zero-failures.6483776/post-6938736



https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/return-to-zero-failures.6483776/post-6938527



So, I guess what I'm pointing out is that there is an idea as to causation and possibly a reason for correlation, it just hasn't been studied formally (at least that I know of) and published to tie it all together (assuming that is the result of a study).

Fuck. Those Warne rings are going right in the damn garbage. If they fucked up my scope I'm going to be pissed.

 

[MachoKing]

The manufacturers are aware of this, the first question I was asked was, "Were these vertically split rings" and the answer was yes.

Then in the explanation of the symptons, it was explained how they pinch the internals and the scopes will actually work UP & RIGHT and not work left and down.

The Left and Down problem is why they did not return to zero. They will track out, but not back. It forced us to design the scope testing tool because it was getting worse. Up in Alaska, there are not a lot of high-end shops, most mail order their scopes and they buy the cheap rings at Three Bear.

We tested this, hardcore across multiple classes and students and saw it first hand.

View attachment 6888662
We tested an entire class of scopes more than once and found them lacking just like the companies said

Frank, this is the problem I am having! The scope, in the Warne rings, will not dial left at all. Hopefully it's not permanently damaged.

 

[lash]

In my case, there was damage to the internals. The focus/parallax became frozen up to the point that it would have taken a wrench to move it at all. Understand that this was a scope that previously had been used for over two years in all kinds of matches asy main rifle scope. When I got a good deal on a scope with a better reticle, this was moved onto my .338 and I bought the ADM mount because I wanted 20 MOA more for ELR use.

Fortunately for me, Sightron fixed it for free, with my only cost being shipping one way and two weeks time. It now sets in Seekins rings again and is fine.

This was about 2 to 2-1/2 years ago, so well before Frank's experience and subsequent information. At the time, there was no definition of the issue, but I suspected the mount might have something to do with it, so moved it along.

 

[WYcoyote]

I read enough to ditch my Warnes a while back.

 

[carbonbased]

We swapped some out and they worked

we did not have enough spare parts to truly test this aspect of it on grand scale

We usually carry spare scopes in our rings to replace problems, we did not carry spare rings and to be honest you cannot slow a class down more than we already do fixing stuff

This last class we had 2 scopes with issues, we just replace them with spare scopes, we don't attempt to diagnose them, takes too long.

I can totally see how the regular Warne rings crush the scope a bit. Yuk.

But their quick release versions operate differently. Did you see the QR ones cause scope problems too?

For those interested, warne maxima qr picatinny rings work this way (I have a pair): you disassemble the ring, put scope in, tighten upper and lower portions. Then you place the ring on the picatinny rail and finger tighten the QR. Since the QR and scope tube gripping are separate functions (i.e. the lower screws would resist any further tightening), I don’t think the quick release lever would exert any more force on the scope. Whereas non-QR Warne rings combine scope gripping and base gripping functions.

But I’ve been wrong before…

 

[jasonliu]

It's 2021, I can't believe the Warne vertical split rings are still on the market nowadays.
I recently ran into problems with these vertical split rings: https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/cabela’s-covenant-7-issue.6991195/post-9594132