Scope ring alignment and lapping

I had a set of rings that I bought that setup for and I am not sure how much good it did. When I reversed the rings (front to back) I think it helped more than the lapping. Have not used it since. That was the first and only time I used the set.
 
I should add: I am using Leupold rings that have "anti-slip grooves" cut into the mating surface. Now I am wondering if lapping will remove much of the ring material leaving me without sufficient tension. In other words, would I need to remove so much material that I won't have enough room left to properly secure the rings to the scope body.
 
Does anyone have experience using the Wheeler Engineering ring alignment and lapping kit?

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/2130187492

I am setting up a new rifle and scope, and this kit is relatively cheap.

My brother bought a similar Wheeler kit with 1", 30mm & 34mm bars plus a torque wrench. Guess who got the stand alone torque wrench he already owned, plus the ability to borrow the lapping kit?

We've lapped several sets of rings and we didn't have to remove much on any. It gives peace of mind to the OCD traits but it's most important value is the cheap insurance that a scewed set of rings isn't going to ruin an expensive scope. Yeah, you'll probably lose some of those grooves if your rings have them.

Now that I have access to the set, I wouldn't mount any scope without lapping the rings first, but if you're only mounting a $100 scope to a $400 rifle for whitetail deer out to 200 yards, I wouldn't bother.
 
I should add: I am using Leupold rings that have "anti-slip grooves" cut into the mating surface. Now I am wondering if lapping will remove much of the ring material leaving me without sufficient tension. In other words, would I need to remove so much material that I won't have enough room left to properly secure the rings to the scope body.

Funny that you are using Leupold rings, that is the ones I had problems with.
 
My brother bought a similar Wheeler kit with 1", 30mm & 34mm bars plus a torque wrench. Guess who got the stand alone torque wrench he already owned, plus the ability to borrow the lapping kit?

We've lapped several sets of rings and we didn't have to remove much on any. It gives peace of mind to the OCD traits but it's most important value is the cheap insurance that a scewed set of rings isn't going to ruin an expensive scope. Yeah, you'll probably lose some of those grooves if your rings have them.

Now that I have access to the set, I wouldn't mount any scope without lapping the rings first, but if you're only mounting a $100 scope to a $400 rifle for whitetail deer out to 200 yards, I wouldn't bother.

Lucky!

This is a hunting rifle, but I am want the peace of mind aspect. The scope is a Leupold VX-5HD, so it makes sense to me that I spend the extra time to ensure it won't slip or mark up the tube.
 
Funny that you are using Leupold rings, that is the ones I had problems with.

What issues did you have? The bases that I have are also Leupold, and have windage adjustment meant for the rear base. The fool that mounted it at Bass pro put the windage adjustment base at the front. I didn't even notice until I got home and looked at the windage screws up front, scratching my head.
 
I could never get the scope zeroed. After lapping them still could not get them to zero and hold. Took it to a smith and he changed the front mount to the rear and have not had a problem since. I have no idea why but it is shooting sub MOA now. And the gun is not a big caliber, it is a 204 Ruger.

Also, I could not use the pointer bars that came in the set because of the distance they needed to work.
 
Last edited:
I could never get the scope zeroed. After lapping them still could not get them to zero and hold. Took it to a smith and he changed the front mount to the rear and have not had a problem since. I have no idea why but it is shooting sub MOA now. And the gun is not a big caliber, it is a 204 Ruger.

Also, I could not use the pointer bars that came in the set because of the distance they needed to work.

Got it. Do you remember if the bases were like this (windage adjustment rear)? I don't see the point of this feature for duplex reticles. I assume that if the receiver and barrel were that far out of alignment, it would be a way to get the scope aligned to the barrel.
upload_2020-1-29_12-0-2.png
 
Before ya'll go grinding on the rings you should try them both ways on the receiver and confirm using the alignment bars. Swap front for rear and check alignment again. Lapping should only remove ridges and burrs, not totally be used to align the scope within the rings. Read the instructions!!
 
Before ya'll go grinding on the rings you should try them both ways on the receiver and confirm using the alignment bars. Swap front for rear and check alignment again. Lapping should only remove ridges and burrs, not totally be used to align the scope within the rings. Read the instructions!!

Right, but some bases are designed with a rear windage adjustment (like the ones I have). In theory, swapping the adjustable base to the front of the receiver could make the scope farther out of center alignment (barrel and optical center).

If the rings mount to a picatinny base, then yes swapping could offer better alignment of the rings.
 
Right, but some bases are designed with a rear windage adjustment (like the ones I have). In theory, swapping the adjustable base to the front of the receiver could make the scope farther out of center alignment (barrel and optical center).

If the rings mount to a picatinny base, then yes swapping could offer better alignment of the rings.

Duh... there are always exceptions.......
 
Does anyone have experience using the Wheeler Engineering ring alignment and lapping kit?

Extensive

Because you asked.

In the past this topic or issue has been very polarizing both here and is on the street as well, Face to Face.

The primary thought / belief or opinion is, if one spends Large Money ( 100 plus to ,, 300 something ) on scope rings lapping is not necessary or required.

With the Wheeler or other rig alignment devices, they serve the purpose and ( for the most part ) work well.

I would at least encourage shooters to check alignment with the Pointed Rods.

While on the pointed rods, I cut mine to a FLAT as for me it is easier to catch minor misalignment~s when butting FLATs rather than Points.

One other thing I would encourage shooters to check is surface contact to scope tube using a fluid, of sorts.

One of the pics is of a barrel that I checked fit to an upper using "Lay Out Fluid."
The pattern of contact ( or not ) is self explanatory and clearly visible. FWIW, the upper in question ( not pictured ) was not cheap, nor was it $400.00. Continued, when I contacted the upper manufacture, I was told I am the only one that ( seems to ) have a problem. The Moral being I am a firm believer in checking your stuff to verify no matter the manufacture~s.

Hum, sill on lapping uppers, I would check Wheeler's upper lapping devices because some are not 100% acceptable.
Concerning Wheeler Upper Lapping Tools, I did call Wheeler ( part of The Visa Group ) and brought my concerns to their attention. I was told ( SADLY ) that they (Wheeler ) are aware of the of the issue.
I asked why they are still selling the Upper Lapping Devices, answer from the Wheeler Rep, "I don't Know."

Anyway, back to scope lapping,

In a few cases I've run across a few sets that didn't even line up properly and one set was out of wack just enough it was visually deceiving and another time an alignment issue was aggravated by a rail being out of spec.
So, from my perspective, it's at least worth it to check alignment.

To lap or not can be checked first with a fluid, mentioned above.

I've also attached a pic that shows somewhat moderately extreme situation in obtaining a good or better surface / contact area on ring~s. Again the area~s are visual and with "LOW Spots" ( if you are going to use rings in question ) I look for 75% contact area and will fill in LOW Spots with Slivers Hockey Tape.


Hope This Helps

"Safe Shooting"

Ring lap 3.jpg ................................Barrel seat 6.jpg
 
Does anyone have experience using the Wheeler Engineering ring alignment and lapping kit?

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/2130187492

I am setting up a new rifle and scope, and this kit is relatively cheap.

It's a good easy to use kit. This shouldn't hurt your grip grooves, when lapping the rings you generally don't remove a lot of material...…just work the tool back and forth a few times until it loosens up a little..... should be 5-10 times. Slightly tighten the rings and repeat about 3-4 more times and that should be all that's needed. When you're done, wipe out all of the lapping compound and ..... mark the rings as which is front/rear and facing what direction, as they are now a matched set.
 
I use em, probably improperly.

I use the pointers to pick which way is best to start, then I torque down the lower halves. Install the upper halves and start polishing. You’d think that the goal would be to get an even set of marks across the entirety of the inside of both rings, and it would be if you started with a small lap and worked up to size instead of starting with a lap at size and adjust the rings. Anyway, if you grind to what looks like more than 50% contact I think you’ll likely have ruined your rings.
 
Everything in moderation........... The idea is not to make the entire surface of the ring shine, it's to take most of the high spots out. It will also take burrs off that cause scope ring marks. The receiver, the base and the rings are a system. If one of those is a little whacky such as the base not mating perfectly to the receiver,or the base groves not being milled perfectly, or the clamping system of the rings not perfect it will affect how much you need to lap. If you have to get deep into the rings to get good bearing surface, you need to look at something else. I've probably lapped around 50 set of rings. Most were high quality, some were bargain basement. I only recall a couple that I actually quit on and switched out the bases.
 
I use em, probably improperly.

I use the pointers to pick which way is best to start, then I torque down the lower halves. Install the upper halves and start polishing. You’d think that the goal would be to get an even set of marks across the entirety of the inside of both rings, and it would be if you started with a small lap and worked up to size instead of starting with a lap at size and adjust the rings. Anyway, if you grind to what looks like more than 50% contact I think you’ll likely have ruined your rings.

"Larry says" 70-80% contact.

( I read it on the internet so it's got to be true )




.
 
I would not buy low-quality rings with a low-quality base. By not buying stuff that needs you to adjust it, you get the right item and performance everytime. Too many better options for near same price.

Example A
Made in Sanford, NC
https://www.dnzproducts.com/game-reaper/

Thanks for the heads up. The one piece base/ring combo will be better for me in the long run than the STD Leupold base and ring combo that I current;y have. At least with a one piece, if I need to remove the rings and base, there is less chance of alignment issues when reinstalling.

With the Leupold design, I would loose all alignment when removing the rings from their bases, since they both swivel on the bases. In fact, the frong ring has to be inserted 90° just to get started.
 
I don't lap my mounts. I've always had good experience using one piece machined mounts/bases together (Badger Ordnance and Spuhr). While I realize they're a lot of money, Spuhr did release a hunting model of their mount that is lighter and about $135 cheaper than the IDSM.

It is nice to just bolt it on and go. The IDSM's I own have six bolts per side that lock the scope in place with four bolts locking the mount to the receiver.

If you're not super concerned with precision, or are not generally shooting long distances, lapped rings would be ok.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the heads up. The one piece base/ring combo will be better for me in the long run than the STD Leupold base and ring combo that I current;y have. At least with a one piece, if I need to remove the rings and base, there is less chance of alignment issues when reinstalling.

With the Leupold design, I would loose all alignment when removing the rings from their bases, since they both swivel on the bases. In fact, the frong ring has to be inserted 90° just to get started.

The more modern designs are a hell of a better system. Same is true with what @Grim posted too. But the rail and ring combo can be over kill for a more simple setup.
 
The more modern designs are a hell of a better system. Same is true with what @Grim posted too. But the rail and ring combo can be over kill for a more simple setup.
Agreed on overkill. It was installed on a .300WinMag, so I was concerned with slip from recoil.

I am buying a Spuhr IDSM for the Sig Sauer Cross 6.5CM just for the precision rifle side of use; it can be a bit of a pig in that area since the rifle itself will be on the light side.
 
I just ordered a DNZ Game Reaper that I will be trying out.

View attachment 187282

With the DNZ design, you do not have to worry about the sloppy machine work at the firearm factory. The off center drilling of the scope mount screw holes is why you needed to lap the rings. Back in the day a receiver with the dovetail cut in was a hell of a leap forward then a factory jig for holes. the DNZ design take the stress of miss alignment on the cross bar, (back the quality aspect @Grim talked about) with a one piece base. and the torque affect is removed that the alignment pin things try to fix.

trust me, you will be happy.
 
With the DNZ design, you do not have to worry about the sloppy machine work at the firearm factory. The off center drilling of the scope mount screw holes is why you needed to lap the rings. Back in the day a receiver with the dovetail cut in was a hell of a leap forward then a factory jig for holes. the DNZ design take the stress of miss alignment on the cross bar, (back the quality aspect @Grim talked about) with a one piece base. and the torque affect is removed that the alignment pin things try to fix.

trust me, you will be happy.
Agreed. This will be leaps and bounds better. Just need to get the scope leveled correctly, but that's not as a significant issue that you were dealing with earlier. It is one of Spuhr's premium points, where it has an engineered tool to assist in leveling the scope, but again, if you have a scope with an out of alignment body, it's not going to help much.
 
I wanted to give a bit of update. I installed the DNZ game reaper, and was impressed with the quality of the construction and finish. As mentioned previously, this design eliminates the need for aligning the rings since they are made from the same piece of material, thus they are already in alignment. However, curiosity got the best of me so I decided to see what lapping would do (since I already had a lapping kit on hand). I started light to see where the finish was being removed. It appeared to me that the finish was being removed on the outward most edges. I know that's a bit hard to describe, so let me elaborate:

On the rear rings, the rearward half of the ring surfaces (toward the gun's butt stock) were being removed. On the front rings, the forward half of the ring surfaces (toward the muzzle) were being removed. I kept going until about half of the finish was removed on both ring sets. I used a punch to mark the front ring cap and rear ring caps, so that they could be identified if I ever need to remove the scope in the future.

In my opinion, the only advantage that I might get from lapping this style mount would be reduced the scope marks after repeated recoil. Time will tell if this is true or not. Needless to say, I am impressed with this new mount system.
 
the only advantage that I might get from lapping this style mount would be reduced the scope marks after repeated recoil.

Preferably, it's desirable to get as much true surface area in contact with the scope tube to grip / hold the scope in place.

Scope Marks , in the form of "Pinch Marks" are a sign of improper mounting.


I have optics that have "Scope Marks" and they are even and consistent scuff marks with NO displaced material ~ metal from the clamping area.
 
Back
Top Bottom