Ok! Now I can see it! Thanks for dumbing it down fer me..
Printable View
Ok! Now I can see it! Thanks for dumbing it down fer me..
Quote:
Originally Posted by C Ward
it shouldn't squeeze out all the compound, it should leave just what's needed to fill in the spaces, right?
Let me see if my explanation skills are working. I might exaggerate a bit to make the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBelly
With the front of the base secured there was no gap under the Front of the base but the rear of the base stuck up .005".
I could tighten the rear screws and it would pull the base down tight in the rear. But, in doing so, technically you are flexing or distorting the rail .005" to close that gap.
If the mount was tightened down it would squeeze nearly all of the compound out and would be bedded in with the five thousandths distortion.
By by leaving the rear of the base loose you have not induced the stress in the base. Once the "bedding compound" sets under that .005" gap you no longer have a gap. So, when you tighten it down, since their is no gap there is no distortion to the base.
I thought that's what lapping the rings did?Quote:
Originally Posted by C Ward
I'm also curious if the receiver and base were checked for trueness? Perhaps the base is wonky and just torquing it to the receiver makes it straight?
Understand completely, that's a good explanation. Has a torqued base been a problem for this rifle in the past? Have you had this problem with other rifles in the past?Quote:
Originally Posted by ray1970
also, once the compound is set, I assumed you're going to re-thread the holes to alleviate any issues with their perfectly-perpendicular-yet-true-to-the-bore that may or may not now be present......
I'm not doubting any of your skills, Ray. It's really not my intention. Bedding a scope base just seems, to me, like pole-vaulting over a mouse turd.
I've always tested to see if everything tightens up, and if it shoots, then problem solved. I'm pretty nerdy, and this thread only feeds that......my wife doesn't thank you, as now I feel compelled to watch you do this and then consider doing it on my LR bolt gun.
You don't want to apply any torque to the base screws when you bed because then the tolerance stacking you are trying to correct for will be in the finished product once it sets up . On all rifles where the front and rear scope base mounting surfaces are on a different plane no 2 rifles are alike . Remington is especially bad about this because they finish the rear reliever bridge on a belt sander . This is why 2 piece bases have no place on a precision rifle .
Bedding the base also serves to give closer to if not 100% contact between the receiver and the base which makes things less likely to shift around and the mounting screws to shoot loose .
Lapping the rings can correct for very small problems with the scope mounting plane not being straight . In my book if you buy quality rings and bases and mount everything right its a waste of time . Also any of the aluminum rings , there are some very good aluminum rings on the market , you can not lap because it destroys the anodizing and ruins the rings . On all scope rings the dimension of the bore is what sets the clamping force on the scope tube , change that dimension and the clamping force isn't right and the scope moves .
Every one of my rifles without a built in scope rail has the scope base bedded to the receiver .
Wouldn't bother me if you were.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBelly
I was only making this thread so anyone interested could follow along with my journey.
I totally understand not everyone is going to agree with my methods or my thought process.
I've always kind of marched to my own beat anyways.
The proof is in the pudding as they say. I guess we'll have to see how she shoots when I get it all done. I have high hopes for it but I suppose I could end up disappointed in the end.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray1970
Its a good a noble journey Ray. I like asking the questions and have the answers up here.
A guy on the old SnipersHide did it with his LMT MWS, and it was a great reference for everyone to call upon. Frankly, the real utility is that most folks don't have the stones to just tear something apart and use their own two hands to make something better.
I say, "Bravo, Ray"
Subscribed for reference as I begin building up my Savage 12 LRP in 6.5CM.
XLR Element chassis is what I plan to use as well.
C Ward knows a lot about long range shooting, he is a valuable resource.
I like mine so far. Even though I haven't actually shot the thing. It seems very well engineered and made. Also nice to support a business in our state.Quote:
Originally Posted by Planner
He seems pretty knowledgeable as far as I'm concerned. I'd definitely give any advice he gives some serious thought.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delfuego
Quote:
He seems pretty knowledgeable as far as I'm concerned. I'd definitely give any advice he gives some serious thought.
Oh, he knows his shit. Just look at his scores in Pueblo and Raton. While we haven't properly introduced ourselves, when he's shooting, I know I'm losing [Beer]
Come find me sometime , just look for the big angry old opinionated asshole, mostly true , but I don't bite .
I'm horrible with names so don't feel bad if I don't remember for a while .
Really come ask questions . We all started from the same spot and went through the same issues . The gear choices that we make now are what works reliably and holds up to the abuse of the field style matches .
The learning curve on the LR stuff is steep and can be expensive , asking questions can ease the pain some . Way easier in person , especially Sat in Raton , than typing on the internet .
Agreed, my first Raton match was a great learning experience . In hindsight it cost me a lot of money though. After that match I tore my rifle apart and built a purpose built rifle. I still suck, but It's a ton of fun and super humbling all at the same time .
I will be at the next Raton match. I'll find you and pick your brain for a bit. I've never shown up on Saturday. What happens? Practice? I always show up Sunday tired and full of coffee. I'm sure that don't help.
Sat is set up and the site in range is open for 2 hours . Then dinner and BS time at the hotel .
Walking the terrain for set up is a good tool , you can feel what the wind is doing at the targets and see all the features that funnel and shield it .
The game is all about the wind , getting good data is easy with all the software available now .
Absolutely. Seems like a better option than spending time and effort getting the original H&S precision stock ready to do something it is not well designed to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by ray1970
I have bedded several of my scope mounts, but I only bother when they have a "large" gap.
As has already been said, bedding a scope mount is about relieving stress, the same way bedding an action in a stock is about relieving stress. When you torque something down, if it doesn't have a perfect/near perfect mating surface, you run the risk of it being twisted or bent. In the long range game, consistency is key. If one of the components is stressed, there is the possibility of it moving when the rifle is fired. Even a small movement can result it inconsistency at longer ranges.
I haven't played with any of the chassis options out there, because I have had great success with bedding actions into stocks that I like. I use devcon for any of my centerfire rifles, but I use JB Weld for my rimfire projects. The rimfires have been mostly for fun, but I like to tinker with improving/modifying firearms.
Overall, nice work Ray. Keep updating this thread as you can, it's always fun to see others projects.
Edit to Add:
Wow, sorry for the old post resurrect... I was just browsing through, and didn't realize I had gotten that far back.
Ive used one of these in PRS matches. It did everything it was asked to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Planner