Scope Mount Screw Alignment

Hi Guys,
I have a brand new 110 Storm (10 Storm would be more correct but they don't seem to be distinguishing as much anymore).
Anyway, I installed a set of Leupold Backcountry mounts, the ones that look like Talley knock offs, and when I set a level on the bottom halves the front one leans to the left. Sure enough when I tried to bore sight my scope it took the entire 35MOA of adjustment to get the crosshair to point at the same fence post as the barrel.

I thought it could be an issue with the mounts, so I swapped the front one for the back one and there's no change, front one still leans left. Looks like Savage built me a twisted receiver, or miss drilled the holes.

For this upcoming hunting season there's not much time left, so I'm going to try some old style Leupold STD windage adjustable rings & bases. For the longer term, I'm not exactly thrilled with a crooked rifle. If I send it back to Savage, what will they do about it?

I've found quite a few discussions on this topic, but none that followed up after the OP got the rifle back. Anybody been down this road?

That really sucks. I have seen this on used actions where a nucklehead used some tool in the loading ports as a back up and removed the barrel. Never seen it on a new action. The old flatbacks occasionally saw some off angle crap to. If you cant get another rifle for hunting season. Call Savage CS and see what they tell you. Mention your quandry.

Do you have any other mounts you could try? Have you measured the hole's locations or just taken a ruler to see if they line up? Just trying to help you confirm it's the scope mount holes before you're stuck sending it back to Savage.

ETA: Is it possible the holes are drilled inline but canted (not perpendicular to the bore)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Revoliver

Do you have any other mounts you could try? Have you measured the hole's locations or just taken a ruler to see if they line up? Just trying to help you confirm it's the scope mount holes before you're stuck sending it back to Savage.

ETA: Is it possible the holes are drilled inline but canted (not perpendicular to the bore)?

---

I've only tried the one pair of mounts, but swapping them front for rear and seeing no change confirmed for me that it's the holes.

HOWEVER, I just returned from the range and was able to sight in just fine. I had to crank the scope way over, but had about 5moa to spare. The scope has 70moa total windage, which means I used roughly 30moa getting to zero. Still not thrilled on the QC, but at least it's a usable rifle! Seems to shoot pretty good too. Getting sort of a vertical string 1/2" wide by 2" tall at 100 yards. I could only find Fusion 180gr locally (took five stores just to find that) but I have some Norma 180gr Bondstrikes supposed to arrive tomorrow. I'll give them a try next weekend.

Now it's down to praying for elk...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris_in_Idaho

I've only tried the one pair of mounts, but swapping them front for rear and seeing no change confirmed for me that it's the holes.

HOWEVER, I just returned from the range and was able to sight in just fine. I had to crank the scope way over, but had about 5moa to spare. The scope has 70moa total windage, which means I used roughly 30moa getting to zero. Still not thrilled on the QC, but at least it's a usable rifle! Seems to shoot pretty good too. Getting sort of a vertical string 1/2" wide by 2" tall at 100 yards. I could only find Fusion 180gr locally (took five stores just to find that) but I have some Norma 180gr Bondstrikes supposed to arrive tomorrow. I'll give them a try next weekend.

Now it's down to praying for elk...

---

Burris XTR Signature rings can give you up to 40 moa of shift in any direction you want. I have them, they're good rings.

https://www.burrisoptics.com/mountin...ignature-rings
https://www.burrisoptics.com/blog/mo...ignature-rings
https://marvel-b1-cdn.bc0a.com/f0000...remerings1.png

ETA: Using the +/- 10 and +/- 20 inserts, you could correct that 30moa shift from the scope mount holes.

Is it just me or do the Burris XTR rings seem like a solution for a problem that should not exist in the first place?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by celltech

Is it just me or do the Burris XTR rings seem like a solution for a problem that should not exist in the first place?

---

It's just you. You don't have to have any offset at all if you don't want or need to* and just like the extra clamping and delrin (or whatever material they are) inserts not marring up the scope.

ETA:
*buy using the two sets of +/- 20moa inserts aligned with the +s and -s on the same sides in the front and back rings.

Nope- not just you.....

Small amounts are no big deal- that is why they have that knob on the side of the scope. If that's not enough then you should be getting the problem fixed.

Ever shoot long range with a scope that runs out of adjustment? Need 20MOA today, but not tomorrow? Or just want your knobs as close to center as possible?
There are as many reason to use them as there not to. No one agrees on the same Beer either.

I agree, the problem shouldn't exist. However, if you prefer not to send the rifle back to Savage, the Burris rings are the least problematic solution.

I doubt there’s a mass produced rifle out there that gets the scope base screws straight every time. The Burris signature zee and XTR signature rings are fantastic at correcting misalignment without using up the internal adjustment of the scope. I use them pretty much exclusively anymore for the reasons already stated, along with they provide great grip on the scope without leaving ring marks.

I wouldn’t use rings with inserts. You could try using a one piece rail & rings. Or a one piece mount. (I’d recommend a rail over the mount as mounts are typically 6061 and any of the quality rails are 7075 or Chrom-Moly steel. Either being much stiffer. May be enough to “pull” the slight alignment issue straight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Hoback

I wouldn’t use rings with inserts. You could try using a one piece rail & rings. Or a one piece mount. (I’d recommend a rail over the mount as mounts are typically 6061 and any of the quality rails are 7075 or Chrom-Moly steel. Either being much stiffer. May be enough to “pull” the slight alignment issue straight.

---

Ah, the old 6061 can't handle mounting a scope but is perfectly fine as a chassis for the entire rifle argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Revoliver

Ah, the old 6061 can't handle mounting a scope but is perfectly fine as a chassis for the entire rifle argument.

---

No, I never said that. Handling a scope has nothing to do with conversation. I actually use an ADM AD-Recon scope mount & Mirage URL Chassis which are both 6061-T6 Billet. Regardless, 7075 aluminum is much stronger/harder, and makes a difference in smaller, thinner parts. A Chassis is a large item. It uses a great deal of material. The more material, hence thicker part, means stiffer component. Since I am referring to the rail or mount as being somewhat of a load bearing support(if indeed the Action is slightly warped), the strength/stiffness makes a difference in such a small, thin part. In simple terms, comparing a Chassis & a rail, is much the same comparing a Popsicle stick & a Baseball bat.

I’d recommend researching the properties of both 6061 & 7075 & various strength treatments, to better educate yourself with the strength/stiffness & hardness of either material. Really, I encourage research of Metallurgy as a whole. Absolutely fascinating! Or, just ask. I would be happy to fill in anything you’re unsure of.

A lot of OLD Mauser actions were drilled off center so I guess savage could be off center too.
I have a Herders "J9" which is a Mauser 98 I do believe.
Anyway Some times you can have a smith weld up the holes that is off then re drill or move back a little bit and have a new holes drilled and tapped. The Burris work great I have to use the 20 in front and back then I had to take a "Blank" base and drill a holes off center to get it back to true.

I have many sets of the burris signature rings. Thousands of rounds through them, and they have never failed me, even on my magnum rifles. I like to shoot long range and i like the added cant and the super reliability. I have yet to see them not work that it hasn't been user error.

The Burris rings look pretty interesting. Am I understanding correctly that both the Signature Zee rings and the XTR Signature rings use the same insert system, and the difference is just the size/duty level of the rings (2 screw vs 6 screw)?

Same concept between the two, but the inserts are not interchangeable between the Signature Zee and the XTR Signature. The XTR Signature inserts are shaped/sized differently than the Signature Zee inserts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Hoback

No, I never said that. Handling a scope has nothing to do with conversation. I actually use an ADM AD-Recon scope mount & Mirage URL Chassis which are both 6061-T6 Billet. Regardless, 7075 aluminum is much stronger/harder, and makes a difference in smaller, thinner parts. A Chassis is a large item. It uses a great deal of material. The more material, hence thicker part, means stiffer component. Since I am referring to the rail or mount as being somewhat of a load bearing support(if indeed the Action is slightly warped), the strength/stiffness makes a difference in such a small, thin part. In simple terms, comparing a Chassis & a rail, is much the same comparing a Popsicle stick & a Baseball bat.

I’d recommend researching the properties of both 6061 & 7075 & various strength treatments, to better educate yourself with the strength/stiffness & hardness of either material. Really, I encourage research of Metallurgy as a whole. Absolutely fascinating! Or, just ask. I would be happy to fill in anything you’re unsure of.

---

I'm not seeing how 7075 or even 4140 is going to pull scope mount holes in steel into alignment. And 6061 does just fine for Keymod and MLOk slot attachments, both of which are thinner than a scope rail.

The rings are currently on sale at Midway
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1548235656

Well those rings would be the cheapest fix.... Not the best fix but still the cheapest. It looks like you have a lot of potential to introduce binding and loading of the scope... and another part equals another thing that can cause issues. External adjustments use to be how all the scopes were adjusted-- but then people realized a better way.

Bingo!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Whynot

Well those rings would be the cheapest fix.... Not the best fix but still the cheapest. It looks like you have a lot of potential to introduce binding and loading of the scope... and another part equals another thing that can cause issues. External adjustments use to be how all the scopes were adjusted-- but then people realized a better way.

---

Nothing is fool proof. If you follow the instructions there is no issue, if you don't and mix-n-match the insert set halves, that's on the end user. Otherwise, there's no more chance of loading or binding or torquing than any other scope rings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Revoliver

Nothing is fool proof. If you follow the instructions there is no issue, if you don't and mix-n-match the insert set halves, that's on the end user. Otherwise, there's no more chance of loading or binding or torquing than any other scope rings.

---

This is exactly right

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by want2ride

This is exactly right

---

I agree with celltech, we shouldn't have to deal with bore alignment with line of sight!
I've found that most often the problem can be traced back to loose fitting barrel threads and the recoil lug is not flat and parallel. A precision ground lug will help align the barrel with the action and most often solve the e problem, Burris sig.zee rings will always get you there.
Loose headspace will also cause an ftf.
I had a rash of ftfs in various calibers and it was found that a bent priming pin in my press was twisting the misaligned primers during the priming operation.
Loose anvils were always present at deprive and also with the ftf cartridges. The press was distorting the cups and dislodged the anvils! New priming pin and problem cured.

Thanks everyone for the continued interest in this thread. I'm happy to report this has turned out to be the best shooting hunting rifle I've owned. Usually I have to handload to get down near 1moa, but this one shoots 180 Norma Bondstrike factory rounds like a lazer (check out the five round 100yd group). I also got the opportunity to test it on a whitetail on Friday and it did not disappoint!

https://uniim1.shutterfly.com/render...&ts=1665869621
https://uniim1.shutterfly.com/render...&ts=1666148957

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris_in_Idaho

this has turned out to be the best shooting hunting rifle I've owned.

---

Common occurrence with & voiced phrase in reference to Savage 10/110 rifles. America’s rifle! Glad to here you’re enjoying it.

Would it be possible to just get ring inserts and not have to replace the entire ring ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thebeav

Would it be possible to just get ring inserts and not have to replace the entire ring ?

---

No. Specific rings are specifically made for these inserts. However, I would caution against them. For one, the inserts are typically polymer, and polymer is quite soft & flexes more than most think. Also, I encourage you to go back a read again. It was mentioned that outside, mechanical scope adjustments USED to be the norm. Until a better way way was discovered. (Internal adjustment)

Here is a picture of a Vintage Unertl rifle scope. See how it’s adjusted? By separate mechanical Windage & Elevation adjusters. This is the same concept the Burris rings (and others like them), are offering. Seems like a novel concept, until one comes to terms it simply being a re-hashed idea from the 1800’s.

https://i.ibb.co/dr9mHkq/F61-CBABA-F...F9-E653329.jpg

Lets also not forget, the OP was convinced he had a major problem…that is, until he started shooting his rifle. He was able to sight it with his scopes adjustment range & it’s his top performing hunting rifle. All with some super-dee-duper Burris redu.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Hoback

No. Specific rings are specifically made for these inserts. However, I would caution against them. For one, the inserts are typically polymer, and polymer is quite soft & flexes more than most think. Also, I encourage you to go back a read again. It was mentioned that outside, mechanical scope adjustments USED to be the norm. Until a better way way was discovered. (Internal adjustment)

Here is a picture of a Vintage Unertl rifle scope. See how it’s adjusted? By separate mechanical Windage & Elevation adjusters. This is the same concept the Burris rings (and others like them), are offering. Seems like a novel concept, until one comes to terms it simply being a re-hashed idea from the 1800’s.

https://i.ibb.co/dr9mHkq/F61-CBABA-F...F9-E653329.jpg

Lets also not forget, the OP was convinced he had a major problem…that is, until he started shooting his rifle. He was able to sight it with his scopes adjustment range & it’s his top performing hunting rifle. All with some super-dee-duper Burris redu.

---

Sorry Dave, usually i agree with what you are saying, but this time i strongly disagree. There really is no downside to using the Burris Signature rings. No marring, no slipping, no failure in thousands of rounds of 6.5 Creedmoor, 300 WSM, 28 nosler, 7mm Rem Mag. I don't use the rings for side to side cant, only the extra elevation that a 20 MOA rail and an adjustable amount of cant in the rings give me. I like being able to use the scope's turret to shoot out to a mile and beyond. There really is NO downside to using these rings that i have seen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Hoback

No. Specific rings are specifically made for these inserts. However, I would caution against them. For one, the inserts are typically polymer, and polymer is quite soft & flexes more than most think. Also, I encourage you to go back a read again. It was mentioned that outside, mechanical scope adjustments USED to be the norm. Until a better way way was discovered. (Internal adjustment)

Here is a picture of a Vintage Unertl rifle scope. See how it’s adjusted? By separate mechanical Windage & Elevation adjusters. This is the same concept the Burris rings (and others like them), are offering. Seems like a novel concept, until one comes to terms it simply being a re-hashed idea from the 1800’s.

https://i.ibb.co/dr9mHkq/F61-CBABA-F...F9-E653329.jpg

Lets also not forget, the OP was convinced he had a major problem…that is, until he started shooting his rifle. He was able to sight it with his scopes adjustment range & it’s his top performing hunting rifle. All with some super-dee-duper Burris redu.

---

Sorry Dave, usually i agree with what you are saying, but this time i strongly disagree. There really is no downside to using the Burris Signature rings. No marring, no slipping, no failure in thousands of rounds of 6.5 Creedmoor, 300 WSM, 28 nosler, 7mm Rem Mag. I don't use the rings for side to side cant, only the extra elevation that a 20 MOA rail and an adjustable amount of cant in the rings give me. I like being able to use the scope's turret to shoot out to a mile and beyond. There really is NO downside to using these rings that i have seen

No need to be sorry. It’s no worry to me when others disagree. Lots of different ways to add up to 10. But there is a reason serious competitor shooters don’t use Burris Signature. Look, I use American defense. I’ve had it a long time & this mount has performed well. But the same goes for ADM in the competition shooters game; neither are they used by any top competitors. And I don’t recommend these to others either. The only thing I recommend is what I would do, if I were to do it over again. Get either 7075 Rings, or invest in a 7075 mount, like the Spur or Tier-One mounts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Hoback

No need to be sorry. It’s no worry to me when others disagree. Lots of different ways to add up to 10. But there is a reason serious competitor shooters don’t use Burris Signature. Look, I use American defense. I’ve had it a long time & this mount has performed well. But the same goes for ADM in the competition shooters game; neither are they used by any top competitors. And I don’t recommend these to others either. The only thing I recommend is what I would do, if I were to do it over again. Get either 7075 Rings, or invest in a 7075 mount, like the Spur or Tier-One mounts.

---

Dave,

Do you lap those rings?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by prdatr

Dave,

Do you lap those rings?

---

No, I don’t. Not that there is anything wrong with it. High quality rings/mounts offer very good ring alignment & Ring to scope surface contact. Lapping rings is that super extreme chasing of a some higher accuracy level that doesn’t exist. Once again, if my rifle is already delivering outstanding consistency & sub grouping in the right hands, the way it is, lapping rings isn’t going to somehow make it more accurate. Rings which are not making adequate surface contact & require lapping will “show their Arse”, so to speak. They won’t deliver consistency. Remember: accuracy is consistency Whether 1/4” groups, 1/2” or 3/4”…, even 1” groups or more. Regardless, if the rings are allowing the scope to move, they won’t show consistency. If a weapon is delivering inside 1” with consistency, lapping rings, playing with Action screw torque, or bedding the stock, isn’t going to make it more accurate.

I’ve used the Burris rings on many rifles even of large caliber for years with no problems at all. I have had to use them for windage offset before as well and see no problem with using them for that purpose. Mass produced rifles are far from perfect and I’ve had screw holes off center enough that it uses way too much internal windage adjustment to get zeroed. These rings solve that issue and short of welding the holes shut and re-drilling them, I don’t know of any other solution in those situations aside from the old school leupold/redfield mounts with the rear windage adjustable ring. I’ve never had much faith in those on heavy recoiling rounds though as there’s very little purchase on the rear ring with the windage screws on the rear base.