110 Too High!

[hydrashocker]

Well finally got moved and have had a little time here and there to get this project back up and moving again!

So far, I have pillar bedded the stock, bedded the receiver, and bedded the recoil lug, and finally got my Savage 110 LA ACC in 7mm tapered barrel mounted with a 1 piece Weaver Tactical 99493 base with 0 MOA.

I properly bedded, both front and back on the base doing one side at a time, and bedded the integrated recoil lug to ensure full contact. I had to remove some media on the base so that it would sit only on the receiver (it was hanging over onto the guns recoil lug). I also removed just a little on the back side so to ensure that the bolt would not hit it when fully locked.

So now the moment of truth!!! I finally install the new Burris Xtreme Tactical XTR Rings in High and just place my Nikon Monarch 4-16x50 Side Focus 8439 on top of the set up. I stand back and look; the thing is WAY up in the air! Now I didn't get out the tape and actually measure how high the thing is above the barrel it is because I was just pissed off.

All I wanted to mount it as low as I could with about 1/4 inch of clearance for a good set of lens caps. I did all the home work and still came up short changed! I did email Weaver and ask the height of their 99493 base which they came back at .386 inches. I paired that up with the .75 inches on the rings and came up 1.136 inches of lift. Now with a 50mm objection lens with an OD of 57.3mm I divided that in half and come up with 1.1279528 inches of lift needed. Well the 1.136 inches was enough, and then couple that with the tapered barrel I should have had enough room for a set of lens covers, right?

What the heck went wrong with my math????

http://www.nikonsportoptics.com/en/N...-Nikoplex.html
http://www.burrisoptics.com/xtrrings.html
http://www.weaver-mounts.com/rings_b...lti-slot_base/

[J.Baker]

My guess is that Weaver measures their ring height to the bottom of the scope tube, not to the centerline of the scope. Seems the industry can't seem to decide on one or the other as half of them measure one way and the other half measure the other. It's easy enough to verify on your end with a tape or caliper.

[hydrashocker]

Well I measured the clearance between the scope and barrel and I have 5/8 inch to come down!

With the eye piece, I don't think I'll have enough room to come down that much because it appears I'll hit the bolt handle? I want to come down 1/2" but I am scared that everything won't line up right.

I wanted a solid 1 piece mount to help strengthen the action, especially with the recoil and the larger scope (50mm). I might have to take the rifle in and see exactly what I need at Sportsmans Warehouse or Cabelas. Now I know Leopold is different then Burris and weaver, but this seems ridiculous. Hopefully somebody else won't have this same issue with their Savage 110.

It's easy enough to verify on your end with a tape or caliper

Can you elaborate exactly how you can do that without the mounts or rings? Just trying to get the thicknesses of the base was like pulling teeth with both Leupold and Weaver, at least with me. Do you just measure with a straight edge off the receiver and use that against the recital? What about the eye piece, recital and barrel, not to mention placing of the scope for proper eye relief. What I'm trying to say is, you just don't know exactly what your dealing with until it's sitting right in front of you.

[stangfish]

Once you do this you will find that some combination of these dimensions will get you where you want to be. I have never found a use for high rings on a bolt action rifle....ever.

It is all about figuring radii. Receiver, Barrel, Scope Tube, Scope Objective.
The radius of the tube is going to be either 1"/.5 or 30mm/.59
Everything is on the same axis

Add and subtract dimensions of base thickness and ring height and (objective/tube radius diffence).

I find it rare that you ever have the objective contacting the barrel before you run out of clearance on the eyepiece if your using a one piece and it is not a low profile. Clearancing the one piece rail for the eyepeice is an option if you make contact there but are otherwise happy with your scopes position

[hydrashocker]

Well it was flat out the manufacture industry standard as mentioned. I had to subtract the .5" from my measurement to get the correct saddle messurement needed. I'm returning it and exchanging the Burris High 3/4" for a Burris Low 1/4".


Novice mistake.....LOL