Scope Rings

[longdog]

The BLKs work great for dovetail mounting……they won’t cant to one side like the Westhunter rings. I just sent a pair of Westhunters back for this reason.I use the RLKs on my R11 and they hold my Athlon very securely.
Also, the Hawke rings use the aforementioned “tape”.

 

[nervoustrig]

The BLKs work great for dovetail mounting……they won’t cant to one side like the Westhunter rings.

I don't know about the Westhunter in particular, but the clamping plates on most scope rings are reversible to accommodate either 3/8" or 11mm dovetails. The tooth on one side has a 45° angle. The other side is a shallower angle...that one is 60°. The 45° is for a 3/8” rail. The 60° is for an 11mm rail:

With that said, there is no requirement that the scope rings be perfectly centered over the receiver, in terms of preventing potential cant error. The scope could be mounted an inch off to one side, so long as the reticle is clocked to the bore when attaching the scope and then the reticle held level when shooting.

 

[Nattboy]

For dovetail mounting I really like BKL self-centering rings. They come in 1" and 30mm. I have 30mm low mounts on all of my dovetail rifles (Daystate, Air Arms, and BSA) The older Daystate mags just fit with minimum clearance on a 40mm objective lense or less.

View attachment 364869

Thanks for the advice. Seems a lot folks like them.

 

[Nattboy]

I don't know about the Westhunter in particular, but the clamping plates on most scope rings are reversible to accommodate either 3/8" or 11mm dovetails. The tooth on one side has a 45° angle. The other side is a shallower angle...that one is 60°. The 45° is for a 3/8” rail. The 60° is for an 11mm rail:
View attachment 364947

With that said, there is no requirement that the scope rings be perfectly centered over the receiver, in terms of preventing potential cant error. The scope could be mounted an inch off to one side, so long as the reticle is clocked to the bore when attaching the scope and then the reticle held level when shooting.

Thank you. I didn't know that. Y'all are sure giving me an education.

 

[longdog]

I don't know about the Westhunter in particular, but the clamping plates on most scope rings are reversible to accommodate either 3/8" or 11mm dovetails. The tooth on one side has a 45° angle. The other side is a shallower angle...that one is 60°. The 45° is for a 3/8” rail. The 60° is for an 11mm rail:
View attachment 364947

With that said, there is no requirement that the scope rings be perfectly centered over the receiver, in terms of preventing potential cant error. The scope could be mounted an inch off to one side, so long as the reticle is clocked to the bore when attaching the scope and then the reticle held level when shooting.

but why would you?

 

[nervoustrig]

but why would you?

No good reason for an air rifle as far as I know, but it can be advantageous for close-quarters combat...the real kind or paintball and such:

Why Canted Works

Why Canted Works When fractions of a second matterRUN CANTED™ Why Canted Works When fractions of a second matterRUN CANTED™ Blindfold Test — your natural shooting position. Blindfold Test — your natural shooting position. If you're holding a CQB weaponnaturally, it will be canted. If you're...

mccloyimplement.com

For air rifles, the very slight cant which can arise from using an 11mm mount on a 3/8” rail, or vice-versa, doesn’t make any difference when the scope reticle is oriented correctly. Granted if the offset is enough that one finds it aesthetically annoying, by all means use a self-centering mount like BKL, but there is no need in terms of eliminating cant error.

 

[orangeokie]

I don't know about the Westhunter in particular, but the clamping plates on most scope rings are reversible to accommodate either 3/8" or 11mm dovetails. The tooth on one side has a 45° angle. The other side is a shallower angle...that one is 60°. The 45° is for a 3/8” rail. The 60° is for an 11mm rail:
View attachment 364947

With that said, there is no requirement that the scope rings be perfectly centered over the receiver, in terms of preventing potential cant error. The scope could be mounted an inch off to one side, so long as the reticle is clocked to the bore when attaching the scope and then the reticle held level when shooting.

For discussion’s sake, let’s assume the bore and barrel are perfectly aligned with the dovetail, which is perfectly centered on the bore and barrel. Theoretically, if one were to mount his scope with self-centering rings, in a zero wind condition, pellet drop on a vertical axis (elevation) would be the only correction needed at any effective range. Windage would not be a factor at any effective range.

Now, if one were to mount his scope off center, it seems that both elevation and windage corrections would be necessary at any effective range.

If that is true, it would seem the offset scope mount is introducing a third variable to solve in order to consistently bring POI onto the target at any effective range. In all my years in the Marine Corps, on the rifle range, I never heard offset sights or scopes mentioned as an aid to consistent accuracy.

 

[Spartan]

If your scope is canted your windage will only ever align perfectly at one specific range. It will fall on either side of center windage at all other ranges, and only hitting center windage as it crosses that specific center range. That center windage range is determined by the amount of cant and any additional angular offset. This is why shooters occasional see their projectiles hitting left of POA at 20yds and right of POA at say 100yds. Assuming no wind. And it may be dead on at 50 yds. Just an example. Then they chase their zero for days thinking they have a problem with the scope or gun, when really the only problem is cheap rings. So don’t let your scopes cant.

 

[nervoustrig]

Now, if one were to mount his scope off center, it seems that both elevation and windage corrections would be necessary at any effective range.

In this scenario, the POI will fall reliably on the vertical bar of the reticle when:

1. the scope is oriented correctly...that is, so the reticle is intersects with the bore (i.e. no scope cant), and
2. when shooting, the gun is held such that the reticle is level (i.e. no gun cant)

 

[orangeokie]

No good reason for an air rifle as far as I know, but it can be advantageous for close-quarters combat...the real kind or paintball and such:
View attachment 365007

Why Canted Works

Why Canted Works When fractions of a second matterRUN CANTED™ Why Canted Works When fractions of a second matterRUN CANTED™ Blindfold Test — your natural shooting position. Blindfold Test — your natural shooting position. If you're holding a CQB weaponnaturally, it will be canted. If you're...

mccloyimplement.com

For air rifles, the very slight cant which can arise from using an 11mm mount on a 3/8” rail, or vice-versa, doesn’t make any difference when the scope reticle is oriented correctly. Granted if the offset is enough that one finds it aesthetically annoying, by all means use a self-centering mount like BKL, but there is no need in terms of eliminating cant error.

Now it makes sense!

 

[RScott]

For dovetail mounting I really like BKL self-centering rings. They come in 1" and 30mm. I have 30mm low mounts on all of my dovetail rifles (Daystate, Air Arms, and BSA) The older Daystate mags just fit with minimum clearance on a 40mm objective lense or less.

View attachment 364869

@orangeokie :
Off topic - I notice you have a March 2.5-25x (compact?) scope. I'm looking for a scope for hunter division field target where we have to rangefind with 16x max magnification. This requires a very narrow depth-of-field to distinguish 49 vs 52 vs 55 yards. Do you feel your scope has high quality crispness and narrow DOF to accomplish that? (and if so, can you let me know how many degrees of rotation of the side focus knob there are for focusing between 10 and 55 yards)? Regards.

 

[orangeokie]

@orangeokie :
Off topic - I notice you have a March 2.5-25x (compact?) scope. I'm looking for a scope for hunter division field target where we have to rangefind with 16x max magnification. This requires a very narrow depth-of-field to distinguish 49 vs 52 vs 55 yards. Do you feel your scope has high quality crispness and narrow DOF to accomplish that? (and if so, can you let me know how many degrees of rotation of the side focus knob there are for focusing between 10 and 55 yards)? Regards.

As for "crispness" of the glass. Superb. The parallax focus knob does not have yardage numbers on it, so I would need to have an exact 55 yd range marker to experiment.

 

[RScott]

Yard markings on focus knobs are notoriously incorrect. To create a yardage tape for a wheel attached to that knob, we usually use a long measuring tape. But if you were to focus at distances about 50 yards out, do you see fuzzy versus clear vs fuzzy for objects that are 3 yards apart at that distance?

 

[orangeokie]

Yard markings on focus knobs are notoriously incorrect. To create a yardage tape for a wheel attached to that knob, we usually use a long measuring tape. But if you were to focus at distances about 50 yards out, do you see fuzzy versus clear vs fuzzy for objects that are 3 yards apart at that distance?

I'll check that later today and get back with you. I'm guessing you would prefer clear and crisp between 49 and 55 without having to adjust the knob?

 

[RScott]

Actually the opposite. Pellets shot with 20 fpe at the muzzle start to fall rapidly after about 45 yards. Our holdovers have to increase by 1/2 inch or more for a target at 55 yards versus a target at 50 yards. So we need to estimate distances to the target as accurately as possible. We can use our scopes to estimate distances if they have a very narrow depth of field, e.g., when the scope focuses crisply at 55 yards and my scope wheel says it is 55 yards away, at that scope wheel setting, anything at 50 yards needs to be blurry. We will often set up targets at 46, 49, 52, and 55 yards and a good scope will show all other targets as at least slightly blurry when one of them of them is crisply in focus.
Thanks for your offer to check this. In theory, a shorter scope and a scope with a wide magnification range will have narrower depth of field (good for my needs, not so good for hunters). The March 2.5-25x compact fits this description but I don't know anyone who has one in order to see how it performs.

 

[RScott]

Actually the opposite. Pellets shot with 20 fpe at the muzzle start to fall rapidly after about 45 yards. Our holdovers have to increase by 1/2 inch or more for a target at 55 yards versus a target at 50 yards. So we need to estimate distances to the target as accurately as possible. We can use our scopes to estimate distances if they have a very narrow depth of field, e.g., when the scope focuses crisply at 55 yards and my scope wheel says it is 55 yards away, at that scope wheel setting, anything at 50 yards needs to be blurry. We will often set up targets at 46, 49, 52, and 55 yards and a good scope will show all other targets as at least slightly blurry when one of them of them is crisply in focus.
Thanks for your offer to check this. In theory, a shorter scope and a scope with a wide magnification range will have narrower depth of field (good for my needs, not so good for hunters). The March 2.5-25x compact fits this description but I don't know anyone who has one in order to see how it performs.

I should add that the range-finding has to be done with the scope's magnification set at no more than 16x. DOF can be quite narrow at high magnifications, e.g., 50x, but tend to be deeper at 16x. It is hard to find scopes with narrow DOF at 16x but on paper the March 2.5-25x is promising.

 

[Geezerhood]

Since I have yet to find an airgun or PB gun where the scope aligns with the bore close enough that I can keep the reticle centered in the scope for best optical and mechanical performance, I stick with Burris Signature rings of some flavor whenever I can. Usually Zee or XTR (my favorite) but I have some dual turn in dovetail ones on my TC Contenders. They give you up to 40 MOA of adjustment, a virtually stress free mounting with no need to lap and they don't damage the scope finish. A bit more money than the cheap stuff, but well worth it for me.

It can take some fenagaling to use the Signature Zee rings with a picatinny to dovetail adapter on some airgun dovetail mounts, but so far, they have worked with every scope / gun combination I have tried for when the even better XTR Signature rings aren't wanted or won't fit well. Having the desired free elevation travel and the windage travel very close to perfectly centered warms my heart.

 

[l8apexing]

i have had good luck with the "westhunter" brand rings on ebay.

$20 give or take depending on style,
comes in a bunch of colors also.

and a bit of advice,
if you dont have a torque screwdriver, get one,
imo they are invaluable for scope installation.

you can torque the ring screws to the proper in/lb and you dont need the friction tape.

got mine on ebay for around $30

I second the suggestion about the torque. A s rewdrivwr (like a Wheeler) or a device (like a Fix-It-Stix) is important.

 

[Airgun-hobbyist]

Don't buy into that tape scenario. Removing it and lapping the rings as an assembly is best. I prefer to use one piece cantilever mounts, as they are more rigid and usually stay true once lapped. The Wheeler Engineering Scope Ring and Lapping Kit Combo kit is not too expensive if doing rings a lot, but you can source the appropriate sized hardened and ground rod and a tube of valve lapping compound for much cheaper.