On lapping scope rings:

[Pete Wass]

During the winter I decided I wanted some higher rings for my HBR type rifles, ( Rem 700's). I'm in the experimental stages of my BR life now so I found low end stuff to work with, being on a fixed income and all. So, I also decided to go to Weaver bases, which would kinda be the original Picatinny type of a deal. So, this morning I mounted a pair of them and found that both mounts were high on the rear of the portion where the scope would seat, real high. Now, I know somethin about this lappin bidness so I sez to myself, " I'll go out in my shop and find a bearing scraper and go at this bugger and make things happen a lot faster". Well, it worked out the very best. I had 80 percent bearing in about 3 sessions of the scraper and final lapping took only several strokes. Great when a plan comes together, ain't it?

Pete

 

[Al Nyhus]

Pete, the Weaver-style bases are a sturdy system, provided the material is high quality. This is where I usually talk about bedding the bases and the rings, but you know my thoughts on that...

FWIW, The terms 'Picatinny' and 'Weaver' are often lumped together to describe the cross bolt style of bases/rings when in fact, there's a marked difference.

-True 'Weaver-style' bases/rings have a .180 slot width for the cross bolt.

-True 'Picatinny-style' bases/rings are a .206 slot width and the center-to-center distance of the slots is always .394".

I recently saw a rifle with some sort of mass merchandised Tacti-dumb 'Picatinny/Weaver bases and rings' (in reality, there's no such thing). The rail had the .206 slots and but the rings had the .180 cross bolts....you could see where the rings had shifted on the rail a minute amount.

Good shootin'. -Al