Should I bed my scope base to reciever?

[Koda]

So I swapped a scope with new ringmounts but never had a base not perfectly fit the receiver before. Its properly torqued and wont come off but its a hunting rifle that will see temp extremes from summer to winter temps. Im wondering if water (rain etc.) gets in there and freezes thus expanding and contracting will compromise the mounting job?
Or am I overthinking this? Should I bed the rings to the receiver and with what?


Photo: notice the gap all around (even the sliver of light on the farside)

Read More

 

[Member 94692]

Bed your scope? That might be legal in the Ozarks.
Just kidding!

 

[bionic knees]

Yes, overthinking. Seems to be what we do here!

 

[WAYNO]

deleted...

 

[Spitpatch]

Get with Leupold, see if that variance is normal.

As to "the screws taking all the stress", as long as the center of the arc on both mating surfaces is making contact (right where the screws are), this should not be an issue. A slick bottom of a scope base riding on top of a slick receiver top (fitting perfectly) doesn't "assist" the screws to do their job. Where danger exists, is when such a gap occurs AT the screw, and recoil has leverage at that scenario to stress the screws inordinately (the tightening process can do the same).

 

[Koda]

It looks like that base is incorrect for that receiver. That places a lot of stress on the screws. I would not live with it.

Was that base actually bought for that receiver?

The ringmount is correct for the R700 LA receiver, purchased brand new for this project. The gun is really old so I thought maybe a slight variation in radius tolerances stacking up in the wrong directions but these might be good upon closer examination....

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

In this weather you got something better to do?

 

[Koda]

Get with Leupold, see if that variance is normal.

As to "the screws taking all the stress", as long as the center of the arc on both mating surfaces is making contact (right where the screws are), this should not be an issue. A slick bottom of a scope base riding on top of a slick receiver top (fitting perfectly) doesn't "assist" the screws to do their job. Where danger exists, is when such a gap occurs AT the screw, and recoil has leverage at that scenario to stress the screws inordinately (the tightening process can do the same).

So I had to get the readers on and a much closer look in better lighting. It appears the arc on both matches the receivers arc, but the bases are a tiny bit wider than the receiver arc so Leupold put a flat on them along the sides, in other words the sides slightly stick out a bit. Its really hard to get a good cell phone pic in there with proper lighting and hard to explain. With magnified readers, the front base looks perfect, the rear is still a bit deceptive due to rounded edges on the receiver next to the precisely machined squared/sharp edges on the ringmounts plus the two side flats being squared off really stand out, but I think is a perfect fit in the middle. Its hard to explain, but the rear mount has a much slighter arc so those flats along the sides look more like a defect gap (where the sliver of light comes thru in my first post).

I really appreciate your chiming in here with your experience, I can rest easy. It looks like the only downside to these bases is the gap left along the sides will fill up with dust, fern pollen, debris, rain but I can keep them clean after hunting season is over.

I swapped scopes between my two rifles putting my best optic on my favorite 25-06, the scope has a smaller objective and is now much closer to the barrel axis for better cheek weld but now I have work to do rezeroing both rifles.

edit, heres a clear pic from Leupold showing those flatted sides (on the bottom). The rear mount is very slight so its flats look more like a gap once installed but if you look closely you can see the flat sides. (click to enlarge)

 

[Koda]

In this weather you got something better to do?

Its been a pretty good snow day, skipped work, walked dog, played with kiddos in the snow. I should go skiing though...

 

[Xmark1]

I almost always bed my picatinny scope rails to the receiver.

This started long ago, after I removed a scope mount and saw rust colored all over. Moisture does get under the mount.
The added support will not do anything but help accuracy and keep things dry. IMHO.

 

[Koda]

I almost always bed my picatinny scope rails to the receiver.

This started long ago, after I removed a scope mount and saw rust colored all over. Moisture does get under the mount.
The added support will not do anything but help accuracy and keep things dry. IMHO.

My rifles old and Ive had a few different mounts on it over the years but never any rust or wear under them. These new mounts do give me pause with the gap along their sides giving a place for moisture to collect, What do you use as the bedding?

 

[Xmark1]

My rifles old and Ive had a few different mounts on it over the years but never any rust or wear under them. These new mounts do give me pause with the gap along their sides giving a place for moisture to collect, What do you use as the bedding?

I use the same glass bedding compound that I bed the receiver/barrel with.
All of my bolt actions are either Remington 700's or copies as such like my Christenson's.
I have used Warne or Leupold 20 MOA rails on all of them.

Here is a picture example of my 30-06. Remington 700 SCR II Bone Collector, Limited Edition SS barreled action Trinite from factory. H&S Precision.

 

[Koda]

I use the same glass bedding compound that I bed the receiver/barrel with.
All of my bolt actions are either Remington 700's or copies as such like my Christenson's.
I have used Warne or Leupold 20 MOA rails on all of them.

Very nice job on the rail bedding, cant even tell...

Mine is a Remington 700, had a gunsmith bed the action... I've never done it. I'm undecided on if these new rings need it but do see the logic in bedding the ringmounts or rails.

Undecided.

 

[drstrangelove]

You could shape the base to match the receiver, but it's a fair bit of work with a file and a skilled eye; a jig would be optimal. I see no harm in trying a fill/bed shim except it may look terrible and not be as strong as a flush metal to metal connection. Might try another base… this one may be off spec or meant for a different year of rifle. Ask Velzey. He knows everything.

 

[Velzey]

Bed it using JB quick, easy peasy. Just put a small dab on each base and set them in place and torque down. Clean up is easy with qtips and acetone.

 

[Xmark1]

Mine is a Remington 700, had a gunsmith bed the action... I've never done it. I'm undecided on if these new rings need it but do see the logic in bedding the ringmounts or rails.

Undecided.

I have glass bedded most all of my bolt guns. Myself
It is not for the faint of heart. You can end up destroying the rifle. Read up first!

What I can confirm is that I took an off the shelf Remington 700 -- .223 heavy that shot about 3 to 4 MOA. After bedding and load development it now shoots 1/2 MOA. It shoots holes through dimes at 200 yards.
I have pictures to prove it if I can find them, I will post the documentary process of bedding, and the targets results afterwards.



214 yards.

 

[Koda]

Bed it using JB quick, easy peasy. Just put a small dab on each base and set them in place and torque down. Clean up is easy with qtips and acetone.

Hi Velzey, this rifle is actually one of your masterpieces
I'm just trying to decide if I need to bed the new ringmounts...?
It sounds like its optional....

They are properly installed to proper torque, per Leupolds instructions. The ringmounts are a little wider than the receiver leaving the appearance of a gap or where water/moisture could collect, my worry was it could wick up under the mounts and be an issue over time, also in hunts in freezing temps. I haven't rezeroed the rifle yet so I could remove them to bed if I decide to.

 

[TTSX]

I give mine a quick dab of loctite. Seems to seal them up but doesn't glue them down permanently , either.

 

[Spitpatch]

No bedding compound is necessary between the base and the receiver.

If rust is seen on either upon disassembly, it is a simple matter of corrosion protection (as with any other metal surface on the gun). This is one more reason I like Paste Wax (Johnson's or Minwax). It stays in place better than "oil" or "rust preventative" (liquids), especially in areas that will be ignored or inaccessible for awhile.

Should bedding compound be used between the base and receiver, it would seem this is literally a "solid" commitment to never remove those bases from that gun (or be ready with curses should the need arise).

If one "never removes bases from any gun I own", then rust could have never been discovered.

I am a firm believer in dedicating an optic to a gun. I avoid any "switching back and forth" with the optic or the mounts, and take extra time, effort and sometimes expense to get all perfect at the first installation, with the goal and intent to never remove them...

...but I damned sure keep my options open, and have enough experience chipping bedding compound from gun metal to not relish the task (OR leave such for the next owner of the gun).

 

[orygun]

Buy a Ruger 77 MKII or Hawkeye! Never will you again have an issue like this.