Any products that allow moving you scope without losing zero?

P

Pond James Pond

New member
Just curious if there is a product that allows you to remove your scope, for which ever reason, and then reattach it without losing the zero.

I'm asking particularly with picatinny rails in mind.
 
Weaver bases and rings are as repeatable as can be. They're the type that evolved into the rail system first used for 20 moa bases on long range match rifles back in the late 1970's when Weaver model T scopes started replacing Lyman and Unertl scopes. I've used cheap Tasco rings on Weaver bases and rails on 30 caliber magnums and no change of zero observed removing/remounting checking repeatability on an optical collimator locked in the muzzle and in actual shooting. Picatinny Arsenal made a MIL SPEC version in the 1980's that evolved into what's now used on commercial and US military rifles for attaching stuff to them.

Jack Davis, a gunsmith catering to competitors (also a referee at the Nationals), made the first ones but never patented it. He told me in the 80's that Weaver would probably take him to court if he did. What was first called a "Davis" rail is now a Picatinny rail.
 
Last edited:
The first time I ever saw Picatinny rail, I thought it was a Weaver product. :)

From a hunting-accuracy standpoint, the old Pachmyr Lo-Swing worked okay. Quick-Detachable (Q-D) side mounts, same-same. Weaver had (has?) a swing-away hinged top-ring setup.
 
Ive used an ARMS #35QD Throw Lever Base with appropriate rings on my one AR for around 14 years now, and have always had good results. I also have a pre zeroed Aimpoint on an ARMS #22M68 lever mount for the same gun. I can swap them with out issue and zero has always been pretty much dead on when they were returned.

Ive also used the individual ARMS throw lever rings with a couple of scopes as well, and again, with good results. They worked well on my Springfield SOCOM, even with its non milspec (some sort of Weaver) rail. I mounted the rings, against the recoil bocks, fore and aft, before mounting the scope, then mounted the scope. This kept the rings from moving under recoil, and the zero seemed to hold very well when R&R.

I also have LaRue and GG&G lever mounts for a couple of other Aimpoints, and they repeat zero as well.

I have used Weaver thumb screw type rings for a couple of things, and they "sort of" returned to zero, but not near as close as those above. The few I still do have/use, are on a couple of AK's on Ultimak rails, and not really used for R&R, but more just for a semi quick removal option.
 
Pond said:
Just curious if there is a product that allows you to remove your scope, for which ever reason, and then reattach it without losing the zero.

I'm asking particularly with picatinny rails in mind.
Click to expand...

Yes there a many that do this.
The most important thing to do is keep the screws or QD lever at the same consistent torque. I carry a torque wrench from Seekonk with me always. I use a NF BEAST with a DTA mount. I use it on 5 different rifles. I have never lost a zero. I also use a NF 5.5-22 on a few rifles and just had it mounted with NF rings. I once again had a torque wrench and used 65 inch LBS each time I mounted it. Never lost a zero once.
 
Never used a torque wrench holding a 25 cent piece tightening Weaver scope ring knobs; my finger tips held the quarter with varying amounts of force, but the rings' clamps never complained about it. Zeros didn't change either.
 
I haven't tried em on a hunting rifle but on my AR I used Warne quick detach rings with my scope with just hand tightened levers. Removed the scope ran a course, put it back on and shot right to POI. I use non QD warne rings on all my bolt actions.
 
Ruger mounts are pretty good for that. I've removed and put my scope on roughly a dozen times and didn't notice any change in POI.
 
Do such Q-R scope rings need to be a single unit, with the two rings as part of the same apparatus, or can you have two independent rings with Q-R levers?

I ask because, as usual, I see a decent product on the Midway USA link above (about $110) yet when I look for similar products on the Midway Deutschland website, the cheapest decent-looking options are pushing €180-350!! That is between $230 and $500!!!!

My goodness... we (the consumers) really must seem like some monetary wineskins to squeeze dry....:mad:
 
Pond the warne rings I used on my ar, are 2 separate rings with 2 separate levers. They're mounted to the scope so it shoudln't make any difference if it's a one or two piece system.
 
I must live in parallel universe....
I've never had the Weaver system return to zero. Ballpark, yes. But, not as close as other designs. -Regardless of the level of quality.

Honestly... I've had far better luck with rimfire dovetails returning to zero, than anything based on the Weaver system. :rolleyes:

With quality mounts and good machining, a Picatinny rail does well. With mediocre quality or a poorly machined rail, it's a roll of the dice.

The only mounting system that I have used that has allowed 100% return-to-zero is the Ruger dovetail ring system.


Do such Q-R scope rings need to be a single unit, with the two rings as part of the same apparatus, or can you have two independent rings with Q-R levers?
Click to expand...
You can run either way.
The platform you're using, and the amount of weight you want on the rifle, are primary factors in determining which way to go. Repeatability is about the same. But there can be significant weight difference between one-piece mounts and two-piece mounts.

Just remember, with Picatinny rails, during installation (or re-installation), to hold the optic/mount down, forward, and against the fixed side of the clamping jaws (left side usually) while tightening.
 
I've used Weaver rings, Ruger rings and Leupold QD rings with equal success. The Ruger and Weaver rings need a screwdriver to remove and replace, but since I keep a multi-tool handy all the time that isn't an issue.

The key is to slide the mounts as far forward as possible in the bases before tightening each time. Before and after zeroing.
 
Who has measured reinstalling of any QD mount several times without firing a shot and got repeatable positioning within 1/8 MOA at worst?
 
Who has measured reinstalling of any QD mount several times without firing a shot and got repeatable positioning within 1/8 MOA at worst?
Click to expand...
Not firing a shot?....


Sounds like the mid-80s Cosworth rally team. They spent all year tweaking their cars, rebuilding engines, re-engineering gear boxes, re-cutting tire tread, and then jumped head-first into the championship races. ...only to wrap the car around a tree in the second corner, because they never did any practical testing, on an actual track, during the development phase. :rolleyes:


Bore-sighting will only get you so far (and those tools have their limitations and repeatability issues, as well). Actual shots down range tell the true story.
 
How about using an optical collimator in the muzzle? Once you've zeroed the scope on it, it's easy to see and measure the error is each time the scope is removed and reinstalled. The objective is to see how repeatable the scope's optical aiming axis is to the rifle's shooting axis; isn't it?

Shooting groups after each remove-replace cycle introduces all the rifle, ammo and shooter variables. Unless you shoot all your stuff no worse than 1/16th MOA and 1/8 MOA error is acceptable.

Practical and precise measurement of any system performance after removing then replacing one part can only be valid when no other variables exist except the fit of that part. Which is why I built my own scope testing rig to eliminate rifle, ammo and human variables. It even tests scope repeatability from recoil shock.
 
Last edited:
Do such Q-R scope rings need to be a single unit, with the two rings as part of the same apparatus, or can you have two independent rings with Q-R levers?
Click to expand...
I havent seen any noticeable difference between the set ups on guns with "good" rails.

With something like the rail on my SOCOM, being able to "adjust" the fit using separate rings, would likely make a difference. The separate rings allow for a better fit, where the one piece mount, may still allow movement of the whole set up, on the rail.

How about using an optical collimator in the muzzle? Once you've zeroed the scope on it, it's easy to see and measure the error is each time the scope is removed and reinstalled. The objective is to see how repeatable the scope's optical aiming axis is to the rifle's shooting axis; isn't it?
Click to expand...
I think we're getting to the "splitting of hairs" point here. From what Ive seen, for real world shooting, the very slight difference, isnt worth worrying about.
 
Some years back, like 50, Bauash & Lomb made a scope with no turrets. The windage and elevation adjustments were all in the base mounted on the rifle. You had one scope that you switched from rifle to rifle. The guys I knew that had them were satisfied with them, but I personally wasn't a believer. They were popular for a while, and they were a quality product. But for some reason, unknown to me, Bauash & Lomb disappeared from the rifle scope market. Building a mount like that isn't going to sell many scopes.
I want my scope mounted permantly almost to my rifles.
 
As mentioned, lots of P-rail rings claim to hold zero; not all of them which claim this do it, however. Go quality, like Badger, Leupold Mark 4, etc., to increase the chances.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top