Tikka 260 T3x odd groupings

[Mick Miller]

@MarinePMI - Is this not likely an issue/conflict with Vortex/Warne where the former specifically state on their instructions for securing scope rings to 'never exceed 16-18in/lb' whereas Warne advise '25in/lb for both bases and rings'?

As it happens I secure my bases with 25in/lb and the rings with only 20in/lb so over torquing is unlike to be causing any crimping, squishing issues. The wrench I use retails at around £160, it's a pretty precise, calibrated instrument and not a shonky 'fatboy' or whatever. I'm confident I'm not exceeding any of those maximum recommendations.

Could you also link to any articles that back the assertion that Warne rings cause these issues as, despite searching, I cannot find any - I'm genuinely curious (as sometimes this can come across as accusatory on tinternet forums) - Nightforce, I understand, actually recommend Warne as an alternative to their own proprietary rings for instance. A lot of people I know own and use these without issue.

In other news, barrel is getting recrowned today

[MarinePMI]

Mick,

 

Here's a video showing how the rings move, and rely on the scope tube flexing to keep it in place: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Nrfd6eQgLQ

And here is a conversation, with industry input, that explains that this is a known issue.  When Frank Galli and Ilya Koshkin both agree it's an issue, I tend to listen.  Both are experts in their areas of expertise, and look at real world data, vice marketing and BD speak.

https://forum.snipershide.com/threads/vertically-split-rings.6878478/page-2#post-6978483

 

And here is the original post, about scopes going down/losing zero during training courses.  Very eyeopening, and shows how this issue has gotten by without notice until you have a large sampling of rifles and glass, and see a trend of RTZ failures all having a common theme: vertically split rings.

https://forum.snipershide.com/threads/return-to-zero-failures.6483776/

 

[Mick Miller]

Any permanent damage done to the optics as a result or is it a case of 'swap rings, problem gone'? Assuming no over-tightening, farmer hands etc.?

 

[MarinePMI]

Mick,

It's hard to say.  Some scopes had permanent damage, others did not.  My suspicion is that this was due to what cartridge was being fired (amount of recoil) and where the rings were placed on the scope tube in relation to the scope's erector design (as well as FFP/SFP, each with an entirely different erector system and number of lenses).  This is one of the reasons it is often recommended to not attach rings to a FFP scope near the erector adjustment housing.  There are some that say that they should also not be near the bell of the objective or ocular lens as well (since these are typically where the focal points are, for each set of lenses (objective and ocular) of a FFP scope).  

If this sort of thing interests you, I'd highly recommend perusing some of ILya's blog postings and videos.  There is a plethora of valuable information with regards to optics (how they're made, how they work, how lenses interact, etc.) on his site.  His accent can be a challenge at times, but he really knows his stuff (plus, it's part of his day job, though not rifle scopes in particular).

http://www.darklordofoptics.com

[Mick Miller]

Should be okay then, I tend to sit mine in the middly bits [lacks technical term].

[drum]

I have a conquest hd5 which i was very unhappy with,couldnt get a clear sight picture for love nor money.Thought id bought a bad one.Reading up on the issue,as you do,i read on a nz forum where someone had the same problem which was found to be vertical split rings.I took of the warne rings and tried some old sportsmatch rings.Problem solved.Sight picture was perfect.Warne rings torquing the scope tube perhaps?

 

[Big Al]

Looks like its worth changing the ring Mick and giving some feedback.

The split group pattern certainly looks more like a hardware problem than a shooter or load one.

[Mick Miller]

Crown's done. Nice work, thank you Barton GunWorks!

[brown dog]

On 5/10/2018 at 12:59 PM, MarinePMI said:

Mick,

 

Here's a video showing how the rings move, and rely on the scope tube flexing to keep it in place: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Nrfd6eQgLQ

And here is a conversation, with industry input, that explains that this is a known issue.  When Frank Galli and Ilya Koshkin both agree it's an issue, I tend to listen.  Both are experts in their areas of expertise, and look at real world data, vice marketing and BD speak.

https://forum.snipershide.com/threads/vertically-split-rings.6878478/page-2#post-6978483

 

And here is the original post, about scopes going down/losing zero during training courses.  Very eyeopening, and shows how this issue has gotten by without notice until you have a large sampling of rifles and glass, and see a trend of RTZ failures all having a common theme: vertically split rings.

https://forum.snipershide.com/threads/return-to-zero-failures.6483776/

 

Blimey, those links are an eye-opener!

I had Warnes on a Sauer 202 years back. Never liked the things, always felt the vertical spilt was a rather counter-intuitive engineering solution that was 'different just for the sake of being different'.   Just goes to show: Never fight your intuition!

[No i deer]

I never liked them either.optilocks are the badgers nadgers 

[Safeshot]

Just to bring this one up again, I have a sauer 202 which refused to hold groups with any 308 ammo, factory or reloads. Warne rings on EAW picatinny. Changed them today for different rings and hey presto groups into around MOA when hot with both factory and reloads. So if anybody wants to try the Warne ones they are welcome to an extended trial  before float testing.....

 

 

[Mick Miller]

Hmm. I was going to try the recrown before committing to a new set of 34mm rings.

What's the recommendation for 34mm Picatinny mount that didn't involve spending hundreds of pounds? Tier one? 

LEUPOLD PRW (only £70)?

[fizzbangwhallop]

8 hours ago, Mick Miller said:

Hmm. I was going to try the recrown before committing to a new set of 34mm rings.

What's the recommendation for 34mm Picatinny mount that didn't involve spending hundreds of pounds? Tier one? 

LEUPOLD PRW (only £70)?

I’ve found Recknagel to be very good.... I use their removable poly lever ones on 4 different calibre rifles.... so that’s 4 on Zeiss day scopes and 2 on the Photon Xtremes that replace 2 of the dayscopes on dark... the other two have dedicated nv scopes with their own picatinny mount bases.

The rifles sit in my cabinet without ‘scopes on and I’ve never noticed any variation in poi over several years. (Ok, some would say the Pentax M42 lenses on the Xtremes are inherently prone to a shifting poi but I’ve shot a lot of foxes with them and they’ve been serviced to keep them sweet.)

 

cheers

 

fizz

[Mick Miller]

Too late (but thanks for the recommendation), set of Tier One on the way!

[Catch-22]

Yeah I too have the Recknagel (EraTac) one piece quick detach mount for my PMII. 

Seriously solid, beautifully machined and so completely repeatable. I've taken it on and off my rifle countless times with zero drift or change in POI.

Prior to owning the EraTac mount, I did have the Tier One rings. Also a lovely bit of kit. It will do you proud.

[VarmLR]

Had similar issues with mid priced mounts (can't even remember what they were). Replaced for a set of Tier Ones and problem solved.  I now only use Tier One or Burris XTR Signature rings on my rifles as they don't cost the earth plus the Burris ones come with up to 45moa adjustment on the ring inserts.

[visiter1]

had a similer problem with a howa we thought it was the stock at first, we then changed the scope but the orignal scoped wprked perfect on another rifle and the scope we had put on the howa was doing the sames thing , we then chnged rail and mounts from warne to tier 1 problem solved.

[Mick Miller]

So an update to this thread. After recrowning the rifle and removing, replacing and reinstalling both the rail and the mounts I went and shot some of the worst groups yet. The loads were also showing signs of being over pressure at 25 degrees ambient as opposed to being fine when I developed the load over the winter at around 10 degrees ambient. 

A single test over the Chrono backed that up, with the same load producing an almost 200fps gain in velocity.

I went back to the drawing board and reduced the load to get back to 2600fps and try again, this time I also replaced the mounts with tier one mounts. 

Same deal, some awful groups followed by split groups as I got near 2600fps.

So, I decided to ditch the n550 altogether, got a sample of RS62 and put together another bunch of rounds to try. Cutting a long story short I found that 41.5gr produced a thumbnail group at 100m, gave an average of 2560 fps over 6 shots with a SD of 9fps. Cold barrel shot was a little higher than subsequent shots, however all subsequent shots are touching. 

So, it seems it could have been powder temperature sensitivity rather than mounts, crown, bullet choice, bedding or any of the other suspects. 

Shot it last weekend in a club comp and came in 2nd out of 25.