Scope Clearance

[Spin4Trout]

Is there any steadfast rule for the amount of space that should be left between a scope's objective end and the rifle barrel? I'm putting a Bushnell Elite 3200 3-9x40 on a Remington 700 using Leopold Rifleman bases and low Weaver quick-detatch rings. The scope is not touching the barrel, but there's not enough space left over to put the scope cap back on. Id say the space might be only about 1/32".

[woolyhunter]

As long as the scope does not touch the barrel you should have no problems. 1/32 will be plenty of clearance.

[Buckbuster]

Hey, Spin4Trout - When is a problem a problem? I'd say if you can't get a scope cap on the objective lens you should opt for a taller set of rings. You're going to have that scope mounted for a long time and that amounts to a lot of dust accumulation. When dust is cleaned off, even with a brush, some scratching occurs. It's best to eliminate the accumulation and the only way to do that is with a dust cap or a soft pouch scope cover. Of course, you could duct tape the scope end when you're not using it, but that would be a poor choice at best.

I'd suggest that you do the right thing and remount it with a taller set of rings. I had to do this myself once, after mounting a Cabela's Alaskan Guide scope with a 50mm objective. It took another trip to their retail store, but it was a worthwhile effort. I am using the flip-up covers on both the occular and objective lenses and am really happy about the way they work. Haven't lost one yet!

Buckbuster

[Yooper]

I agree with Buckbuster. You just paid a good chunk for the scope, so the best thing to do is keep it clean and safe. Why risk it?

I used to work at a place and mounted scopes all the time. I had a customer who brought in a gun with a scope mounted real close like that. He'd shoot it about 5 times and the scope would be off. I put taller mounts on and the problem was solved. FYI, it was a cheaper scope too on an older gun. Barrel jump? I don't know for sure. Could have been bad mounts too.

[OhioOutdoorsman]

I know a guy who had an uncle who thought that maybe you could jimmy the scope up a bit by using a few pieces of carboard beneath the scope and above the rings.

You really should consider getting a smaller scope. Are you really going to be taking those 400 yd shots anyway?

Who spinfishes for trout anyway? That's almost poaching.

[Buckbuster]

Ohio-

From my experience, when you jury rig there will always be a bad outcome, sooner or later, and usually sooner.

Getting a scope with a smaller objective lens could be an option, but why. A large objective lens isn't about 400 yard shots, it's about letting in more light. The larger the objective lens, the greater the capacity for light transmission, which is always an issue at first light and the last few minutes of legal shooting time. Replacing the rings is the cheapest solution, compared to buying a scope with a smaller objective lens, and you'd end up with a lesser product in the final analysis, so why would you want to?

Any scope will work fine during 95% of a hunting day, when the sun is up and bright. The problem is that 95% of the bucks you'll see show up in that 5% of the day when light is at a premium.

I only hang scopes with the largest objective lens that I can get.

Buckbuster

[LLOYD]

My own two cents on the subject of 50mm scopes. These larger objective lens, although theoretically allowing more light in, rarely offer any real difference unless you are using the scope in extremely low light situations. Some experts feel that even in low light, there is little difference between the 40mm versus the 50mm objective size. A disadvantage of 50mm objectives is that the line of sight is higher, causing the shooter to lift his head higher and make poorer contact with the his or her cheek. This is not only an annoyance, but in the case of heavier recoiling rifles can be somewhat of a liability since it lessens the contact with the rifle. Regarding your scope clearance issue, I would take the rifle to a competant gunsmith and have him assess what the issue is regarding the mounting and clearance of the scope.

[chinook]

Well said Lloyd. Sounds like a good combination ya got there. "I like a minimal gap" If it were my problem, I'd Prolly leave it as is and cut a contour off the bottom of the scope cap to miss the barrel. But that's because the last two so called "Gunsmiths" I let work on my firearms were incompetant! Hey, There's a new thread! Gunsmith stories!

[jonhearn]

I know a guy who had an uncle who thought that maybe you could jimmy the scope up a bit by using a few pieces of carboard beneath the scope and above the rings.

You really should consider getting a smaller scope. Are you really going to be taking those 400 yd shots anyway?

Who spinfishes for trout anyway? That's almost poaching.

Hi Ohio... I'm usually not real vocal on things like this but, I don't know where spin4trout lives or anything, but I know here in Southern California, you don't have a whole lot of choice in fishing... Who knows, mabye s4t lives in a place like SoCal.

-Jonathan

[OhioOutdoorsman]

Actually, Spin4Trout and I fish together. We often spin for trout and eat them. (Oh my!) I've decided to not to kid around with him on the boards anymore.......it gets people too fired up.

Just for the record, I do not reccomend using carboard in any fashion for mounting scopes.

Just for follow-up, Spin4 trout got higher weaver rings and his remmington model 700 7mm rem mag is shooting 1" groups at 100yds when cold. Really unbelievable.

[Hard H2O]

Sometimes a little shim is needed. You need something that doesn't compress or absorb moisture though.

Shims from plastic milk jugs work great. You can also purchase shim material in plastic or stainless steel from most any industrial supply outfit. The benefit of the purchased shims is that they come in known thicknesses.