@alamo5000
Got any updates? Is the optic issue corrected?
Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
@alamo5000
Got any updates? Is the optic issue corrected?
Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
Holy smokes. Yeah. Kinda.Originally Posted by Tokarev
It's not all the way corrected yet but I am hoping to find out soon how this will go.
Here is the background: I bought an optic which I assumed was bad/bent/lemon etc. I sent that one back and got a refund. Bought a second copy. Had issues as well. I contacted the optic manufacturer and they were really on the ball. They hand picked another optic and did a range certification on that (third) copy and sent it out to me without any questions really. I mounted my third optic. I was getting 11 mils of elevation out of 32 available. None of that added up to the range certification that I got (in writing) that included tracking and zero.
After a ton of testing and basically wasting a bunch of ammo I came to the conclusion that the scope mount was bad. Needless to say that I did a LOT of tests to figure this out. I am 99% sure that this was the problem. I contacted that manufacturer and they sent me a label and I returned it to them for inspection.
Hopefully I hear back from them soon with news that I am getting a replacement mount. I figure that second and definitely the third optic were actually fine. After a whole slew of tests I am quite certain it was the mount that was the culprit. Needless to say this has been so far a 6 week long ordeal.
I don't have tools to do a test on an optic mount itself but what it appears to be is the cant on the mount was machined wrong. I don't want to mention the company (yet) until I hear back from them with their findings and see how they handle it. Needless to say when I mounted up the scope correctly I got 11 mils of elevation. When I turned it around with the cantilever towards the shooter (and mounted the optic in a backwards mount) I got around 19 mils of elevation, which is where it is supposed to be. That also lines up exactly with the certification I got about the specific optic that I got from them.
Anyway not solved yet. Hopefully it's not too much trouble going forward. It's already been a headache and six weeks of nonsense.
???
Any updates?
Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
Got my mount replaced. Somebody really effed up on the first one. It took two months, three rifles, and three scopes, but I finally figured it out. An employee at said company milled the slope of the mount the wrong direction. They did however confirm this was the problem and sent me a replacement.
I got it on the rifle and got it zeroed. I shot some Hornady 108 grain ammo over a chrono just a couple of hours ago. My average was 2756fps.
I normally never buy factory ammo but in this case I am purchasing it to collect the brass. I have not done any load development yet.
Total over the previous 2.5 months I have put maybe 100 rounds down range, but the vast majority of that was troubleshooting to finally find a messed up scope mount...
The weather has been pretty bad the last few weeks but once I get into some load development and get something I like I will definitely stretch it's legs. I was getting MORE than the advertised velocities so that's interesting.
With that ammo I could hit 1000 yards just using hold overs in my reticle. I built mine to be a 1K rifle and it's easily going to get there I think (I haven't took it out that far yet). The cool thing is I have a good velocity window to work with. Even if I get a node or a bullet powder combination that is 50 or 100 fps slower I still get what I am after in the way of a rifle. Typically I am not one to 'hot rod' my loads so that works out great.
Really and truly I was planning out a bigger caliber gun for long range target shooting (1K+). The longest regular shots I have are 1,400 with opportunities for longer every once in a while. When I was trying to decide on things the 6ARC dropped so I figured 'why not'. I can shoot it for a lot cheaper and it meets a lot of wants.
With my twist rate and barrel length I kind of ruled out shooting light bullets, but I knew that going in and it was a choice I made after a lot of thought. If anyone gets one in a 20" or shorter rifle 1:7 would be a no brainer. It should be pretty standard I think, at least so far.
I built mine with a special purpose in mind, but I am still thinking through what an optimal barrel length would be for an all around rifle. So far though the cartridge is definitely interesting. Getting components to test is a pain in the ass though...fortunately I have several pounds of Varget left and 16 pounds of CFE 223 that hasn't even been opened. I will have to make due with those two for now. Bullets though are hard to come by. At least 6mm ones.
Something to add to the checklist. Seems like it should be easy enough to check that by measuring the parts.
.
-----------------------------------------
Not another dime.
Other than just shooting the gun I don't know of any way to test that. I've never had the need to test it before. At least until now. None the less it is replaced now. It should have never happened but what's done is done I guess.
20moa base? The slope is usually pretty noticeable.
Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
I agree.
The front of the scope should be pointing slightly downward.
-Seconds Count. Misses Don't-
It wasn't a full 20 MOA and it wasn't a base (in the traditional sense). The actual mount itself (a one piece) was machined wrong. To complicate that some the first optic I got was bad as well (I think it got bent somehow). When I got the first optic all mounted up I had like 1 or 2 mils of elevation left in the turret, which was obvious WAY off... I had like 30 mils down and 2 up... so I sent that one back, got a refund etc... and that wasn't a fast process.
Then I ordered another scope and it was off too albeit not as much as the first one (at least I thought so). So I sent that one back for warranty... they replaced it before I ever sent it in (great customer service) but in hindsight that second optic as well as the replacement one were both good. They basically heard my story and sent a label with the new optic that they had range certified.
Within about two or three days of getting a range certified optic I KNEW it wasn't the optic at that point. The optics manufacturer hand picked an optic and put it on a rifle and zeroed it as well as did the other tracking tests and so forth.
At that point I started breaking out the calipers and did a ton of other tests and isolated the problem. Keep in mind that all of this was done during my off time from work (when it wasn't raining or whatever). Between all the shipping, boxing, shipping again, refunds, and whatever I figured it out. Plus I tried mounting it on other rifles and so on and so forth as well. Then I sent the mount back to the manufacturer who took a little bit of time to examine it themselves... It took too much time and a bit of frustration.
It however wasn't something that I could visually see, at least not without someone telling me beforehand what the problem was.
I have been playing around with some 112 Grain MatchBurners with so so results. The other day I found a single box of 108 grain Hornady bullets so I bought them.
Today with my first load, without any seating depth tests or any of that stuff I shot this on the first try. Outside edges measure .517". Center to center it's .27".
Since one MOA is 1.08" at 100 yards, this leaves me with exactly a .25 MOA 5 shot group. Not too bad I would say. Especially for how it went down. First load. At all.
I shot it off of a bipod and rear bag.
Reply With Quote