crushed Vortex scope tube

[steve101610]

Are you using their rings on one of their bases? Many manufacturers make claims that are not always true for every situation. A quality one piece base with a good set of matched rings won't require much lapping. Two piece bases with cheaper rings could require alot of lapping depending on how true the action was drilled and tapped.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

[70oldsracer]

Are you using their rings on one of their bases? Many manufacturers make claims that are not always true for every situation. A quality one piece base with a good set of matched rings won't require much lapping. Two piece bases with cheaper rings could require alot of lapping depending on how true the action was drilled and tapped.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

In certain circumstances, this might be an issue, but that was not the case for me. I have a picatinny rail on my savage and Warne rings. The front and back rings are practically in perfect alignment. I check all my set ups with an alignment tool before I even put a scope in the rings. Here are two pics of my set up. The tube being crushed was clearly not a misalignment issue.
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/640x480q90/923/sVwygK.jpg
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/640x480q90/923/ENsfqn.jpg

[yobuck]

It's funny this was brought up. Realize if you can that ive been using scopes for more than 60 years.
Not that it qualifies me for anything more than lots of recollection for lots of years.
And that recollection is i never knew anybody who lapped scope rings, and ive known lots of very good shooters.
But until the Vortex, like the torque driver, id never owned lapping tools for scope rings.
But it was advised that i do that, so i bought a set.
Actually the rings were very good and didn't really need lapping.
While i was at it, i checked all of our guns including some with very old and inexpensive rings like the old Weavers on the cheap Weaver 2 pc bases, and found they were all surprisingly good.
Again, our Vortex problem wasent a damaged scope tube caused by improperly aligned rings, as the tube was never damaged and still isnt.

[Stumpkiller]

It was all the rage back when Bob Milek was writing for Guns & Ammo.

Somewhere in the basement I have the gear. Abrasive paste and a 1" tube.

I have a couple of the Redfield one-piece bases where the front & rear (steel) rings are keyed into a slot and then rotated 90° to lock the dovetails in. THOSE are rugged beyond belief but prone to be slightly off or toqued when getting them looked in place. I did lap those.

[70oldsracer]

It was all the rage back when Bob Milek was writing for Guns & Ammo.

Somewhere in the basement I have the gear. Abrasive paste and a 1" tube.

I have a couple of the Redfield one-piece bases where the front & rear (steel) rings are keyed into a slot and then rotated 90° to lock the dovetails in. THOSE are rugged beyond belief but prone to be slightly off or toqued when getting them looked in place. I did lap those.

This is the exact and only reason I originally I bought this kit. I was building a 6.5x55 Swedish Mauser and using a Leupold one piece base with dove tail Leupold steel rings. I haven't lapped a set of rings since. I do use the alignment bars just to give me some piece of mind before putting my scope in the rings. Since I had the kit out, I was going to drill and tap a hole in the back of my 1" lapping tool so I can install a threaded rod in it and use my drill to lap rings rather than the handle that came with it. I think it will be a lot faster and easier. I'll probably never have to use it, but it gives me another project to keep me busy.

[yobuck]

Well there you go, thanks for the confirmation.
As for the old Redfield setup, that was very popular in the 50s and 60s, and is the same as the Leupold setup.
I still use that setup with a one pc base on a 700 Rem action chambered in 7x300 Weatherby, wearing of all things a vx3 3.5x10 scope.
It worked, and it still does, so why change it.

[bobbyj]

Great discussion. I learned quite a few things about scope mounting. 'Do's' and 'dont's'; 'like's', and otherwise.

I did eventually acquire a "Fat Wrench" from Wheeler Engineering. I use it now, whenever I mount a scope. The Fat Wrench suggested 20 in. lbs., so that's what I set my scopes to. So far, they still work and shoot as well as I am capable of shooting. To be fair, .243 Win,, .223 Rem., and 17HMR are not going to rock my scopes too badly.

I'm an average rifle shooter, and, also with 'average' knowledge of optics. Never could afford the 'top-shelf' scopes, so I was content to use the less expensive models. Weaver, Redfield, Burris scopes, and I have a couple of the newer, less expensive Nikon (P-series) scopes. That's not to say "cheap", as some of the "average, everyday" scopes, do satisfy the shooting masses and have done so for ages.

I own four Vortex scopes of varying powers. Like anyone else who is an 'average Joe' with a limited income, my purchases are, like many, based on successful marketing by the scope manufacturer. I spent what I could afford, and what I believed was a good value for my needs.

I haven't had any issues with any of the Vortex(es) as of yet over the past 4 years, and never thought much about it. They work, for my purposes.

Although, a nice higher-end Leupold, or maybe a NightForce would make a good "bucket list" item; one day, before assuming room temp.

I've got a Weaver K-4 fixed power Scout Scope on my Marlin 1894 .44 Mag - again, not expensive, yet does what I want it to do.

I recently had to use, no kidding, an "Eazy-Out" screw remover because my friend, who had little experience with scope mounting, had tightened down the tube rings so tightly, the hex screws were stripped out, and I could not back them out without using the "Easy Out" device. I removed the tube ring screws, and, surprisingly, I did not detect any malformation or indentation of the scope tube. I guess he's lucky for that. I will be re-attaching it to the rifle with the proper wrench.

bobbyj.

[RandyB]

Great discussion. I learned quite a few things about scope mounting. 'Do's' and 'dont's'; 'like's', and otherwise.

I did eventually acquire a "Fat Wrench" from Wheeler Engineering. I use it now, whenever I mount a scope. The Fat Wrench suggested 20 in. lbs., so that's what I set my scopes to. So far, they still work and shoot as well as I am capable of shooting. To be fair, .243 Win,, .223 Rem., and 17HMR are not going to rock my scopes too badly.

I'm an average rifle shooter, and, also with 'average' knowledge of optics. Never could afford the 'top-shelf' scopes, so I was content to use the less expensive models. Weaver, Redfield, Burris scopes, and I have a couple of the newer, less expensive Nikon (P-series) scopes. That's not to say "cheap", as some of the "average, everyday" scopes, do satisfy the shooting masses and have done so for ages.

I own four Vortex scopes of varying powers. Like anyone else who is an 'average Joe' with a limited income, my purchases are, like many, based on successful marketing by the scope manufacturer. I spent what I could afford, and what I believed was a good value for my needs.

I haven't had any issues with any of the Vortex(es) as of yet over the past 4 years, and never thought much about it. They work, for my purposes.

Although, a nice higher-end Leupold, or maybe a NightForce would make a good "bucket list" item; one day, before assuming room temp.

I've got a Weaver K-4 fixed power Scout Scope on my Marlin 1894 .44 Mag - again, not expensive, yet does what I want it to do.

I recently had to use, no kidding, an "Eazy-Out" screw remover because my friend, who had little experience with scope mounting, had tightened down the tube rings so tightly, the hex screws were stripped out, and I could not back them out without using the "Easy Out" device. I removed the tube ring screws, and, surprisingly, I did not detect any malformation or indentation of the scope tube. I guess he's lucky for that. I will be re-attaching it to the rifle with the proper wrench.

bobbyj.

I learned a lot too. I ordered the same Wheeler wrench and also learned that there are a multitude of aluminum tubes that can be destroyed by over tightening. Not exclusive to Vortex.

You can listen to folks on gun forums and you'll hear every brand imaginable called trash. I don't want to own trash and certainly can't afford a NF, Leupold, Meopta, Swarovski or any other premium scopes costing twice what I paid for my rifle.

I too own Vortex scopes and really it gets my attention when I hear them spoken about in a disparagingly manner. Especially by folks who claim to have more knowledge than I. So, I often start to listen and feel I've been misled and even consider selling off my beloved scopes. Which, until now have exceeded my expectations and have proven to be a great value. I mean, just last week I paid $269 for a Strike Eagle 1-8x24 that included a CM-202 mount. A month ago, I bought a Viper LR 4-16x44 for $302. Great value for that money. I've owned many Vortex scopes and have always been very pleased with them. I also like Nikon scopes and have had many of them.

I just got through looking at some review sights trying to decide what am I going to replace these scopes with? Here's about par for what I found, and I'd wager you'd find the same.

On Optic's Den website's Review of Best Rifle Scopes, their overall number #1 recommendation is Vortex Diamondback. Their number one sub $500 scope is the Vortex Viper.
Field & Steam list of the 10 Absolute Best Rifle Scopes with those upper echelon scopes included the Vortex Viper PST at #10.
Outdoor Life's best of 2017 has the Diamondback on there and say you won't find better elevation and windage controls on any $2000 scope.
Target Tamer's Best scopes under $500 has the Diamondback at #2. Their top 3 scopes under $1000 includes 2 other Vortex models.

These are people who are passionate enough to devote much of their life to reviewing scopes and other outdoor shooting products and they say my money is well spent. So, tell me. What can I take the $269 I paid for my Vortex Strike Eagle and replace it with a superior scope? What about that $302 I paid for the Viper 4-16x44? What can I buy for that same money to be a better scope for my new 300 Winmag Savage? After this little review and reflection period, I've decided to hang onto what I got and be proud of it for what it is. A great value not only in my opinion, but in the opinion of most all people who have direct knowledge of the subject at hand.

[Stumpkiller]

https://www.opticsplanet.com/nikon-prostaff-5-3-5-14x40-tehtf.html

[70oldsracer]

Well, Vortex sent me a brand new scope, it came in the mail today. That's less than two weeks, not bad. The letter says they replaced the scope due to damaged tube from overtighted rings and they recommend mounting the scope using a torque wrench at 15-18 in/lbs. The funny thing is, the tag on the scope mentions nothing about a torque recommendation.
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/923/R5PztK.jpg
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/924/rkCZIF.jpg

[Iowa Fox]

You can't beat that for customer service. I like Vortex products and really appreciate the way they take care of old Veterans like me.

[Stumpkiller]

Good to know they still stand behind the product.