Joined
·
814 Posts
I will now be offering in shop scope ring lapping services along with some better scope ring options.
Interesting...While I do lap my rifle scope rings, It never occurred to me to lap my XB scope rings. Hmmmm. Maybe that's because TP scopes come with the rings already attached to the scope, thus I just forget about it because I'm not actually taking the rings apart to put lay the scope in them. This is dumb on my part, being as I spent the $ for a pretty nice scope mounting kit with all the lapping tools in it. Well...if I experience any minor accuracy inconsistencies that I can't figure out, I will just take the rings apart and lap them to see if it helps at all.
I'm with you Vital. It certainly can't hurt in most cases. I often wonder what rings are being supplied with the higher end XB scopes. Are they Warne, Simmons, Millett, Vortex, Weaver, or are they just cheap-o rings to maximize profits? I will pay closer attention when my Evo X Marksman shows up, just so I know. I suppose the one negative to lapping XB scopes would be for those people who have issues with the shock loosening up scope mounts and rings. If your scope is being shocked enough to start walking around inside the rings, I'd think the last thing you would want is to remove material from inside those rings. Personally, I'd buy different rings if I encounter that issue, but that's just me.
+1I'm with you Vital. It certainly can't hurt in most cases. I often wonder what rings are being supplied with the higher end XB scopes. Are they Warne, Simmons, Millett, Vortex, Weaver, or are they just cheap-o rings to maximize profits? I will pay closer attention when my Evo X Marksman shows up, just so I know. I suppose the one negative to lapping XB scopes would be for those people who have issues with the shock loosening up scope mounts and rings. If your scope is being shocked enough to start walking around inside the rings, I'd think the last thing you would want is to remove material from inside those rings. Personally, I'd buy different rings if I encounter that issue, but that's just me.
Most of us already have to shoot separate dots to keep from busting arrows. I am not shooting deer at 100 yards anyway.Really to hit a deer's vitals ? With wind and weather all part of the equation I'm not convinced it will make a huge difference but I guess it could be argued for some target shooter perfectionists.
Most of us already have to shoot separate dots to keep from busting arrows. I am not shooting deer at 100 yards anyway.
Really to hit a deer's vitals ? With wind and weather all part of the equation I'm not convinced it will make a huge difference but I guess it could be argued for some target shooter perfectionists.
Don't assume all hunters are satisfied with hitting paper plate size targets I and most ethical hunters are not. Lapping scope rings for mounting on a crossbow for 1/8" precision at a 100 yard target is debatable unless you can offer up some proof. We are talking crossbows not match rifle.I'll agree with that.. Some people are ok with hitting paper plates at 30 yrds while others are trying to squeeze 1/8 inch at 100.. Me personally I think hunters should be more concerned about accuracy than target shooters, paper doesn't suffer..![]()
Don't assume all hunters are satisfied with hitting paper plate size targets I and most ethical hunters are not. Lapping scope rings for mounting on a crossbow for 1/8" precision at a 100 yard target is debatable unless you can offer up some proof. We are talking crossbows not match rifle.
Whatever turns your crank or puts money in your bank. Show me the proof and how you measure it.
No beef with you being a vendor. I just think that it would be redundant on a crossbow. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. I guess I struck a nerve with you because I questioned your post. The proof is in the pudding![]()
I'm afraid the dishonesty and lack of integrity lies with you my friend. You are selling a process to be used on crossbow scope rings that you claim will improve shooter accuracy but offer no proof. The proof is in the pudding.![]()