Barrett Vs. Vortex

gelatine

Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Location
GTA, ON.
Hi, Folks:

I finally got my dream rifle (98B, 338LM) and scope (Vortex HS LR). When I read all the manuals I found something interesting.

The Barrett Zero gap ring's manual said the torque is 35 in/lb, however, Vortex said the torque range shall between 15-18 in/lb.
I emailed both company's tech support... Both of them said the number is correct.

Quote from Barrett tech reply:
"There is no need to lap the rings. In fact, that is not recommended for aluminum rings. The 35 in/lbs. torque is correct for the Zero-Gap rings."

Quote from Vortex's tech reply:
"Our torque spec recommendation is 15-18 in/lbs. we don’t have a lot of experience with this specific ring and have no reason to believe it is of inferior quality, but we would still recommend adherence to the 15-18 in/lb spec. On certain products you can go up to 20 in/lbs, but most times it is not necessary. A quality ring with good surface contact will not require a lot of torque to hold the scope properly under recoil."

"To be clear, if you use 35 in/lbs you will damage your scope."


Well.... What should I do then? I have only few days to mount it on, zero it and heading for my hunting trip. I cannot offer any damage nor time loss to replace a new one.

Any ideas?

Thanks.
 
Use rosin, tighten the scope to 18 in/lbs.

Use 65 in/lbs for rings to rail.

Or buy a brand of scope that doesn't have a thinner-than-industry-standard tube (ie. not Vortex)

Not that I'm 'mr. scope' or anything, but I honestly never even heard of people crushing scope tubes until Vortex came along....... now all of a sudden, people are crushing tubes left, right, and center.

On the other hand, I'm not fond of 'zero-gap' or 'near-zero-gap' rings either.
 
Last edited:
Can't help but feel that scope isn't enough for that Barrett. I like vortex and have the entire line of gen 2 razors so not a hater...
 
b_w

Hahaha.. That's true, but it's the best I can afford at the moment. Also, compare to my shooting skill, it's way more than I really needed. :(
 
Back
Top Bottom