4" low at 15 FEET!

[GlennS1956]

A few personal "how I done it" comments...........

Thanks Ed! And thank you to everyone else that offered advice.

[HectorMedina]

I've followed this discussion for some time, and I cannot but notice that no one has talked about the mounts.

Unless you get reasonable quality mounts, much of these efforts are wasted.

Testing the mounts in a known combination of rifle/scope, and/or getting high quality mounts is absolutely essential if you want the scope and mounts to be transferrable between rifles.

Otherwise, you are regulating the barrel to THAT specific combination of scope and mounts.

In my tests, I have found as much as 10 mRads of difference vertically, though mostly laterally, simply by putting the front mount at the rear and viceversa.

Just my experience.

Keep well and shoot straight!





HM

[Back_Roads]

I've followed this discussion for some time, and I cannot but notice that no one has talked about the mounts.

Unless you get reasonable quality mounts, much of these efforts are wasted.

Testing the mounts in a known combination of rifle/scope, and/or getting high quality mounts is absolutely essential if you want the scope and mounts to be transferrable between rifles.

Otherwise, you are regulating the barrel to THAT specific combination of scope and mounts.

In my tests, I have found as much as 10 mRads of difference vertically, though mostly laterally, simply by putting the front mount at the rear and viceversa.

Just my experience.

Keep well and shoot straight!





HM

So true, I have had cheap rings that also point the scope extreme right or left, and had to flip the mounts opposite to get somewhat decent alignment.

[SpiralGroove]

I've followed this discussion for some time, and I cannot but notice that no one has talked about the mounts.

Unless you get reasonable quality mounts, much of these efforts are wasted.

Testing the mounts in a known combination of rifle/scope, and/or getting high quality mounts is absolutely essential if you want the scope and mounts to be transferrable between rifles.

Otherwise, you are regulating the barrel to THAT specific combination of scope and mounts.

In my tests, I have found as much as 10 mRads of difference vertically, though mostly laterally, simply by putting the front mount at the rear and viceversa.

Just my experience.

Keep well and shoot straight!
HM

One of the big questions I've always had is:

Are my cheap rings or mounts affecting accuracy?

I've NEVER used anything but cheaper UTG rings or single units on my Springers and even RAW PCP's .

Hector - Could this be a problem with accuracy or just getting set-up with initial POI? 

All my mounts were $20 or less   

[nced]

I've followed this discussion for some time, and I cannot but notice that no one has talked about the mounts.

Unless you get reasonable quality mounts, much of these efforts are wasted.

Testing the mounts in a known combination of rifle/scope, and/or getting high quality mounts is absolutely essential if you want the scope and mounts to be transferrable between rifles.

Otherwise, you are regulating the barrel to THAT specific combination of scope and mounts.

In my tests, I have found as much as 10 mRads of difference vertically, though mostly laterally, simply by putting the front mount at the rear and viceversa.

Just my experience.

Keep well and shoot straight!





HM

"Otherwise, you are regulating the barrel to THAT specific combination of scope and mounts."
Yep, for sure which is why there is a need to do adjustments whenever the scope and/or mounts are changed.
At first I tried some adjustable mounts and found that the initial setup was very "fiddly" and (at times) took a couple hours of mounting/adjusting/testing/unmounting etc. only to have the adjustments "shoot loose" (or however the adjustments shifted) move in less than a season of shooting about 10,000 shots. Also, the "adjustables" I used tended to put the center of the scope too high for me............


Anywhoo, bending the barrel has been a relatively quick and permanent adjustment when needed (if possible due to barrel design limitations with shrouds etc.) so "adjustables really aren't "my cup of tea".

[HectorMedina]

One of the big questions I've always had is:

Are my cheap rings or mounts affecting accuracy?

I've NEVER used anything but cheaper UTG rings or single units on my Springers and even RAW PCP's .

Hector - Could this be a problem with accuracy or just getting set-up with initial POI? 

All my mounts were $20 or less 

Kirk

Sorry for the long time to answer, life is hectic and it is more hectic when you are two weeks away from taking a plane 8,200 miles to the other side of the world.
Anyway, apologies.

I don't think of some UTG mounts, rails or accessories as "Cheap" they are inexpensive, but some of them are not cheap.
Now, they DO have the bottom of the line that MAY perform well and MAY not.

THAT is the difference between inexpensive and cheap. Inexpensive things perform. Think about this:
If you were looking for a Kahles scope, and I told you I can get you one for $1,300 when they are going for $3,400, in comparison my offer is inexpensive. But the scope will never be a "cheap" scope. (BTW, this is just an example, no truth involved in it, just an example).

UTG rails are very well made, precise and according to specs, if they say something it usually is. Same for scopes. They are not interested in the ultrasophisticatedd market, but they do make some very worthwhile scopes.

Now, if, for some reason you suddenly found that a set of mounts do not perform, then there is not much room to ask for redress. They cost what they cost and most of the time they do perform well above their price level.

On the other side, you have companies like Hawke. They are not on the inexpensive side. In Optics there is a HUGE range and they are not even in the middle, but the lower quarter of the price range, YET, their performance is well below what it SHOULD be possible for the price.
Main thing is: they do NOT "MAKE". They buy products from other companies, and so, what the manufacturer charges, once it gets to the customer is mutiplied by 4 (yes, FOUR).
Some companies have wisened up and we now have a plethora of offerings with some almost identical "chassis" just different specs or reticles or accessories, or even knobs.
But the scope is the same, manufactured in the same plant and in the same floor (optical plants are usually divided by floors where one "level" is made in one floor and the next floor makes superior products)

Perhaps I am wrong, but you are not the type of person to demand impeccable performance from the same rig over 200 shots day in - day out. You have a multitude of airguns and you enjoy them all so, for you, if you have to correct a few clicks between one use of a given system and the next (with perhaps 4 weeks apart), it is no biggie. In that sense, your use of UTG mounts is logical, warranted, and completely acceptable.
Doesn't mean that you may find yourself in a situation that you cannot decide what to do (if the scope is a bit crooked and the mounts are a bit crooked and the shot ends 4" low or to the left, or to the right with any given combination). You would simply start swapping parts until you got a right combination: maybe the scope is a bit crooked to the right, but the mounts are a bit crooked to the left.... Bingo! You have a solution. Good for you!

I can never be in that position. It takes too much time and effort to try and test all possibilities. I need to proceed on firm footings.

And then comes the fact that I am working with OPG's (Other People's Guns). So it is my responsibility to make it clear to the user the limits of the work performed.

AND this brings us to the concrete example I wanted to give to the friends here:

A user complains that the DIANA 54 he bought is not performing. Initially, it was a case of a blown breech seal. Once the issue was found the remedy was self-installed by the user.
But then the gun, at full power was shooting severely to the LEFT!
Hmmm, of course one possibility is to regulate the barrel, no problem, but this being a DIANA AirKing (not a "Pro"), but still a DIANA AK I was extremely curious.

I asked for the gun to be sent to me.

As a gunsmith I keep a "tool" for most things. One of them is measuring how bad is the "need" for regulation. For this, I have kept for many years a low powered SIGHTRON that has proven to be pretty well aligned between Optical and Mechanical axes. It was not an expensive scope, but it is not a "cheap" scope either.

This was the result:


As you can see, the iron sights (shifted ALL the way to the left), did give me a ShR (shifted Right) POI
Now, CENTERING the Iron sights, the impact truly was ShL
I then mounted the "witness" scope and mounts (an Accurized set of ZR's) and the impact was EXACTLY under the centered iron sights POI's.

So:
We had an agreement between the mechanical sights and the optically centered scope. AND the barrel itself was not too bad, only 1.2 mRads ShL(Good first conclusion)

Then I MECHANICALLY centered the scope, the shots ShL by about 1.4 mRads more, again, not a bad conclusion.

I then took the Hawke scope that had come with the gun, made a special set of ZR mounts (the Hawkes have an erector spring adjustment screw that protrudes and needs the milling of mounts to give it some clearance):



and tested the scope with the Accurized mounts.

This was the result, compared the original test:



Well, 38 mm's translated to 7.6 mRads!

And not only that, the optical center of the scope is WAY out of the mechanical center of the scope. These are the turrets' positions, windage:


Elevation:


Mechanical center would be at 1½ revolutions, not at 1 revolution.

Of course NO SCOPE ever made can accommodate that (more than 100 X ¼ MOA clicks in ONE direction, that would mean well over 200 clicks over the whole range).

So, what can be done?

IMHO, the scope needs to go. But the user wants the rifle regulated to the scope and mounts. So I may end up doing that. He has been told in no uncertain terms that that once this "marriage" is made, there is no divorce, and if he sells the rifle, he will need to gtive away the scope and the mounts for nothing because the next owner may decide to change the scope and if the now ShR barrel starts impacting too much to the right, then he is going to have a problem and/or he will need to explain and refund.

As part of a DIANA "Warranty" I think I can regulate the barrel to a reasonable degree, but I do not feel confident regulating to 7.4 mRads ShL

Therein lies the problem. It is very easy to blame the rifle, we tend to think of optics as the "finer" elements in the system. But the truth is that they are not.

Sadly, my experience with Hawke's warranty is so abismal as to be one of those "Don't even bother" cases.

Anyway, we'll see what is the final decision. My main message is that IN ANY SYSTEM, be prepared to test item by item to find out really what is happening.

Keep well and shoot straight!






HM

[cjtamu]

Timely post, Hector.  Began to suspect couple weeks ago I had intermittent parallax issue with a scope. So many things in the system to look at and even more fun when it’s a gun with a barrel latching mechanism. Went through some of the testing you describe. Mounted scope again this morning and it did me a favor. Parallax adjustment stopped working completely ha ha ha. Much easier warranty return.

[SpiralGroove]

One of the big questions I've always had is:
Are my cheap rings or mounts affecting accuracy?
I've NEVER used anything but cheaper UTG rings or single units on my Springers and even RAW PCP's .
Hector - Could this be a problem with accuracy or just getting set-up with initial POI? 
All my mounts were $20 or less   

  Kirk

Sorry for the long time to answer, life is hectic and it is more hectic when you are two weeks away from taking a plane 8,200 miles to the other side of the world.
Anyway, apologies.

I don't think of some UTG mounts, rails or accessories as "Cheap" they are inexpensive, but some of them are not cheap.
Now, they DO have the bottom of the line that MAY perform well and MAY not.

UTG rails are very well made, precise and according to specs, if they say something it usually is. Same for scopes. They are not interested in the ultrasophisticatedd market, but they do make some very worthwhile scopes.

Perhaps I am wrong, but you are not the type of person to demand impeccable performance from the same rig over 200 shots day in - day out. You have a multitude of airguns and you enjoy them all so, for you, if you have to correct a few clicks between one use of a given system and the next (with perhaps 4 weeks apart), it is no biggie. In that sense, your use of UTG mounts is logical, warranted, and completely acceptable.

Anyway, we'll see what is the final decision. My main message is that IN ANY SYSTEM, be prepared to test item by item to find out really what is happening.

Keep well and shoot straight!

HM

Yes Hector, you are correct .

I have really never had an issue with my scope rings that I'm aware of - so I guess inexpensive is fine for me .

One thing I will do ... is to run a piece of 1" or 30mm round stock between my rings (various guns) with 500 grit paper - to make sure any burrs or troublesome edges are removed.
I think this could greatly help with any scratching/denting of scopes.  This will change POI slightly, but after a few clicks .... were back.

Thanks again,
Kirk

[Methuselah]

Not to change the subject Hector, but you mentioned Hawke warranty isn't, ah, worthy...

I'd be appreciative for your opinion on which scope manufacturers stand behind their products. This especially since I own one of the Hawke scopes and warranty was one of the deciding factors for selection.

BTW, with your travel situation, I'm in absolutely no hurry for a response 

[Bayman]

Not to change the subject Hector, but you mentioned Hawke warranty isn't, ah, worthy...

I'd be appreciative for your opinion on which scope manufacturers stand behind their products. This especially since I own one of the Hawke scopes and warranty was one of the deciding factors for selection.

BTW, with your travel situation, I'm in absolutely no hurry for a response 

I don't normally argue with Hector but the Hawke warranty is excellent. I've utilized it several times and never been rightfully disappointed. They didn't replace one and I was embarrassed when I found out it was my misdiagnosis.

I any event I probably have two dozen Hawke scopes on various springers, rimfire and centerfire rifles. Are they the best? No, not by a long shot. BUT, IMO they're the best value for the money. Sure there's better glass out there for purists out there, but let's face it we're not shooting 1000 yards with our BB guns. They're a good mid option between the cheap Amazon scopes and a Leupold. The Hawke Vantage line is springer rated upto 12 FPE. I got a 3-9x40 Vantage I use as a shop mule that won't die and it's been on several 12+ FPE springers including R1s. Ymmv. Fwiw it's barrel droop that ruins most springer's scopes and I've fixed every gun before shooting them long with that scope. I typically use Airmax scopes on my 12+ FPE springers. The glass is better, I like the reticle better and they rarely break.

[SpiralGroove]

Yeah, I haven't had much trouble with my Hawke 3x9x40 or 4x12x40 scopes that are on my Weihrauch springers < 12 FPE.  Probably had at least 10 of them.
I got all my 4x12x40 Vantage scopes on Dvor for $75 back in the day.  Got 5 of them .

One Hawke 3x9x40 broke on a Hatsan 95, and Hawke replaced it promptly .  Hatsan airguns are very hard on scopes.

-> My assumption is Hector has seen a lot more issues .... but I'm guessing .

I now use only 4x12x40 on the HW30, HW50's and a few HW35E's as they're perfect out to 50 yards.
All my HW95/R9/R10/HW80s/HW80SLK have UTG 4x16x44 scopes (glass reticle) to shoot out to 80 yds.  These used to be $125/$150 on Dvor ...... They're now $200 or more!
The UTG reticle is very fine and likely Not liked by all . 

I don't care for the Hawke 1/2 mil-dot reticles or the fact they only focus to 15 yards.  My crawl space range is 12/13 yards and hence they would be unusable.
I'm too cheap to spend $300 on a AirMax - Hawke's prices have really gone up in the last few years!

Now for PCP's, I've moved up to Element/Athlon ....  shooting at 100 yards.

[Yogi]

Not to change the subject Hector, but you mentioned Hawke warranty isn't, ah, worthy...

I'd be appreciative for your opinion on which scope manufacturers stand behind their products. This especially since I own one of the Hawke scopes and warranty was one of the deciding factors for selection.

BTW, with your travel situation, I'm in absolutely no hurry for a response 

My experience with a sample space of one.

I bought a MTC/Optisan scope from AoA.  One of the turret tops had worked loose and the brass wheel with a pin that turns the internals had sheared.  I sent to scope back to the seller, they sent it back two weeks later saying "NO PROBLEM".  No change!  I contacted the parent company in the UK and sent an e-mail to the president of the company.  A week later AoA sent me a new scope.  That was my milage, yours may vary....

FWIW-This is the first time I have heard anything but exemplary news about Hawke's return policy.  However, you DO HEAR of lots of people who return Hawke defective scopes and thus NEED that return policy.

[Methuselah]

I've only got the one Hawke scope. At the moment it's on a Savage Mark I .22 pb (2-7X32 AO with wire reticle) where I would think it should last forever. One scope's gonna have to pull duty on a Hatsan 125 though, which was why the interest in warranty...

On scopes, I'm baffled why so many folks own them in magnification higher than 10. I get unstable at 5 or 6 power unless I'm having a really good day.

Anyway,  I hope no hard feelings, didn't intend to hijack the thread

[SpiralGroove]

One scope's gonna have to pull duty on a Hatsan 125 though, which was why the interest in warranty...

On scopes, I'm baffled why so many folks own them in magnification higher than 10. I get unstable at 5 or 6 power unless I'm having a really good day.

- Yes, the Hatsan 125 will test the scopes strength - good luck .

- I only bench shoot and have tired eyes .... I need the magnification.  For 100 yard shots I use a 6x24x50 or 10-40x56. 

However, I have fond memories of when I used a peep sight exclusively .

[HectorMedina]

I don't think we disagree too much.
SMALL Hawkes are normally, not bad. You can get EXACTLY the same scope (sans the brand)  for 30% less, but then there is this "warranty" thing.
MOST of my business is high end oriented, the VERY few "plinkers" I've made have merited their own entries in the blog, LOL! They are that rare.
I either make target rifles, or hunting rifles that demand that "extra bit" and so, scopes I need to put on the build are, normally, in the 16X top magnification, so 3 - 4X at the low end and 24-50X on the high end. Also, most of the time, I mount whatever the customer says he wants, from Athlons to Vectors and all the alphabet in between. When they ask for recommendation, I usually recommend Vector optics on the inexpensive range (Discovery if the budget is REALLY limited), and SIGHTRON/Kahles on the high end.

Coming to this concrete situation and why I do not have a good opinion of Hawke, pictures speak for a thousand words:
This scope was built on a competition FT rifle:


After a few weeks of use, the reticle was like this:


They refused to replace because "after analysis of the scope, we have discovered that the scope has been tampered with".

You see the small locating dimple in the first picture?

There was another instance where the user had had to (upon my recommendation) put electrical tape around an ocular assembly that had started to loosen and rotate with successive firings (another FT rifle) thereby changing the ranging readings. Their response? "Adhesive was used to lock the components preventing a complete analysis, therefore we cannot establish that the scope was not tampered with".

Both scopes ended up in the trash.

As I said, as long as the scope is one of the smaller/less expensive versions, it's OK in medium powered springers and PCP's. Take it to the 20 ft-lbs D48's and D54's and they are inadequate. AND, because in reality, their ONLY line that is truly springer rated is the "Air-Max" line, all other lines are supported "at will".

Impeccable warranties? Vector Optics, Vortex Optics, SIGHTRON, NightForce, Kahles

Price-wise, the Hawke offerings have good correspondence with items in the Discovery and Vector lines.
Leapers / UTG and Center Point have come a long way, don't dismiss them.

As to why some shooters need higher magnifications: Rangefinding and performance at low lighting conditions.
With current technologies, the size and weight of a 16X and even 24X rivals what a few years ago was the average size and weight of a 9X or 12X.

Anyway, thanks for reading!





HM

[Bayman]

I don't think we disagree too much.
SMALL Hawkes are normally, not bad. You can get EXACTLY the same scope (sans the brand)  for 30% less, but then there is this "warranty" thing.
MOST of my business is high end oriented, the VERY few "plinkers" I've made have merited their own entries in the blog, LOL! They are that rare.
I either make target rifles, or hunting rifles that demand that "extra bit" and so, scopes I need to put on the build are, normally, in the 16X top magnification, so 3 - 4X at the low end and 24-50X on the high end. Also, most of the time, I mount whatever the customer says he wants, from Athlons to Vectors and all the alphabet in between. When they ask for recommendation, I usually recommend Vector optics on the inexpensive range (Discovery if the budget is REALLY limited), and SIGHTRON/Kahles on the high end.

Coming to this concrete situation and why I do not have a good opinion of Hawke, pictures speak for a thousand words:
This scope was built on a competition FT rifle:


After a few weeks of use, the reticle was like this:


They refused to replace because "after analysis of the scope, we have discovered that the scope has been tampered with".

You see the small locating dimple in the first picture?

There was another instance where the user had had to (upon my recommendation) put electrical tape around an ocular assembly that had started to loosen and rotate with successive firings (another FT rifle) thereby changing the ranging readings. Their response? "Adhesive was used to lock the components preventing a complete analysis, therefore we cannot establish that the scope was not tampered with".

Both scopes ended up in the trash.

As I said, as long as the scope is one of the smaller/less expensive versions, it's OK in medium powered springers and PCP's. Take it to the 20 ft-lbs D48's and D54's and they are inadequate. AND, because in reality, their ONLY line that is truly springer rated is the "Air-Max" line, all other lines are supported "at will".

Impeccable warranties? Vector Optics, Vortex Optics, SIGHTRON, NightForce, Kahles

Price-wise, the Hawke offerings have good correspondence with items in the Discovery and Vector lines.
Leapers / UTG and Center Point have come a long way, don't dismiss them.

As to why some shooters need higher magnifications: Rangefinding and performance at low lighting conditions.
With current technologies, the size and weight of a 16X and even 24X rivals what a few years ago was the average size and weight of a 9X or 12X.

Anyway, thanks for reading!





HM

Sound completely different from my experience.. I have utilzed Hawkea warranty several times over the years. Whether you look at that as bad or good is up to you. They've always came through for me. I don't have any high end customers or 20 FPE springers although I did have a 23 FPE RX1 that my test mule Vantage survived.
From a regular guy view point I wouldn't worry about the warranty. I just sent back a 2-7 Airmax because it had a weird dot appear on the reticle glass. I'm not sure of its origin but there's a new in the mail already. As a non sponsored regular guy, Hawke has always been good to me.. BTW never wrap a scope tube with anything. Good rings and proper torque negate the need for tape barriers.

[SpiralGroove]

Hector,
Sounds like they don't want U to tinker with the scope -> at all .... just return them.

Scopes are one thing I don't really tinker with ... I don't really have the knowledge to ..... so just send 'em back and get a new one .

[braskaboy]

Hmm, I'm learning a lot.

My current favorite scope is a .22MOA Leupold 2-7x33

I work at a gun store so I can get it for $225 and I like that it is a US made scope.

That said, the reticle is very fine and sometimes hard to pick up against darker targets in dawn/dusk settings.

I'm learning why so many people want parralax adjustable scopes for close range. 

I was thinking a 3x24 or 3x30 acog would be a fun scope for a 12fpe rifle.  I like fiber optics/tritium in my reticle.

[HectorMedina]

Sound completely different from my experience.. I have utilzed Hawkea warranty several times over the years. Whether you look at that as bad or good is up to you. They've always came through for me. I don't have any high end customers or 20 FPE springers although I did have a 23 FPE RX1 that my test mule Vantage survived.
From a regular guy view point I wouldn't worry about the warranty. I just sent back a 2-7 Airmax because it had a weird dot appear on the reticle glass. I'm not sure of its origin but there's a new in the mail already. As a non sponsored regular guy, Hawke has always been good to me.. BTW never wrap a scope tube with anything. Good rings and proper torque negate the need for tape barriers.

I'm glad that they have worked for you. These two scopes costed me over $1,600 because I had to, on one hand take the loss and on the other put a working scope on the shooters guns.
Replaced with SIGHTRON STac's and never looked back.

This was early in my gunsmithing career, around the first go-around of Brad Bonnar at Hawke, perhaps if I ask nicely now they would pay more attention? LOL!

Variety is the spice of life.

@ braskaboy.- just remember that spring-piston airguns kill the scopes through vibrations. Not all scopes are designed for the vibrations that spring-piston rifles can deliver to the scope.
Inverse recoil has been more or less domesticated, after all, the closing of the FN-FAL bolt on an empty chamber is about the same as a Diana 48, but it is the vibrations the ones that kill the scopes.

Thanks for reading!






HM

[Keen]

On scopes, I'm baffled why so many folks own them in magnification higher than 10. I get unstable at 5 or 6 power unless I'm having a really good day.

Anyway,  I hope no hard feelings, didn't intend to hijack the thread

I'll send my eyes over so you may try them out.

I think you'd understand