Sgt_Mike
Well-known member
in a recent post about a Burris scope 6.5-20 x 50mm I stuck on a Savage Mk II (22LR) I mentioned running out of elevation, which I was using Leupold rings (rifleman version not my usual go to but on a rimfire should be stout enough). This particular model of the Full Field II line. Is the target version which means only 30 " at 100 yards so that is 15" up, 15" down from center, the regular version has about double the correction.
Well at the 50 I'm still low because of the round used.
Knowing that the Burris Signature Zee Rings and the Burris XTR (?) rings can be offset via offset inserts ( the XTR have the offsets included, and the signature Z's doesn't have the offset's included and the construction of the rings hence the almost $200ish vs the $60.00 pricing between the two versions).
The offset inserts are to allow up to a 40 MOA correction in the scope rings. I picked up a set of the Signature Z's, not exactly the height I wanted but they will work, I still get a good cheek weld and eye relief with them. In the packaging they come with 0 MOA inserts, the opi lock offset insert is a separate purchase.
I had entertained the thought of using masking tape to provide this offset as a interim until I can locate a set of correct offsets. This them led me to bug / ask @hm1996 a question about the usage of this. We held a discussion via PM he was extremely helpful, but noted he could not actually provide exact guidance as it was a scope vs Iron sights and the sight radius difference.
I did more research to attempt to understand the process and the exact offset with the differing inserts. I did find a article that provided the information I was seeking. Responded back to Clarence what I had found. It was really late so after that PM I sat down doing the math of trajectory and LOS difference crudely. Without the sight radius. Then I actually went back to the instruction manual with the rings low and behold the exact information I was seeking with the ring spacing (sight radius) .
My rings are spaced at 3.50" so the following table applies to my current setup with the amount of offset.
0.005" = 5.15" correction @ 100 yards
0.010" = 10.3" " "
0.015" = 15.45"
0.020" = 20.6"
0.025" = 25.75"
0.030" = 30.90"
0.035" = 36.05"
0.040" = 41.20"
In the pamphlet / instructions it also covers ring spacing correction of 3.75", 4.0", 4.75", 5.0", 5.25", 5.50", 5.75" and finally 6.0" which are all different values as a guide. The recommendation is to fire with the scope reticle in a centered position vertically and horizontally . Then use the appropriate offset to reduce the amount of correction within the scope. The correction can be applied Up, down , Left, and right depending on the orientation of the offset insert in the ring.
If members would like to see all, or even just a few of the values (ring spacing), ask and I'll be glad to post the desired or even all the differing ring spacing in different posts in this thread.
For a reference, the concept is actually not new Redfield engineered the ability of windage correction with their standard bases, Leopold continues to use that exact design today that Redfield pioneered. And it was at one time known that tape could be used as a slight shim to lower or raise the LOS depending on if applied on the front or rear. Masking tape in thickness (4.6 mils = 0.0046" ) is one of the most consistent known items. To the point many "smiths" will use it vs a no go gauge, by applying strips to the go gauge to make a No Go gauge. In the event say the Go is available and the No Go can't be located quickly enough, or not on hand.
The Burris inserts are actually the best method as it prevents any misalignment on the scope tube itself when used correctly and will not mar the scope.
So in my case I was shooting at 50 yds impacting 1" low (maxed out on elevation) ... how does that relate the table is in 100 yards. Because I'm low the shim should be applied to the rear ring to cause the muzzle to rise being the round up. Simply divide the value of the shim by half to get a reference. I.E. a 0.015" shim applied to the rear insert (on the shim to ring contact area) should net me 7.73" higher impact than without the shim, placed on the front ring lowers the impact.
What if I want to zero in 25 yard increments simply divide the value by four the multiply the value in quarters, using the 0.015" shim will net 15.45" divide by 4 = 3.8625" correction per 25 yards.
Say I want to zero @ 75 yards multiply the value of 3.8625 x 3 = 11.5875" so rounded out = 11.6".
For 125 yards? 15.45" plus 3.8625" = 19.3125" or 19.3" rounded out.
Now in the example I've only used the ring spacing for my setup 3.5" increasing the ring center to center will change the value of correction. (3.5" is the closest distance in the information provided by Burris with my rings. The XTR maybe different or not IDK I don't own a set of those.)
I'm in hopes this is actually helpful to the members here.
Respectfully
Mike
Well at the 50 I'm still low because of the round used.
Knowing that the Burris Signature Zee Rings and the Burris XTR (?) rings can be offset via offset inserts ( the XTR have the offsets included, and the signature Z's doesn't have the offset's included and the construction of the rings hence the almost $200ish vs the $60.00 pricing between the two versions).
The offset inserts are to allow up to a 40 MOA correction in the scope rings. I picked up a set of the Signature Z's, not exactly the height I wanted but they will work, I still get a good cheek weld and eye relief with them. In the packaging they come with 0 MOA inserts, the opi lock offset insert is a separate purchase.
I had entertained the thought of using masking tape to provide this offset as a interim until I can locate a set of correct offsets. This them led me to bug / ask @hm1996 a question about the usage of this. We held a discussion via PM he was extremely helpful, but noted he could not actually provide exact guidance as it was a scope vs Iron sights and the sight radius difference.
I did more research to attempt to understand the process and the exact offset with the differing inserts. I did find a article that provided the information I was seeking. Responded back to Clarence what I had found. It was really late so after that PM I sat down doing the math of trajectory and LOS difference crudely. Without the sight radius. Then I actually went back to the instruction manual with the rings low and behold the exact information I was seeking with the ring spacing (sight radius) .
My rings are spaced at 3.50" so the following table applies to my current setup with the amount of offset.
0.005" = 5.15" correction @ 100 yards
0.010" = 10.3" " "
0.015" = 15.45"
0.020" = 20.6"
0.025" = 25.75"
0.030" = 30.90"
0.035" = 36.05"
0.040" = 41.20"
In the pamphlet / instructions it also covers ring spacing correction of 3.75", 4.0", 4.75", 5.0", 5.25", 5.50", 5.75" and finally 6.0" which are all different values as a guide. The recommendation is to fire with the scope reticle in a centered position vertically and horizontally . Then use the appropriate offset to reduce the amount of correction within the scope. The correction can be applied Up, down , Left, and right depending on the orientation of the offset insert in the ring.
If members would like to see all, or even just a few of the values (ring spacing), ask and I'll be glad to post the desired or even all the differing ring spacing in different posts in this thread.
For a reference, the concept is actually not new Redfield engineered the ability of windage correction with their standard bases, Leopold continues to use that exact design today that Redfield pioneered. And it was at one time known that tape could be used as a slight shim to lower or raise the LOS depending on if applied on the front or rear. Masking tape in thickness (4.6 mils = 0.0046" ) is one of the most consistent known items. To the point many "smiths" will use it vs a no go gauge, by applying strips to the go gauge to make a No Go gauge. In the event say the Go is available and the No Go can't be located quickly enough, or not on hand.
The Burris inserts are actually the best method as it prevents any misalignment on the scope tube itself when used correctly and will not mar the scope.
So in my case I was shooting at 50 yds impacting 1" low (maxed out on elevation) ... how does that relate the table is in 100 yards. Because I'm low the shim should be applied to the rear ring to cause the muzzle to rise being the round up. Simply divide the value of the shim by half to get a reference. I.E. a 0.015" shim applied to the rear insert (on the shim to ring contact area) should net me 7.73" higher impact than without the shim, placed on the front ring lowers the impact.
What if I want to zero in 25 yard increments simply divide the value by four the multiply the value in quarters, using the 0.015" shim will net 15.45" divide by 4 = 3.8625" correction per 25 yards.
Say I want to zero @ 75 yards multiply the value of 3.8625 x 3 = 11.5875" so rounded out = 11.6".
For 125 yards? 15.45" plus 3.8625" = 19.3125" or 19.3" rounded out.
Now in the example I've only used the ring spacing for my setup 3.5" increasing the ring center to center will change the value of correction. (3.5" is the closest distance in the information provided by Burris with my rings. The XTR maybe different or not IDK I don't own a set of those.)
I'm in hopes this is actually helpful to the members here.
Respectfully
Mike
Last edited:
