Shimming a HP?

mordecai · Post by **mordecai** » Fri Apr 22, 2011 8:40 pm

So while switching out my new HP rig's rings for something lower, I see it had a few shims in the rear.

Is this normal for HP? I thought that was a SB problem... ??? (I ask since I'm going to run with new rings and kept the shims just in case...)

Trent · Post by **Trent** » Fri Apr 22, 2011 10:22 pm

I'll be interested to hear if anyone else has had to do that. I've not heard of it in high power silhouette.

daisy · Post by **daisy** » Sat Apr 23, 2011 12:50 am

I had to shim me Ruger MII 30/06 to make rams. I used a bit of film negative . Scope is a Browning which was made by Bushnell as in 3200 .

Daisy

ppkny · Post by **ppkny** » Sat Apr 23, 2011 3:43 am

I had to shim my new Tikka T3 6.5x55 with factory rings with .004 in the rear ring. I probably could have made the rams but I like to keep the adjustments as close to center in the scope as I can.
ppkny

Bob Mc Alice · Post by **Bob Mc Alice** » Sat Apr 23, 2011 12:00 pm

After looking at the picture of it again, I see you have Leupold std. windage adjustable bases. I have these on every rifle I own, except for a few with dual dovetail bases. The 168-175gr. bullets around 2500-2650 MV FPS fall fast out to 500m. Typical 6.5-20 x Leupolds are near maxed out or don't even have enough elevation adjustment to reach that far. Shimming is common to over come this problem. Every one of mine has a .010 brass shim under the back base. I firmly believe that this small of a shim does NO harm to the scope. If your gun was shimmed chances are it was needed.

Jerry G · Post by **Jerry G** » Sat Apr 23, 2011 2:59 pm

I had to shim my old M77. My new gun has the slope built into the built in rail.

AZRifle · Post by **AZRifle** » Sat Apr 23, 2011 3:55 pm

If you were firing this round, you would not need a shim.

Jerry

Jason · Post by **Jason** » Sat Apr 23, 2011 5:25 pm

No shimming needed on my 260 Rem. That must be a 7mm problem.

Bob Mc Alice · Post by **Bob Mc Alice** » Sat Apr 23, 2011 5:46 pm

That is because fast moving light weight puny bullets shoot flatter.

Snake · Post by **Snake** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 9:42 am

No shimming on a 260? No one cares...then again the usual 260 guy wouldn't notice low or absent hits

but they are good at telling stories....
The rear ring on Remington receivers tend to be slightly undersize....about .002 on average....variations appear on lots of actions. a coke can is uniformly .004 thick and makes excellent shim material (don't use the top).
Mcalice ....why are using those heavy rings and bases? Haven't you heard of davidson bases and rings?...Light, ridged, precise and of various heights.......By the way do you fellas bed your rings?

silhouette13 · Post by **silhouette13** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 9:52 am

seems to be a lot of 7-08 chatter on the site all of a sudden, used to be Bob was the only one who would raise his hand.....well Bob...seems the grass roots approach has worked. truth be told had a 7-08 come up like the offer i got on a 260 i would have gone that way myself. even attained Guru status! congrats Guru McAlice. what flavor is your cool aide?

Snake · Post by **Snake** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:38 am

Aside from stirring up the natives....6.5 is Ok....its just that a 260 has the same case capacity as a 243,7-08 and 308 bot the bore is smaller hence the expansion ratio is restricted and the available bullet weights are fewer. telling me that you're ahead cause you shoot a 142 gr pill but are left with a 160 round nose when you need weight isn't persuasive when i can load 120or 130s or 150s or 168 or 175 match bullets on the same case AND I have slower throat erosion. Its hard not to have 6, 6.5 or 7 or .30 not shoot well. But i'm just a cynic ...I've always regarded populist movements from one caliber to another more often than not simply the "birds on a wire" syndrome....so much for KOOL AID drinking ;)

Bob Mc Alice · Post by **Bob Mc Alice** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:19 am

I think the Davidson- Kelbly aluminum rings and bases SUCK. Not windage adjustable, they rely on perfect screw hole to bore alignment so you don't have to use up the scopes internal adjustment. I think they look like crap, too. I don't mind the little bit of extra weight that the steel Leupold products add, in fact I prefer it. They look good and are stronger in design. Steel is real. Like the Leupold base and rings add states: You buy them for the same reason you buy Leupold scopes...QUALITY.

The Gurus mission statement... "Actively recruiting 7-08 shooters one man at a time"

Trent · Post by **Trent** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 1:34 pm

"Steel is real!"

I love that statement! Myself and a lot of my cyclist buddies live by that motto. You just cannot beat the ride of a steel framed bike.

ldholton · Post by **ldholton** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:40 pm

if bigger is always better way not shoot a 308 with 190's or 208 A-max's ?? and dont you just hate it when you look at some of the guns that win nats

remember the bigger the bullet the louder the rams ring

as far as shi,,img burris sig. series rings can solve lots of miss alingment and scope troubles but they are kinda heavy

Shimming a HP?

Shimming a HP?

Re: Shimming a HP?

Re: Shimming a HP?

Re: Shimming a HP?

Re: Shimming a HP?

Re: Shimming a HP?

Re: Shimming a HP?

Re: Shimming a HP?

Re: Shimming a HP?

Re: Shimming a HP?

Re: Shimming a HP?

Re: Shimming a HP?

Re: Shimming a HP?

Re: Shimming a HP?

Re: Shimming a HP?