Lapping "High end" scope rings?

[SDHNTR]

What I do when the receiver is way off, like on this gun, is I start with lapping only the lower halves. I get about halfway there first. Stopping to clean and taking note of the wear pattern often. Once I get to about 50-60% contact on the bottom halves, I then install the top halves and lap to 80-90% contact all around.

 

[SDHNTR]

Guessing the bottom clamps are also loose as you can see the rings (both) tilted to the left at the top, likely making them look worse.

Also i thought this thread was about “high end” rings?

Incorrect. The lower rings are not loose. They are torqued to spec.

As for the quality of the rings, unfortunately, there arent many options for a Ruger, and in my experience, the Leupold rings (these) are much better than the Ruger OEM ones. The Ruger ring mount system certainly lacks precision, but once trued up, it's as strong as anything out there. It's an integral “dovetail” with a recoil lug in each ring.

 

[BULLBLASTER]

Incorrect. The lower rings are not loose. They are torqued to spec.

As for the quality of the rings, unfortunately, there arent many options for a Ruger, and in my experience, the Leupold rings (these) are much better than the Ruger OEM ones. The Ruger ring mount system certainly lacks precision, but once trued up, it's as strong as anything out there. It's an integral dovetail with a recoil lug in each ring.

I stand corrected. The way the clamp is rotated makes it look like the rings are not seated. Guess the clamp rotated with torque

 

[SDHNTR]

Final check before scope install.

 

[Marshfly]

Makes note: don’t buy a Ruger M77.

Got it.

But seriously. That’s a perfect example of how a good lapping job can fix a pretty major deficiency @SDHNTR

 

[gbflyer]

Like I’ve said before, no need to argue about lapping. It’s your bent scope.