Should I invest in "ring lapping"?

[Sidneyious]

So I am working on my 16" "spr" and I'm playing with my pri rings and I hear you should lap the rings for better precision with the scope in the rings.

Tapatalk hates me and I don't understand how the image upload works on the desktop phone so here's this and I hope it works.

Pri rings and rmr mount, I'm waiting for optics planet to ship my optics so there that.
https://ibb.co/LrzbNQF

[mpom]

Have you "heard" this recently" Used to be the thing to do years ago, prior to CNC machines and tighter tolerances/variances achieved by quality manufacturers. Doubt you will see any measurable benefit, but might see a negative, such as exposed aluminum or steel due to removing surface treatment with the abrasives used in ring lapping.
You can test the contact between the lower rings and the scope prior to any lapping by coating the lower rings with a slow drying marker then laying the scope on the rings. Press down on scope, lift out and see how much marker transfer occurred. If only an edge or two transferred, there is poor contact, but more than likely most of lower ring surfaces will make contact, which is plenty good. Dont worry about top rings, just dont tighten more than recommended by manufacturer.

Mark

[Inkslinger]

Correct me if I’m wrong, but if you’re goal is to have the most uniform surface for best engagement, wouldn’t that also require you to lap the corresponding areas on your scope? Would smooth rings on the factory coating of the scope be an improvement? Do you think if you were to do that, would you see any noticeable improvement in overall accuracy?

[Stickman]

I wouldn't personally waste the time, but there are certainly people who feel otherwise. If I'm using good rings, I expect the manufacturer to have provided the best surface possible.

I'll await the crew that says if I don't apply rubbing, then polishing compound, then use toothpaste, that I'm going to die on the battlefield...

[One More Time]

I'm in the same camp as quality rings should not need to be putzed with in this day and age.
Same with upper receiver lapping.

[GH41]

Why waste the time on a 1.5 MOA rifle at best?

[markm]

I probably have the only gun in our rotation with lapped rings. Lapping is one of those things where a little goes a long way.

And if you give a guy a lapping tool, he's going to want to lap the rings til they're honed like a cylinder wall.

I think the last time I put on rings, I used the lapping bar to simply align the rings on the base as I tightened them down. You can use the actual scope to do this too, but I'd end up dropping the new scope for sure.

[Todd.K]

Rings?

A quality AR Mount puts your scope at the right height and eye relief for an AR. Plus the “rings” are always aligned because they are part of a single mount.

[mark5pt56]

Moved to optics--read the forum sections before posting

There's so much left over Fudd shit from 1950. If you are buying quality material, it's a waste of time.

[markm]

Moved to optics--read the forum sections before posting

There's so much left over Fudd shit from 1950. If you are buying quality material, it's a waste of time.

American mediocrity. There's still PLENTY of half ass mentality in our culture. I mean shit! It wasn't that long ago Midwest couldn't figure out the dimensions of the pic rail for Christ's sake.

Now I'm not advocating ring lapping, but when you do it, you can see where any high spots/imperfections are leveled off. Overkill for most people, I'm sure.