The subject is a play on those ever popular videos where people figure out an easier or better way to something that the viewer has been doing for years and can’t believe it.

The topic of this post is wet mounting scopes on rifles.

It would make a big difference to me as I typically mount and unmount my scopes weekly and with the concept of QD rings the better stability (less deviation) I can achieve in mounting scopes the better.

Well - I viewed this video this morning and I can’t believe what I’m hearing . . .

I've been lubing my picatinny rails for years. I do not lube the mounting hardware. In fact, I torque and loosen my mounting screws multiple times before doing the final alignment and torque. I figured we do this on Acft weapons, sights and Radar systems why not do it on my own sights. Although we use various type of anti-seize based on application.

edit: I use TW25B grease.

Acetone off the action and the pic rail. TO REMOVE ANY OIL!

Low strength Locktite on the pic rail screws. 30 in/lbs torque.

Done deal

F Class John been doing YouTube for a while now. The one he did on concentricity made people mad, because it just had to matter. LOL

Eric Cortina and Speedy Gonzales had folks on certain forums wild over their barrel cleaning techniques and how many times a match they cleaned.

This is an ongoing debate elsewhere. I didn’t watch the video you posted yet, but there’s two schools of thought, and it returning to the correct location is [censored] per my thinking. It’s all about friction and it being mounted right the first time. Keep studying. Give it the Leupold tap after torquing, then torque it again. You won’t have to worry, wet or dry.

I normally use a drop of Blue Loctite (242) on the screws securing the picatinny rail or any base secured to the action after the action have been cleaned of oil and debris. Dried as well before application Loctite and installation of screws. I use the TW25B on the clamping surface of the scope rings and picatinny rail. Also use a drop of blue Loctite (242) of the ring screws. The ring to scope surface is clean and dry NO oil or grease. If i remember correctly 242 Loctite has up to 100 in lbs of holding force.

I use Area 419 matched scope rings on my custom 6.5 CM. There rings only use three points of contact with picatinny rail. They also recommend using lube when attaching the rings. There's a video at the bottom of the page that goes into detail on their match rings and how to mount them.

There are things to know about using adhesives such as Loctite that are not commonly taught, and especially torque values.

Wet loctite is a lubricant until it dries, torque values are to be lowered 5-10%.

Don't forget to take into consideration Fastner type. Aluminum, Titanium, Plastic, Steal and the various grades of each type. I'm sure with a little research the common toque table can be found for each type can be found. I know we have this for Aircraft. We also use specific toque values designated by the engineers on a particular component installation regardless of the common toque. Keep in mind when torquing a steal screw into aluminum(6061, 7075 etc..) that the torque value is different than torquing into steal.

"Steel"

I had information that it was 20%.

The OP is talking about QD mounts on thermals like Bobro and American Defense. Not a traditional pic rail and screw ring setup. I’ve never tried wet mounting it and have always made sure it’s free from any lubricant. Everything works great dry so I don’t see a need to change anything up,

Isn't hard to test. I just finished testing a new mount for a new thermal company. I used TW25B with the mount. Managed to keep a 1.4 inch shot group with six 5 round test groups using their mount and thermal. I used a small handwarmer as the target, base magnification is 3.2 on the thermal. With a day scope, same rifle and ammunition, I shot a .8 with a BoBro mount without removing it between shots. Guess i could repeat the test with the Bobro and day scope.

The Area419 video was helpful and informative !

I went for the grease approach , I don’t expect to see a “performance gain” but will look to see if zero groupings are more consistent (in terms of expected POA/POI.

Thermals have a bad rep for losing or wandering zeros . . .

I can see where it is clear the friction and pressures are being applied between the scope mount and rifle pic rail

I’m like to see some real test data sheets on that, I bet it’s <2% if meaningful at all in scope rings

One of the shops I worked in years ago had charts that had lubricated torque and dry torque of fasteners. We made components for military planes and followed all torque specs using dry clean threads. I do not use any thread adhesive on scope rings but will use blue thread adhesive on base screws and I do not reduce the recommended torque specs.

We worked on all kinds of aircraft parts and systems when I was a workin' man, from starter-generators to weather radar to old-timey directional indicators and everything in between. We had a Loctite (or Henkel) engineering rep put on a seminar for us one day, and it was all about using Loctite adhesives and such. I do not have any of the documentation in my possession, but we were instructed on the same (or similar) info JP4065 has shown just above. The adhesive acts as a lubricant and will result in over-torqued fasteners if you don't know what you're doing.

I'll use 242 (blue) on bases, but I do not apply any adhesive to ring screws. Just my preference.

Most of torque specs are about elongating the bolt or screw, I just don’t see it being significant in steel to aluminum alloy or steel to steel scope rings. the overall torque specs in general aren’t high enough. Most the torque specs would built out for the break point of components, specifically the rail clamp etc . There are companies that provide thread Locker with their rings.

The chart lists clamp load which would be what the screws in the top half of a scope ring does or the screws in a base does. How much it matters in base or ring screws, I have no clue. I just dab some blue on the screw, torque the chit to what the manufacturers says and go on.

Ha I didn’t even read it. I’m same blue lock or paint pen, torque it to specs and never think about it again, now I have broken an aluminum rail clamp, by assuming that spec was a lot higher then what is was.

Engineer who designs aircraft parts here. Been doing it almost 20 years now.

Yes, you absolutely can over-torque fasteners by wet installing to a spec for dry install. Friction reduces the torque needed to reach a certain clamp load, which is all you're trying to do.

does wet mounting ring or base increase torque enough to matter though?

Not on the screw threads? You mean lubing the rails?

I don't have an analysis to confirm, but I don't think that would impact clamp force in a meaningful way.

Your question is relevant to the base to the rifle, and the rings to the base and not ring to ring. Correct?

I’m more curious as to using loktite/paint etc in screws them selves. Everything has a break point but does wet vs dry screw torque matter in rings?

More asking on the integrity of ring to ring and base clamp screws/bolt. The wet rail isn’t an integrity issue, you aren’t going to crush the rail. I have seen other base clamps break at 45lb dry and wet(torque spec per CS was 25-30lbs) . Not the screw, and not the female threads on back side but base clamp it’s self , wet/dry torque difference was to minimal to measure

Example: I have rings that come with threadlocker, torque spec is 45base /25lbs top and since it comes with threadlocker/loctite/paint etc that would be a wet spec, but they have said it doesn’t matter. Have other rings from another company that are 68in base 25ring, you call them and ask them dry or wet, they say spec is spec and the same.

So is there a significant difference in wet vs dry torque specs on scope rings components them selves, my idiot testing from assuming torque specs on some lower torque spec rings says no, but that’s hardly a large sample size.


.

Sorry On screw threads, specifically.

Yes anytime you lube the screw threads, it's going to decrease the torque required to accomplish the same clamp force.

Patriot07 is correct about above.

I think the scope of the original issue is friction from rings to base on a picatinny rail not allowing the rings to seat properly at the correct torque spec. Then when dropped etc (additional force) they do seat, causing a shift in windage.

Yes but to a degree that it actually matters?

That's impossible to say because it's situation-specific.

I think the concern that wp75169 mentions above is very legitimate. Rings already don't use a ton of torque. I think it would be absolutely possible to not set a base "properly" on the rail and have it bind a little bit until it's jarred by a heavy recoiling round or the rifle being dropped, but if you'd taken time to set it correctly, or possibly have had the base lubed up where it didn't bind to start with, it could have prevented it.

I repeated this test with a day scope mounted in a BoBro engineering mount. I shot 5 5rd groups removing the scope/mount between shot groups with a non-lubed rail/mount. The group opened up to a 1.1 inch group for the 25 rounds fired. I repeated the test but slightly lubed the picatinny rail where the BroBo mount contacted it. Interestingly the group shifted to the right by .2 inches. After the 25 rounds were fired, the group was slightly smaller at just over 1.05 inches. The group difference, probably is due to me shooting. The center of impact shift is up for debate. The Brobo mount is self-adjusting.

The brobo mount is probably 10 years old and well-worn in as is the AR-15 I tested it with. There might be a larger change with a new mount and or picatinny rail.

I tested it yesterday evening with zero wind and a very new Bobro. No difference and it zeroed back perfectly either way.

I appreciate you guys posting your results from testing