doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion German & Austrian Sporting Guns @ doublegunshop.com Source for Rings for Claw Mounts

What is a source to buy claw mount rings to file for my DR?

I want to go go head and file my own claw mount scope rings. I have the time and believe I am more than up to the challenge.



[img]h[/img]

Old colonel,
See below: "First Try But I Cheated a Little..."

With kind regards,
Jani

Old Colonel: The rear spring loaded mount is in my opinion the easiest, but should be done last, matching it to the finished height of the front. When you have smoked it in vertically, smoke it again and let the spring loaded shim make a mark in the smoke. File (cut) the groove (slightly uphill) beginning above the mark and polish it to a final fit. Whatever you do, don't guess about what is going on in fitting things--let the smoke tell you the truth. Even clean out the carbon from the groove every time so that it doesn't give you a false sense of "tight."
The front one, to me is the stinker. There has to be somewhat of a fulcrum effect after the tilt-entry angle as the rear of the claw sits down in the groove. If there is not, the contact GOES AWAY. As the rear sits down, the top front of the claw has to elevate into firm contact with the angle at the inside top of the groove, at least that is how it was on mine. I suppose one could make it shorter than the opening of the groove and shove it forward, letting the rear mount hold it tight, but I wanted the rear of the claw (though rounded at the bottom corner) to brace against the rear of the groove, staying tight of its own accord. Don't be disappointed if you have to make one over. Get a good set of files (the ones used to make hardened dies are the best), down to the Swiss sizes, and good luck!
I think that Oscar nailed the source, if you want it all low, and do not desire an under tunnel for the iron sights.
Clearly, I had no tutor, and there may be vastly better methods to keep everything nice and squared up...I welcome all hind-sight over on the other thread... Steve

BTW, I like the metal checkering on your mounts, and am fascinated by the screw-on rear mount. I have not seen one exactly like it. Lovely...Steve

Actually, when fitting the rear, it is the "slider" that should be fitted to the hook(groove)which should be cut so that it stands "proud"of the bottom of the base.By filing the bottom of the"slider",it forces the base down.Filing the "groove",may leave movement in the assy.BTW, it can't be fitted hard against the rear of the base,since the feet swing in an arc when the scope is removed.The front base comes with the plate(when new)and they are forced together under great force by hydraulics, and they have the same radius on the plate and the hooks(they know what it is).If a hand made base is fitted to an old plate, the plate should be removed from the rifle,so it can be forced onto the hooks.If this is not done,handmade rings can give good service as long at they are used as fixed mounts and not removed often.
Mike

Mike: Thanks, and wow everyone, keep them coming. I want to get it right and if it saves some time, even better. I don't personally want to remove the bases as that would mean resoldering them back in and rebluing, but if that is what it takes, it explains the high cost from some quarters. JJ Perodeux at Champlin Arms charges $400 for just the top ones, I don't see him resoldering and bluing for that price, but don't know. I also did not see a radius inside the front hook base; it appeared to be a slope, a straight angle. I could stand corrected if the radius was too slight to be observed, I did not make a cast or such thing. I sure invite Oskar to chime in and tell us a bit about his methods. If I had remembered his post, I might have contacted him, but then he expressed a strong desire to stay in retirement concerning such work!
Concerning the slider, I purposely created the groove proud of the bottom of the slider, then carefully worked it down, polishing it down to a final tight fit. I think it accomplished the same thing, though if I had flubbed it, I would have had to start everything over. I have seen such sliders with a groove worn on the bottom as well, by rubbing the hooks over the years, and they could have used a refreshing. But you might be right in that the slider was thought to be the replaceable part, and expendable. One's idea of expendable being somewhat tempered by the fact that the slider was probably of non-standard custom size and might be a pain as well to replace. (or could be built back up by spray plasma procedure?) Still, if one thinned the slider too much, it would all be loose and have to be redone or replaced. I just worked it from the other direction...Steve

Old Colonel, I apologize if I should just keep my mouth shut and listen to others with lots of experience. I do want to learn! Didn't mean to redirect the thread...Steve

The main reason for the front sliding part is the lateral adjust for the reticle of older european rifle scope, the other adjusting was a screw in the rear upper part of mouts. So the skilled gunsmith could tap the sliding part temporary away and file these front upper parts hooks the way as Der Ami described. And when ready just install the sliding part back to it�s place.

If the mounts have lateral or windage adjustment(mit support), it would be in the rear mount and above the hooks. This adjustment is done by opposing screws and is not filed at all. The "grooves' on the slider are not from wear at all, they are from filing to fit the rear mounts.If there has been too much filing on the slider( hooks too high,should be about the width of a scribe line "proud"),it can be easily replaced.BTY,the leading edge of the slider can have a small angle to get it started, but the fitting should be level, not as a wedge(recoil would wedge everything together too tightly).It is realitively easy to fit the slider to the hooks, but pretty hard to fit the hooks to the slider, and there is a good chance of getting the hooks too low.Working the hooks reguires "blind filing", but filing the slider doesn't.The way to do it is to remove it,and with a pick, remove the springs that act on it.Put the slider back in(leave the springs out and one "thumbpiece").Put the mount in and push the slider forward(a brass drift and small hammer is helpful).With whatever spotting agent you use on the hooks or slider, the area to be filed will be obvious when the slider is removed.Once it gets started,it shouldn't be necessary to use any spoting compound,bright wear spots should be enough.Using the drift and small hammer insures all the "slack" is taken up in fitting. In fitting the front hooks( this is not usually done for new mounts,as the plate comes already forcefit to the hooks)it is easier to drift the plate out of the base( out-left to right,in right to left)and fit it onto the hooks.Then you can see the underside and can get a better idea of the profile required.By locking the ring down in the vise,a drift can be used to force the plate onto the hooks. This will leave wear marks on the hooks,showing where filing is needed.Spotting agent can be used to start.Final fiting should be done with worn 320 grit cloth backed by a file.Final fit should take a fair amount of force to install the plate.It will feel easier with the scope is instaled, as it makes a pretty long lever. Do I have everyone confused yet?
Mike

Not confused on the front hooks--it would be great to have the front base out after all, and be able to "peen" or otherwise force the final tightness from below (but a little intimidating to unsolder it, as it is not just dovetailed in by a tight fit.) Thanks for taking the time!
As to the rear mount, am I visualing you removing only the narrow "groove" of metal which contacts each claw and not milling flat the center portion of the underside? Understand not filing the lateral adjustment! Wouldn't dream of it. Had one Sauer with a worm screw adjustment (no opposing screws) which turned much too easily for my tastes. Wished I knew how to tighten it up at the time. The adjustment was always moving mysteriously at the worst possible time. Once again, thanks for the input, Mike...Steve