Title says it all, I had every thing torqued correctly with a proper torque driver.

After Loosing zero and the cross hairs canting. I inspected further. Scope was slamming reward in the front ring and the rear base was showing excessive wear from recoil where the ring and base made contact.

Obviously something went wrong. I m not sure what, any insight would be greatly appreciated thanks

What scope, mount, rings, and caliber? Maybe pics too. If the ring\base juncture was moving, it would seem they were loose, defective, or it was just a weird happenstance. Kind of sounds like the front ring was loose on the scope, so the rear ring was the only thing holding, it took a beating and gave up. The scope followed suit.

?

Bushnell Trophy Handgun 2x6x32, Weaver Base, Vortex 1" Rings Torqued to Factory Specs 30 ft lbs on the ring to base and 20 ft lbs on the rings. Caliber is 44 rem mag.

You are exactly correct, the front ring gave it up an the rear ring tried to hold it together. Total fail.

Where to go from here?

Hate that happened ... stuff like that will drive you nuts. When I mounted my Ultradot with the supplied No.4 Ruger rings with my Hunter, they actually slighted indented the tube of the scope. I was PO'd as I did not mount them any different than any other scope I've mounted in 30 years. Later, I purchased a set of No.5 rings and mounted another scope the same way and not even a shadow on the tube of my Weaver shows it was ever in the Ruger rings even though it was torqued the same.

I've since gotten a lapping kit, and all horizontal slot rings are going to be lapped before I torque a scope in them.

Well, at least you know what happened, aside from not knowing what caused the front ring to let go. The system is sound, but'll have to be rebuilt, unfortunately, from the ground up. The .44 mag. contenders have a reputation for harsh fecoil, so you may just add a third ring this time around.

I'm guessing you used Loc-Tite. Maybe the threads were a little dirty and it didn't set right on one of the screws. That may be all it takes with the sort of recoil to which the scope was subjected. Good luck and sorry that happened to you.

Thanks everyone. Defiantly aggravating. I believe I will be going back to a proper Reflexive site. I ordered a short base from MGM that is milled much better.

At the end of the day this TC is for light weight carry into the backwoods for bear and deer.

With a 2 or 3 moa dot I should be fine out to 100-125 yards and that's good enough.

Plus I will get a much better field of view.

In the mean time I m going to be looking around for a 30-30 barrel or 7x30 waters.

I have spretty much made is standard on all my handguns that I expect to have any heavier level of recoil to use 4 rings.

Besides holding tight on the scope I don't think adding extra weight will hurt either. Not like I intend to shoot any of these off hand anyway.

I probably have mounted scopes well over 100 times on many different firearms. I have tried Burris, Leupold, T/C, Weaver, the Bushnell top/bottom split type, SSK, Ruger, Beeman, and quite a few different "Chinese-Phillipine-???" etc. made scope rings, and Warne.

After all is said and done, I will take Warne every time. They are American Made (not even Leupold are) and they fit so perfectly that they are the ONLY rings I have found that will not mar the scope. And they hold tight. I have not had any problems with them, especially when using 3 or 4 rings. And the base I prefer? The good ol' Picatinny-style that goes with Warne. Steel or aluminum? STEEL!

Here is a trick that I learned from Bob Milek, YEARS AGO, on mounting the scope base. It works EVERY TIME, even on FACTORY MOUNTED bases. After you have "tightened" the screws, place your screwdriver (or hex key or star wrench) tightly and squarely in the screw head slot and tap it with a small hammer several times. This "mates" (precision fits) the threads; and the screw actually becomes a little loose; and you will have to re-tighten it to spec again.

And when mounting the rings to the base, make sure that you "scoot" them both FORWARD as much as possible in their respective Picatinny groove before cinching the screws down.

Greg, that's exactly what I've done for 35+ years. "A little tap will do you".
Big Spruce, be careful with the Bushnell Trophy. They are marginal with a .44. Sometimes they work. Sometimes not, especially on violently recoiling .44s.
The Bushnell Elite is sturdier and holds up all the way to .500 Mags.

Plus 2 on the Bushnell Elite. As I mentioned in a prior thread, the Bushnell Elite 3500 is the original Bausch and Lomb Elite 3000.

Bausch and Lomb was noted for German design and quality; much superior to "over-the seas" quality/design such as some Bushnell products.

Doc, amazingly,

some "experts" that have written articles or made videos on "The Correct Way To Mount A Scope" do not know of or use this trick. And I have also re-tightened many "factory-mounted" bases this way also.

Go figure.

LIVE AND LEARN, HAD NOT HEARD OF THE "TAP" BEFORE. I USE 3 WARNE MAXIMA RINGS AND THEY REALLY HOLD, THEY ARE MY FIRST CHOICE FOR HEAVY KICKING HANDGUNS.

Thanks Guys! Yeah I always push my rings as far forward as possible.

At any rate, live and learn. Yes, I can full conclude the trophy is a for light recoiling gun. I m not sure how far I will get with it but I m hoping to maybe get Bushnell at the very least replace it.

I also talked to Vortex about their rings and really it came own to this. The bases and rings just didn't have the tolerances that say the warne system has.

Moving on I have gotten a Picatiny Rail from MGM and talked to Vortex and made sure my reflexive sight would work. They are sending me the correct one to just to make sure. Over all I think this will work out.

I m also going to run it over to my smith and have the 14" barrel chopped to 12" and re-crowned.

Same here ... have them on my Encore and have thought seriously about buying a set of Warne Ruger Style to try on my Hunter.

I have MGM's standard stainless scope rail ... great quality!

Another vote for Warne rings here as well. Those and a Leupold scope are all I use now. Buy the setup one time, zero, and never have to touch it again. Like the old saying goes, I'm too poor to buy cheap.

I agree with going with steel also. Aluminum was made for Coke cans... not heavy recoil.

I have the Warne Ruger Model 77 on my Super Redhawk, the Warne Fixed 1" on my 416 Barnes, and the Warne Tactical 1" rings on my 500 S&W Encore

Everything Gregg says here!!!
You should also make sure all screws, tapped holes and inner ring surfaces and the scope are very, very clean. I usually wash / wipe down with alcohol. If you use thread locker never put it in a blind hole - only on the side of the screw. If it gets to the bottom of the hole before the screw does it may cause the screw to bottom out before it?s tight. Always use 3 or 4 rings. If using 3, I prefer 2 in the front as the recoil forces (fulcrum) are greater The further from the grip.