Do you lap your scope rings?

[Rule 303]

My one-piece bases are semi-rail. Any Weaver style claw ring will attach. The bases are machined from one straight piece of metal. Really pretty much impossible that rings of same make will not line up perfectly. Same rings front and back sit on a single continuous piece of metal. How could they not be in perfect alignment? Maybe not "classic" looking but it works flawlessly.

Lapping is not only to align rings but mainly to smooth them out so no damage to the scope. Most rings will not be totally smooth, this can reduce the friction surface area. Scope might not move but some points of the scope are then under greater pressure from the rings.
I have had scopes marked by rings on a several occasions.

Re Leupold, I have had to lap a few of their rings for a more consistent grip. If the rings have been lapped and the scope can move, use a little araldite/super glue. Have seen this done and it works. Not sure about taking the scope out of the rings though.

 

[Hogpatrol]

If you use Burris Signature with inserts, no lapping necessary.

 

[gbflyer]

My one-piece bases are semi-rail. Any Weaver style claw ring will attach. The bases are machined from one straight piece of metal. Really pretty much impossible that rings of same make will not line up perfectly. Same rings front and back sit on a single continuous piece of metal. How could they not be in perfect alignment? Maybe not "classic" looking but it works flawlessly.

There is no one piece mount in the world, that is man portable anyway, that will resist the force of its fasteners bending it to fit the action, or make up for misaligned holes.

 

[gbflyer]

If you use Burris Signature with inserts, no lapping necessary.

I like those a lot too.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

There is no one piece mount in the world, that is man portable anyway, that will resist the force of its fasteners bending it to fit the action, or make up for misaligned holes.

That is why, if you look, you can see that the screws are not snuggly fit in the holes in the bases. Allows for some lack of precision of holes drilled in receiver. Actually, both rails for both my guns had some issues with that. Forward holes in the Springfield were placed poorly when the gun was sporterized. I'm not sure there is even a prescribed location for forward 2-piece base and its screw holes (rear base is attached with one screw through center of military rear sight dovetail behind the loading/ejection port). I was compelled to drill a new hole in the 1-piece semi-rail to avoid drilling two new holes in receiver. One screw forward and one screw aft holding a steel rail is certainly strong enough to keep a scope stable on 30-06. The two screw holes forward on the 404 Mauser receiver were not a perfect match to the Weaver 1-piece base. I used a fine carbide Dremel bit to reshape the one base hole ever so slightly. Just checked both mounted bases with a straitedge top and sides. If there's any twist, it is microscopic. They are both straight and true.