Sorry if this is posted elsewhere, but I was wondering what the thought of the hivemind was on rings vs. one-piece mounts on a .308 build. I have a set of 30mm rings already, and if I could save the extra money on a mount, I'd like to do that. It's for target shooting only.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Cantilever/One-piece vs. rings
- Thread starter OlieTheDog
- Start date
if the rings are high enough and allow you to get a proper eye relief without bridging the upper receiver and hand guard then its not a problem.
a one piece mount can give you the proper eye relief while remaining on the upper, give you the proper height (generally around 1.5") and give you sone cant (generally 20MOA)
a one piece mount can give you the proper eye relief while remaining on the upper, give you the proper height (generally around 1.5") and give you sone cant (generally 20MOA)
Last edited:
I’m making sure to keep the rings on the receiver for sure. I’m wondering how much impact not having the 20 moa cant will have though. I don’t see myself taking this past ~800, but this is my first semi-auto long range gun so I’m not sure. How much of a factor is that cant?
How high above the rail will the centerline of your scope be with your current set of rings?
You need extra high, 1.5” rings on an AR.
You need extra high, 1.5” rings on an AR.
Yeah, I was noticing that. I’m assuming that’s because they assume a 50mm obj on most optics. Worst case scenario I’ll have to get a mount and will have some extra rings. But you know what that means. Extra parts = get to start a new build
I used the scope ring height calculator to figure out if I was good to go or not.
http://www.mil-rad.com/scope_ring_calculator
AR rings and mounts are designed for proper eye relief and cheek weld reguardless of objective size. That's why they are specifically 1.5" to the centerline above the rail.
Ahhh. Well then, it looks like I’ll probably have myself an extra set of rings then lol. We’ll see.
It looks pretty damn impressive. Unfortunately, $400 sends it out of my price range (at this point) at an astronomical rate.
Why not try the rings you already have and see if they are high enough???? You already have them right? I have found the 1.5” height too high for me to get a good cheek weld. I use the Larue RISR on my AR stocks to get proper cheek weld. I also have a very skinny face.
That’s 100% my intention. I just wanted to see if someone was going to say “no no! You absolutely HAVE to have a one piece or your rifle will split in half!” or something
Well....... your rifle won’t split in half from using rings instead of a 1 piece. ?. The big reason for the cantilever mounts is to get proper eye relief. A lot of people shoot nose to charging handle and the scope has to be pushed farther forward than what standard rings would allow without bridging over to the hand guard which is not good unless it’s a monolithic upper. As far as the height. 1.5” seems standard to help clear the charging handle and a lot of people get good cheek welds at that height. Like I said, I don’t and your height ring would probably work well for me as long as the scope your using will clear the rifle at that height.
Well that's good to know. Glad my rifle will stay in one relative piece. I don't have any experience, outside of dry fire, on my AR-10, but I know on my 15's I don't do nose to CH anymore. With a lot of the positional work I do, I find it more comfortable to sit back off the receiver a bit. I am open to the fact that that may change down the road once I get my optic in (Just found out I'm looking at 3-4 months wait
)Similar threads
