-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Ring Height Info - How to Measure Correctly
- Thread starter mdmp5
- Start date
How far in front the the front ring does the bell extend and what is the height differential between barrel and mount at that length? You can calculate the effective objective OD doing a little trig and, presumably, measure the latter. Pretty straight forward math, or you can just swag it - half a degree down angle isn’t going to make a huge difference unless you were extremely close to begin with.
Hummmm…. my problem isn't calculating the clearance for the objective end of the scope …. its guessing the clearance needed for the bolt action(plus finger) on the CZ455. Can mount the scope low, looks great … just cant use the gun ;-(
Hey guys, does anyone know the ring height needed for a 10/22 tactical with vortex copperhead scope? 44mm 1" tube...thanks very much!
Hey y’all, on ring height, I’m pretty new to shooting precision style rifles, and I have yet to shoot a match, in your option would it be better to have a higher mounting option for a more upright position, or would you prefer to have a lower mount? Thanks for taking my question
Your head position will ultimately come from your cheekweld. No matter if you are prone or standing, you will rest that cheekbone on your rifle stock.
That being said, having an adjustable stock to raise or lower the cheek rest is helpfull because you can generally get rings as high or as low as you need to. If your stock is not adjustable i would error on the higher side of scope rings. You can always build your stock up, but you cannot take material away. AR’s are a good example of needing higher rings.
I have also found that if the scope sits too high, the butt on the rifle will sit lower in my shoulder and on my collarbone instead of in my pocket.
So after all of this, i prefer scope rings that are as low as possible for scope clearance AND allow me to have proper cheekweld.
To answer your question, a slightly shorter length of pull will give you better eye relief as you go from prone, kneeling to standing and become more upright.
Last edited:
thanks for that post on my own knowing nothing i have already purchased one 300 dollar or more larue mount that i cannon use it just put the scope so high from the cheek rest my chin was on the rest and still could not see through the scope and now local shops have me buying parts to change my rifle after buying mounts that again will not fit , the bell hits the rail on top of the gun i am hopeful that the taped pennies gave me the correct height measurement wish i had seen this post a few months ago could have saved 500 dollars if i had let my local gun shop have there way they would have me spending more . Just praying that these rings do the trick this time.
Getting your scope height is much easier than this...
Measure the outside diameter of the eye piece (D-EYE)
Measure the diameter of your bolt (D-Bolt)
Measure the distance from the top of the bolt to the bottom of the eye piece on the scope (D-X)
Scope Height = ( ( D-EYE / 2 ) + ( D-Bolt / 2 ) + D-x
No need to complicate it
Measure the outside diameter of the eye piece (D-EYE)
Measure the diameter of your bolt (D-Bolt)
Measure the distance from the top of the bolt to the bottom of the eye piece on the scope (D-X)
Scope Height = ( ( D-EYE / 2 ) + ( D-Bolt / 2 ) + D-x
No need to complicate it
How does one account for having a big head. I am a pretty big guy with a giant nugget. I cant keep my head straight, get proper cheek weld and see through the scope. With low rings I am forced to tilt my head to get my eye lower.
Unfortunately, when i built my rifles I didn't know any better and went as low as I could get.
Unfortunately, when i built my rifles I didn't know any better and went as low as I could get.
yeah, I know what you are talking about, I had the same issue. Although I will say head size isn’t really the issue. It’s how high you eyes are measured up from you cheek bone. Try first, building your shooting position properly, because that changes things, namely cheek weld. Mostly likely if you’re having to tilt you head to lay flat, your rings are too short. If your shooting position is correct and the rings are too short, whether prone or sitting bench rest, then you really only have a couple of options. First option is get higher scope rings. The second option is to get higher scope rings and build up your stock’s cheek/get an adjustable stock or chassis. What’s your setup right now? What stock, scope, base, and rings do you have?
LaRue UU in 308. RATT Stock, With an Aero Precision Ultra Light mount holding a Vortex Crossfire II
So I have a question regarding ranges being shot at. No I haven't done this but say you are shooting at 2000 yards and need to dial up 29 MIL aka 98 MOA. How much does this effect ring height? I didn't see it mentioned but it crossed my mind when suppressors were mentioned. It would suck to get rings or mounts that were great an 100/200/500 yards and then have that 2000 yard shot and have half the scope view obscured by the suppressor. The barrel on my rifle is pretty much a #8 contour 30" long with a Hybrid 46 hanging off the end so if the effect is a 38" barrel with a 1.57" diameter. As best I can tell it breaks down like this...
top of rail to top of barrel = .520"
difference between barrel and supressor = -.225-ish"
mount height = 1.500"
angular adjustment at full value (98MOA) for 30 (barrel)+7.8(suppressor)+5 (rail length) * tan.333 = .249"
Bell diameter = 1.110"
SO... .520 + (-.225")+1.500 = 1.795" -1.110 = .685" - .249" (angular adjustment) = .436" of clearance over the suppressor at distance. Is this close or an I over thinking it?
top of rail to top of barrel = .520"
difference between barrel and supressor = -.225-ish"
mount height = 1.500"
angular adjustment at full value (98MOA) for 30 (barrel)+7.8(suppressor)+5 (rail length) * tan.333 = .249"
Bell diameter = 1.110"
SO... .520 + (-.225")+1.500 = 1.795" -1.110 = .685" - .249" (angular adjustment) = .436" of clearance over the suppressor at distance. Is this close or an I over thinking it?
Wow! Never seen so much math for scope rings. Interesting to see all the approaches. Always used the penny approach personally.
Ok, so here’s an oddball issue to add.
For reasons that I mention in another thread on my rifle build, I can’t get my head/neck low enough to use my scope. I’m currently using medium XLR rings, on a 20 moa rail. Now, when I say it’s too short, it’s too short by a good half an inch or more. I also can’t get close enough for the eye relief, and my scope is mounted as far back as it will go.
trying to figure out a solution, I came across Vortex 2 inch offset one-piece rings that are significantly higher. I know these are generally AR platform equipment. My thought was to mount it backwards to get it closer to my eye, and the height might get me where I need to be.
Could mounting it backwards be a viable option?
Will having the scope mounted that much higher over the barrel create issues going from a 100 yard zero, out to longer distances?
Any other ideas to get the scope up higher that won’t screw things up downrange?
For reasons that I mention in another thread on my rifle build, I can’t get my head/neck low enough to use my scope. I’m currently using medium XLR rings, on a 20 moa rail. Now, when I say it’s too short, it’s too short by a good half an inch or more. I also can’t get close enough for the eye relief, and my scope is mounted as far back as it will go.
trying to figure out a solution, I came across Vortex 2 inch offset one-piece rings that are significantly higher. I know these are generally AR platform equipment. My thought was to mount it backwards to get it closer to my eye, and the height might get me where I need to be.
Could mounting it backwards be a viable option?
Will having the scope mounted that much higher over the barrel create issues going from a 100 yard zero, out to longer distances?
Any other ideas to get the scope up higher that won’t screw things up downrange?
So is this too close when I read what you wrote I got lost lol scope is 6x24 - 50
Attachments
If it fits with clearance you're good. keep in mind that it doesn't look like you have much clearance left for scope caps, but if you don't use scope caps then you're fine.
Before answering your question, I'd like to clear something up.
The colloquial use of alloy is misleading. An alloy is an amalgam for two or more metallic elements. Therefore, nearly all steels in use today are alloys. Even 1018, which is about as simple as steel gets, has a bit of manganese in it which makes it an alloy. The same goes for aluminum alloys, all of which contain at least one metallic element in addition to aluminum.
The commercial use of the word "alloy" do denote aluminum alloys or "polymer" to denote plastics is a practice that I regard as unscrupulous. It's basically bullshit embellishment by salesmen and marketing types selling wares without substantive qualities.
That aside and getting to your question, it is an issue of strength and strength depends on the type of alloy used and the shape of the part, i.e. the scope ring.
For instance, 7075-T6xx aluminum alloys have about twice the tensile strength of 1018 steel. But, 4140 steel heat treated to a hardness of about 35 Rockwell C has about twice the tensile strength of 7075-T6xx. But that pertains only to tensile test specimens of the same shape and says nothing about the shape of the rings. 7075 aluminum rings of one shape can be stronger or weaker than 4140 steel rings of another shape. Further complicating matters, the strength of the shape can be difficult to determine because it will ultimately come down to the effects of stress concentrations. Within a given part and depending upon the loads applied to it, stress will be concentrated near abrupt changes in shape.
So the answer is, it depends, which happens to be the answer to most questions in life. It depends on the specific alloy used, how that alloy is heat treated and finished (plating or coating) and the shape of the part.
At American Rifle Company, we make our M10 Rings and our M-BRACE mounts from 7075 T6xx aluminum. We are now also making rings for our Mausingfield hunting actions from 4140 steel. And we've also made rings from titanium. The material we choose ultimately depends on the problem we wish to solve.
As a consumer, your best bet is to stick with trusted brands. I think American Rifle Company makes the best rings and mounts in the industry, but I also own the company. So to be fair, I must mention that others do a nice job as well. Badger Ordnance has served the market extremely well and they too make rings and mounts from both aluminum and steel. I'm actually quite fond of a pair of Badger steel rings that I've owned since before I started American Rifle.
Oh, and one last point. Apart from avoiding physical interference between scope and rifle, the most important consideration when choosing scope ring height is your comfort. Many people come to us and ask, "I want my scope mounted as low as possible so what ring height should I choose?" And when we ask them why they want their scope mounted as low as possible, they usually reply, "Well, that's just what I read on the internet." The low mounted scope myth is exactly that, a myth. It has little or no relevance today. It stems from the days when rifles having traditionally shaped stocks and barrel-mounted iron sights were first fitted with scopes. The stocks were design for use with irons, invariably making their combs too low for use with scopes. To mitigate this, shooters wanted the lowest possible scope height, which usually wasn't low enough. This is a no longer a problem In today's world of adjustable stocks and chassis. You will shoot better if you're comfortable on your rifle, so choose a right or mount height that makes you comfortable.
I hope this helps.
Ted
This is almost exactly what Tony Shankle said during his Precision Rifle 1 class Friday before last. I too, was in the "low scope" camp until the class. No wonder I had to fight my rifle every time I fired it. I put some high mounts my RA in .223 but haven't been able to get it sighted in yet. I'm hoping it helps.
I need taller rings for a neck injury but don’t want to buy 2 Spuhr or similar mounts then have to deal with selling one.
I have a 34mm tube now with low rings, but I need something between 1.35 and 1.5”. I’m also pretty tall so other people’s rifles wouldn’t fit me. I’m running an ACC so it’s adjustable enough for whatever, but not sure if 1.5 is too tall either
I have a 34mm tube now with low rings, but I need something between 1.35 and 1.5”. I’m also pretty tall so other people’s rifles wouldn’t fit me. I’m running an ACC so it’s adjustable enough for whatever, but not sure if 1.5 is too tall either
Last edited:
Ted,
Your expertise is illuminating as always!
I agree, comfort is everything. If a person is not comfortable, they're not going to shoot well. A good explanation of this can be found here:
Another potential benefit of using taller rings is a person's vestibular sense is less likely to be thrown off by not having to tilt their head so much to get behind a low mounted scope. A demonstration of this principle can be found here:
Keep up the great work at ARC!
A Aron
Still folks asking, maybe this will help:
pages for scope height with and without moa rails, so simple I can use it
pages for scope height with and without moa rails, so simple I can use it
Similar threads
