I have 2 RPRs. One is a .308 and the other is a .338. I was reading an article about proper scope mounting and it said scope height over bore should be between 1.5 and 2.5 inches. Another article said 1.5-1.8 inches. Both of my rifle scopes are over 2.5. The .308 is 2.66 inches and the .338 is 2.9 inches. I read that the lower the scope is mounted the more accurate the shots will be at long range. Do I need to get new rings?
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Scope height over bore
- Thread starter Didodadday
- Start date
The height should be whatever is necessary for you to be comfortable behind the rifle.
No. You are fine. Low as possible is old hunter fudd tech. Best thing to do is stop reading "articles".
100% this. Also to add, from experience, try and see if you can move cheek piece from side to side, this will also help feel like you’re getting behind the rifle without having to lay head down and put weight on the stock. I finally realized this with my foundation and Hawkins mount, thinking I needed a taller mount cuz I just have a noggin on these shoulders. Once I moved cheek piece over it helped tremendously getting stock to middle of body and I didn’t have to look up through the scope it just sat perfectly in line with me eye.
Again, make sure it’s comfortable to YOU.
If this was 1962 I’d agree.
The low scope mantra of the past was accepted wisdom. Now it’s dismissed as above.
Neither side is completely wrong.
Today there are very few hunters in the traditional sense.
We have animal shooters who sit on corn piles in plastic outhouses. Or “hunt” elk with 25# rifles and shoot great distances with a lot of technology aids.
Previous generations wore wool “fudd” clothing, carried rifles for miles and shot running deer in deep woods with amazing results.
A low scope position is an aid in pointing a rifle offhand on moving game. What some of those old “fudes” could do with a rifle would amaze most folks today. Kill several running deer with one shot each in thick timber within a few seconds. A flock of turkeys running then flying would lose several members of the flock before they were out of sight.
Just a different set of standards.
Neither side is completely wrong.
Today there are very few hunters in the traditional sense.
We have animal shooters who sit on corn piles in plastic outhouses. Or “hunt” elk with 25# rifles and shoot great distances with a lot of technology aids.
Previous generations wore wool “fudd” clothing, carried rifles for miles and shot running deer in deep woods with amazing results.
A low scope position is an aid in pointing a rifle offhand on moving game. What some of those old “fudes” could do with a rifle would amaze most folks today. Kill several running deer with one shot each in thick timber within a few seconds. A flock of turkeys running then flying would lose several members of the flock before they were out of sight.
Just a different set of standards.
Last edited:
That makes sense. If my scope was lower than it is now I would really be scrunching my neck and be uncomfortable.
Similar threads
