There is such a thing as too low

[Lowlight]

Scope Mounting Considerations with a modern rifle...

We no longer want the scope mounted as low as possible, that is a carry over from the hunting and iron sight days.

 

[danatkins]

Still see guys on FB saying low as possible. Will it ever die

 

[OREGUN]

What about that scope that had the objective bell scalloped to fit around the barrel? Is that too low?

 

[hafejd30]

What about that scope that had the objective bell scalloped to fit around the barrel? Is that too low?

Leupold VX-L

 

[danatkins]

What about that scope that had the objective bell scalloped to fit around the barrel? Is that too low?

Doubt you'd see that on a precision rig

 

[Lowlight]

What about that scope that had the objective bell scalloped to fit around the barrel? Is that too low?

That is a specific hunting scope and not part of the discussion if you buy that scope in 2023, LOL

 

[Milf Dots]

I think Frank said 1.5 inch ring height is essentially the new standard height for modern precision rifles...?

 

[n2ishun]

If it's something to do with height limitations, who but Frank would know best ?

Heh, sorry Frank, I went there

 

[Lowlight]

1.375" to 1.5" is definitely the correct starting point

 

[Lowlight]

The interesting aspect of this is, when talking with manufacturers of rings, 1.1" is the most popular,

I have shown with the new Seekins rings how some of our tactical scopes don't even fit in these mounts. Too big.

 

[OREGUN]

I have several rigs using 1.5” rings. There’s one, though, still in 1.15”. Every time I shoot it, it bothers me that I have to tip my head over a bit. I‘m a tall ring convert all the way.

 

[Milf Dots]

1.375" to 1.5" is definitely the correct starting point

I emailed F3R about 1.5" height without cantilever, but he said his straightup 1.5" design isn't finalized for production. Tallest he currently offers without cantilever is 1.35" but he's out of stock.

 

[Tokay444]

Still see guys on FB saying low as possible. Will it ever die

This guy shoots better than all of those idiots.

 

[Lowlight]

Is he really shooting or just letting the rifle do the work

he is buying more of a win then anything else,

 

[Baron23]

I had a spirited discussion on this topic with my dear friend @Nik H who, if I remember correctly, told me that if I didn't have 1.5" rings my dick would fall off, I'd get full body herpes, and I'd never hit the 10 ring again in my life. (joking of course)

Here's the deal...I have super model high cheek bones. Don't hate me because I'm beautiful (which if you have ever seen me you would know is the furthest from the truth! haha). So, I need a very high comb to get behind a scope.

And, after years of clay target shooting I have absolutely confirmed that I need a high comb just to align with the rib (1.25" drop at comb). Its just a matter of the configuration of the on-side eye and the bottom of your cheek bone (because, as an old shotgunner, I kind of insist on a solid and repeatable cheek weld and rather think its the only weld that is utterly repeatable).

Right now I have two rifles in JAE chassis with ARC 1.10" rings.

And my head is NOT rolled over on my rifles....I've taken the Frank/Marc clinics twice and head roll was not one of my many issues (thank god, I have enough as it is LOL)

To get behind the scope properly with these rings and in these chassis, I have raised the comb almost as far as it will go. I have .17" of additional adjustment left. Not much, right. And, I think the JAE's are pretty much in the ball park with everyone else in terms of comb height adjustability.

So, if I put 1.5" rings on these guns, I would be far too low.

I do see where ARC makes 1.26" rings. If I use up that last .17" of comb adjustment, I should be able to get behind my scopes. But, I'm doubtful that .16" of additional height using these next taller rings is at all worth the $180+tax+shipping.

I guess my overall thought is that this is NOT a one size fits all parameter. That is NOT to say go as low as you can....not at all. Just get rings that will put you behind your scope, within the adjustments of your stock/chassis, with your head erect.

Just my view of it and I'm well prepared to be schooled by my betters! haha

Oh, for those who say just dump the JAE's and get a chassis with more comb adjustment...I will be glad to. Just send me $2k per chassis and I'll be happy to go shopping! haha

Cheers

 

[Jefe's Dope]

I go low because I have a small face and high cheekbones. I run out of comb height adjustment before I can get it high enough on a 1.5" height mount. The 1" =/- mounts work best for me.

 

[Nik H]

If you have an adjustable riser, you can dial in the rings.

The low thing is an artifact from hunting rifles that had no adjustment in the cheek riser. I use 1.5” rings because NV and most thermal clip ones require it.

@Baron23

I didn’t say your dick would fall off. You told me that happened long ago…LOL

 

[Baron23]

I didn’t say your dick would fall off. You told me that happened long ago…LOL

hahahaha....and this is me after that happened!! LOL

Apologies to any who lost their dinner from viewing this picture....gag.

 

[Gemsbok]

1.5" high x 6-mil scope mount, plus the 6-mil pic rail that came with my rifle, combined with the adjustable comb on the stock, lets me keep my head upright when I have a sloppy chin "weld."

I ordered a shorter replacement mount. and like @Baron23 suggested ... a chassis with more adjustment is a little ways out on finance schedule.

 

[Im2bent]

This guy shoots better than all of those idiots.
View attachment 8128767

Right handed/left eye dominant?

 

[pmclaine]

I had a spirited discussion on this topic with my dear friend @Nik H who, if I remember correctly, told me that if I didn't have 1.5" rings my dick would fall off, I'd get full body herpes, and I'd never hit the 10 ring again in my life. (joking of course)

Here's the deal...I have super model high cheek bones. Don't hate me because I'm beautiful (which if you have ever seen me you would know is the furthest from the truth! haha). So, I need a very high comb to get behind a scope.

And, after years of clay target shooting I have absolutely confirmed that I need a high comb just to align with the rib (1.25" drop at comb). Its just a matter of the configuration of the on-side eye and the bottom of your cheek bone (because, as an old shotgunner, I kind of insist on a solid and repeatable cheek weld and rather think its the only weld that is utterly repeatable).

Right now I have two rifles in JAE chassis with ARC 1.10" rings.

And my head is NOT rolled over on my rifles....I've taken the Frank/Marc clinics twice and head roll was not one of my many issues (thank god, I have enough as it is LOL)

To get behind the scope properly with these rings and in these chassis, I have raised the comb almost as far as it will go. I have .17" of additional adjustment left. Not much, right. And, I think the JAE's are pretty much in the ball park with everyone else in terms of comb height adjustability.

So, if I put 1.5" rings on these guns, I would be far too low.

I do see where ARC makes 1.26" rings. If I use up that last .17" of comb adjustment, I should be able to get behind my scopes. But, I'm doubtful that .16" of additional height using these next taller rings is at all worth the $180+tax+shipping.

I guess my overall thought is that this is NOT a one size fits all parameter. That is NOT to say go as low as you can....not at all. Just get rings that will put you behind your scope, within the adjustments of your stock/chassis, with your head erect.

Just my view of it and I'm well prepared to be schooled by my betters! haha

Oh, for those who say just dump the JAE's and get a chassis with more comb adjustment...I will be glad to. Just send me $2k per chassis and I'll be happy to go shopping! haha

Cheers

@Nik H is always right.

He’s got a picket fence decorated with dicks from peeps not listening.

Stopped reading after that. I’m an American….can’t stay on one topic that long…….and being a Marine once you stopped talking about dicks I was done.

 

[pmclaine]

My rifles have no adjustment save tape and ensolite pad or Triad stock packs.

Often I find my head horizontal with earth rather than being perpendicular.

Not ideal but my fetish for historical based rifles prevents me from acknowledging ergonomics.

Glad to hear all you guys transitioned….not surprising.

 

[Nik H]

@Nik H is always right.

Thanks for acknowledging that

 

[Lowlight]

He is ...

 

[Brym427]

Anything shorter than the 1.5" mount im using on my axsr and my 7-35 literally would not fit

 

[Precision Underground]

I run 1/2-3/4 risers on almost all of our full length rail rifles. It puts me around 1.65”-2” depending on the stock. Too low makes for a crooked head…. I thought it was just bc I have a tall ass head though.

 

[Carlos Danger]

The closer it is to the barrel the fewer clicks needed to boresight.

 

[n2ishun]

The closer it is to the barrel the fewer clicks needed to boresight.

Would you mind explaining the physics of that for us slow ones ?
How does a 1/4-1/2 in height change the properties of the scopes click adjustment ?

 

[Im2bent]

It's my understanding that height above bore affects mpbr.

 

[kthomas]

The closer it is to the barrel the fewer clicks needed to boresight.

So you are going to optimize your ring height for one shot to the detriment of every other shot you are going to take?

That's some ass backwards logic.

 

[kthomas]

Also it's not hard to bore sight the rifle.

I can't imagine trying to optimize ring height for that one operation that gets conducted so rarely.

 

[Carlos Danger]

So you are going to optimize your ring height for one shot to the detriment of every other shot you are going to take?

That's some ass backwards logic.

We really need to implement a humor font on here.....

 

[Killswitch Engage]

1.5" or go home.

 

[Rob01]

1.5" is way to low. 1.9" is where its at!

SHXSKEL34TW 1.9 inch Super High, 34mm MSR Mount, Black

The 1.9? height provides more room for shooters wearing gas masks, using night vision, or those who are trying to clear accessories mounted to the ri?e.

warnescopemounts.com

 

[Killswitch Engage]

how high is your mount?

 

[4O6shootist]

1.5" mounts and a jaw weld for the win. Get that butt pad in on your collarbone neck junction for as straight of recoil impulse to body line center as possible.

 

[Precision Underground]

1.5" mounts and a jaw weld for the win. Get that butt pad in on your collarbone neck junction for as straight of recoil impulse to body line center as possible.

This is the way. IMO the “cheek weld” is antiquated and can easily cause issues. I just touch my jaw to the comb and my head is all but vertical. My scopes are 1.65”- 1.9” high and my rifle is set up slightly canted toward my head which brings the scope more in front of my eye so very little head tilt is needed.

 

[Milf Dots]

1.5" is way to low. 1.9" is where its at!

SHXSKEL34TW 1.9 inch Super High, 34mm MSR Mount, Black

The 1.9? height provides more room for shooters wearing gas masks, using night vision, or those who are trying to clear accessories mounted to the ri?e.

warnescopemounts.com

All kidding aside, are Warne one piece mounts GTG for a quality precision rifle?

 

[0724/1030]

1.5" is way to low. 1.9’ is where its at!

Fixed it for you!

 

[kthomas]

Bill Poor approves this message

 

[Dead Eye Dick]

Is he really shooting or just letting the rifle do the work

he is buying more of a win then anything else,

Compared to my IHMSA days, every time I get behind a PRS style rifle, I feel like its the rifle and I am all but the spectator. I’ve seen peopel brag about my marksmanship however, 1. I can’t even hold the rifle crosshair on the target point while shooting from a bench; 2. I am technically shooting worse than at any time in my last 65 years of shooting. Yet, I am still hitting targets out to a half mile or longer and doing it regularly enough to make myself wonder. As far as holds, wind correction, I am an old mortar man so bracketing is second nature.

Its got to be the rifle and the structure of PRS style shooting. Between the bags and the tripods and the weight of the rifles, hitting an MOA sized target at 300 yards is a given, a chip shot.

Just so you’ll know, I grabbed my money gun, the XP100 that I have used to shoot more 40x40’s than all the other handguns combined, shot at 100, 150 and 200 yards, shooting in Creedmoor position at Altus in March. It wasn’t pretty. final note, I am not nor will I ever be competitive in Precision Rifle competition. But it sure is fun to still be able to hit targets and not jsut from a bench rest.

 

[Rob01]

All kidding aside, are Warne one piece mounts GTG for a quality precision rifle?

Warne makes some good products but I wouldn't use that one as it's more of an AR mount but you could use this one.

7824M 1 PC Precision Mount 34mm MSR Ideal Height

Engineered with the precision rifle shooter/competitor in mind. Machined from 7075 T6 aluminum billet, 2 integral recoil lugs,4 mounting crossbolts

warnescopemounts.com

Or this if you wanted it shorter.

7824M 1 PC Precision Mount 34mm MSR Ideal Height

Engineered with the precision rifle shooter/competitor in mind. Machined from 7075 T6 aluminum billet, 2 integral recoil lugs,4 mounting crossbolts

warnescopemounts.com

 

[stanley_white]

“My scope rings were so high that the bullet went over the hostage taker’s head.” -Nobody Ever

 

[LeftyJason]

We really need to implement a humor font on here.....

View attachment 8129123

Wouldn't that be Comic Sans?

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Concur completely. Would go further.

Have always felt that a lower bore axis, relative to scope axis, tends to eliminate muzzle jump. I would be raising the butt pad to match the increase in scope height.

How say you?

Greg

 

[cas6969]

Still see guys on FB saying low as possible. Will it ever die

Are they talking about "these" types of rifles, or rifles in general? This is huge "internet issue" for sure, where context gets lost along the way. People tend to receive information that was intended for a specific application, a narrower intention, but interpret it and repeat it in a broader way than it was ever intended. (Or vise versa.) We all need to remember that online and not just with shooting related stuff.

If I say "you need at least X" (because I'm talking about a straight line stock with an high adjustable comb and butt) but you take that info and then repeat it to your friend, who tries to apply it to a stock with lots of drop and no comb, it's not going to go so well for them. Like I said that goes beyond guns. I watch videos where guys are giving engine advice, and I'm hesitant to follow it. "Do this, don't do this" , while I'm thinking yeah but you take your engine apart every couple months, where as I don't want to ever have to do it again! Does it still apply?

 

[danatkins]

Are they talking about "these" types of rifles, or rifles in general? This is huge "internet issue" for sure, where context gets lost along the way. People tend to receive information that was intended for a specific application, a narrower intention, but interpret it and repeat it in a broader way than it was ever intended. (Or vise versa.) We all need to remember that online and not just with shooting related stuff.

If I say "you need at least X" (because I'm talking about a straight line stock with an high adjustable comb and butt) but you take that info and then repeat it to your friend, who tries to apply it to a stock with lots of drop and no comb, it's not going to go so well for them. Like I said that goes beyond guns. I watch videos where guys are giving engine advice, and I'm hesitant to follow it. "Do this, don't do this" , while I'm thinking yeah but you take your engine apart every couple months, where as I don't want to ever have to do it again! Does it still apply?

My scope height is 2.55 in my mpa chassis I've had people tell me it needs to be as close to the barrel as possible. I actually plan on dropping to the next height down just too many irons in the fire

 

[Gohring65]

I can get behind a scope much better prone when it’s on the higher side. 2” is about perfect.

 

[Precision Underground]

A good point to note in case you’re reading numbers here and looking to try something higher- there is height over bore(total height from center of bolt to center of scope) and there is ring height(how high center of scope is from the top rail). Ex-A 1.75” total ring/mount height puts my HOB around 2.85” on one rifle.

 

[FUNCTIONAL]

Disclaimer: I didn't watch the video

I think the focus should be more on fitting the rifle to the shooter than worrying about what's "In" with scope height. Face structure, neck length are going to dictate how you need to set up comb and scope height....add body type in there if we are focusing more on prone.

Im another that has to go low (.8-1.2 depending on the scope and gun) because of my high ass cheek bones. 1.5+ and I'd have to put my chin ontop of the cheek rest to see.