Re: What are my options for optics mounts? (REPR)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Spuhr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Battleaxe
I don't really get it.
If you have a scope that without any optical problems can be mounted in 20 Moa then I cannot see anything wrong with it.
You don't loose anything, and you can still zero it at 100 yards.
Using low rings on an AR is not always that easy due to the ergonomics of the gun.
Mostly users seems to prefer a mount that is somewhere in the 1,3-1,5" area, and that is where mostly mounts are.
So in my opinion it feels difficult to use low rings.
And by the way, for those who prefer really low on an AR10, we have 1,18" mounts, but in my opinion that is way to low for mostly shooters.
I am not so convinced that QD is the way to go.
The ONLY thing that is very important on a long range sniper gun is the ability to hit.
Each time, and that the spot where you want, no POI changes and regardless of weather and temperature.
I don't really see what the QD mount improves that ability.
So in my opinion, if you really wanna be able to hit at long range, go for fixed mounts. If the possiblity to change scope is most important and you feel that you really are going to use a CQB scope on the gun very ofter go for QD.
But do it with the knowledge that it migth costs you some of the accuracy.
Håkan </div></div>
What I'm referring to specifically is the height of the optic above bore centerline and the effect of a canted reticle (or rifle) on accuracy at long range. You have to consider that not everyone here is a trained sniper. Experience levels run the gamut from novice to scary-accurate. An optic that is higher than absolutely necessary in the hands of a less experienced shooter may make the weapon more unforgiving than it already is, so at least in theory you <span style="font-style: italic">can</span> lose something.
I think everyone here has learned through personal experience how difficult shooting an auto at distance is, and the slightest variable has a greater effect on shot placement than shooting a bolt gun. In that context removing/reducing those variables when possible (and practical) is likely a good idea. This is just an opinion but I don't believe that good ergonomics necessarily equal accuracy and in the case of height above bore there is a trade-off. It may only be slight but we're talking autos here and again...very few are successful at distance with them.
Keep in mind that I'm not making any blanket statements. I think its good that you folks offer different heights and in fact your mount was on the top of my list when I was looking, but you don't make one to fit a USO TPAL so I couldn't try one.
I agree with you 100% on fixed versed QD.
