How about just replacing the high one piece rail with a lower rail and then use low scope rings...? Wouldn't that get the cheek weld at least close?
I was thinking about it but between the bolt clearance and the amount I could gain with lower rails I would still need something to raise the comb height. I'll see what I can find though.
My FV-SR arrived today. I took off the rail that it comes with and put a set of #16 Weaver bases on. I then mounted my scope (Vortex Crossfire II 2-7x32) using medium height Burris Zee Rings. There is still plenty of space for the bolt to operate, so much so that I'm pretty sure a set of low rings will work just fine too. I've got a set of low rings ordered (LGS didn't have any in stock) and will report back once they arrive. The comb is still a little low and I suspect, while it'll be better with the low rings, it still won't be perfect - but it'll be close enough for my needs I think.
Thanks. It would be great if you could reply here when you try the low rings.
Those look like some pretty low rings. Care to share what brand they are and where you got them? Thanks!
Hey mmatt~they're Millett "Low", aluminum. Got them at Le Baron in Markham, under $15 if memory serves.I might still have the package and if I do, I'll update this thread with the part #. Le Baron only had 1 option in stock for 1" low, Weaver rings. They look the part IMHO.
The Obj. lens, even with the BC cap hovers about 1/8" off the barrel~which is perfect. The only thing that almost became an issue was how (relatively) little eye relief the Diamonback has. So, with the scope mounted so far back on the EGW rail, the bell is almost touching it. Probably 1/16" clearance, if that. I've seen posts by guys who have reversed the rail to alleviate this problem (it only overhangs on the front) but it ends-up looking a bit screwy over ejection port. Empties still clear, just looks a little odd.



























