AR15 offset scope mount or separate set of rings for scope?

[quinnjoblow]

I have a flat top AR15 that has no iron sights. I have a Vortex 1x24 Crossfire2 muzzle loader scope that I would like to mount. I wanted to have a non battery powered 1x scope for shooting under 150m. Im not sure if I should use a set of rings or an offset mount. Do you need an offset mount to clear the charging handle? I just wasn't sure if the offset mounts were made more for tacticool looks or if they served a purpose. I would prefer to have just a good set of rings instead of the offset mount. I think it would keep the scope close to the upper and make a more compact rifle. I guess as long as my knuckles don't smash the scope when I pull on the charging handle does it make a difference?
I'm old school and hate the fact that my eyes are aging enough to force me to an alternative to open sights on AR rifles.
The scope has generous eye relief so I can be moved a bit forward. Any help would be appreciated.

 

[JayCarver]

You might not want to have the scope lower than what the standards offset mounts are. The height of the standard offset mounts will for most people provide a proper eye alignment for the optic. Another issue that may or may not come up with rings is the front ring might end up in front of the receiver depending on your LOP and butt stock configuration. If you have some putty or some way to mock up the scope this is your best bet to see what will work for you and your setup without buying rings/mount to find out.

 

[quinnjoblow]

Ya I noticed that. I installed the said scope using a standard set of weaver scope rings I had kicking around the parts bin. I couldn't get my head down far enough on the buffer tube to properly see through the scope. It was like trying to find my car keys under my refrigerator. Looks like I will try and get an offset mount that brings center of scope about an inch and a half above rail height. I guess offset scope mounts are not just made to be tacticool.