I was always under the impression that it was better to keep your scope as low to the rifle as possible but Im beginning a quest to try higher rings to see if my head stays in a more natural relaxed position - anyone have any feedback on this issue
ring height?
- Thread starter Mudduck
- Start date
There isn't a rule 'bout anything c'ept pay'n taxes and alley-munies.
Do what feels best for you.
Sum like the sewtkase look azz it's eazzear tuh haul that thang around wid glubbs awn.
Gift'er chit.
Oh, photos...................svp
Do what feels best for you.
Sum like the sewtkase look azz it's eazzear tuh haul that thang around wid glubbs awn.
Gift'er chit.
Oh, photos...................svp
I'm old school; I like the scope as low as possible, and find that the most comfortable position. Mounting it up higher means you'll be adopting the European style stiff-neck upright-head posture that always looks like they're craning their necks trying to see over the scope. 
But a slightly higher scope may make it a bit easier to get a long-range zero without having the mid-range trajectory going too high. I'm talking about what was once considered a long-range zero (maybe 300 yards instead of 200...), not the extreme long-range stuff that is so in vogue today. Higher rings also allow the use of a larger objective lens, which is of questionable value to most people in most circumstances, but some folks like it. There are also some rifles with bolt-handle/eyepiece clearance issues that require the use of higher rings than "normal".
Hey, for the cost of a set of rings, give it a try and see if you like it.
But a slightly higher scope may make it a bit easier to get a long-range zero without having the mid-range trajectory going too high. I'm talking about what was once considered a long-range zero (maybe 300 yards instead of 200...), not the extreme long-range stuff that is so in vogue today. Higher rings also allow the use of a larger objective lens, which is of questionable value to most people in most circumstances, but some folks like it. There are also some rifles with bolt-handle/eyepiece clearance issues that require the use of higher rings than "normal".
Hey, for the cost of a set of rings, give it a try and see if you like it.
- Location
- Lower Mainland
that is only a general rule of thumb...you have to comfortable with your position in order to shoot well anyway....regardless of the height. Once you are zeroed at whatever distance you want, the height of the scope is negated. Happy shooting!
Thanks guys, I'm going to do a bit of experimenting to find out if I can find a more natural position for my neck angle and cheek weld to allow me to find tha consistant spot quicker.. I will pick up a cheaper set of med and high rings and just practice shouldering the rifle and then opening my eyes to see if it makes things easier or worse
One thing I found that matters more then ring height is proper eye relief. I have the lowest rings possible on my rifle (1.375" x-high) and when it was pushed back by 2 pic rails too much I couldn't get a comfortable cheek weld. Thought I needed taller rings then figured I'd try pushing it forward and it has stayed at that position since. Now the cheek weld is consistent and easy to hold no sore neck etc.
You want the scope low enough to get a solid cheek weld. If your cheek is not touching or just barely touching the stock, the scope is mounted too high.
Correct ring height will also depend on the type of rifle you are using. On an AR-15, for example, you would normally mount the optic much higher than on a typical bolt action rifle. That is so because on the Ar-15 stock, the cheek rest is essentially on the same level as the top of the receiver. On most bolt action rifles, the cheek rest is lower than the top of the receiver.
