See through rings, the FUDD mount! It works!

John Y Cannuck

John Y Cannuck

RichPoorMan<br>Super Moderator
Moderating Team
Rating - 100%
15   0   0
Location
The Conservative part of Ontario
IMGP11961.jpg
 
Ok, for the western guys, this will never compete for long range accuracy with a good low mounted scope, on a "bean field rifle" but it will hold hunting accuracy to a couple of hundred yards on big game, and give you peace of mind for the times your scope is full of snow, covered with rain drops, or condensation. (Or if you choose a crappy scope, with outright failure)
 
I personally like them. Where we deer hunt it can be quite thick. (I'm usually the dogger) and I've had deer pass by me without being able to find them in the scope before they vanish back into cover. I carry a lever with open sights now but sometimes at the end of the day/drive I will sit at a marsh where it would be nice to have a scope.
 
If a guy has a good quality fixed or variable, low power scope mounted on his rifle, like the one on your 88, the see through rings aren't much of a benefit. The scope works better than irons in low light, and doesn't give up much in terms of field of view. Then there's the cheek weld issue. Then there's the durability issue. I guess they might be better than the "flop over" hinge mounted rings since nothing moves, but at least the hinge mounted rings gave you a repeatable cheek weld. Even when see through rings were popular I didn't like them. With today's high quality, repeatable, QD rings, surely its time for see through rings to pass into history.
 
The issue I have with them is that they're slower, and tend to exaggerate the effects of recoil.

With a low scope and a high comb, you can snap the rifle to your shoulder and be looking straight down the scope tube... very fast. When the scope is mounted up high, or the comb too low ( set up for irons ) I find I have to bob my head around a bit to get a sight picture.

I had high mounts on a 7x57 briefly, and found a substantial increase in felt recoil with my head way up in the air. I shot the same rifle with irons, so I know it wasn't just the rifle.
 
Now days with fiber optic/tritium iron sights and red dot sights or even modern low powered compact scopes that gather more light and clear as day even at dusk it's no wonder these have gone the way of the dinosaur. My dad still has the odd rifle with these but just becouse he never shoots it enough to change it.
Does.anybody actually go out and still.buy these?
 
That is the exact setup that I used for many years, I loved it, the gun shot well scoped with a 3x9 and I could still use the iron sights if the scope was ever damaged.
 
So if the comb is low enough to use the irons how is your cheek weld with the scope way in the air?

If you're worried about scope durability or the possibility of the objective/eyepiece getting soiled the solution is quality QD rings. See through mounts are the worst of both worlds IMO.
 
I would cantilever the rings the other way. sets your head further back for eye relief. so, head forward on the comb for irons, back for 4'' relief onto cheek pad for scope. I use the corner of the pad for reference to feel where the 4'' mark is.
 
Boomer said:
If a guy has a good quality fixed or variable, low power scope mounted on his rifle, like the one on your 88, the see through rings aren't much of a benefit. The scope works better than irons in low light, and doesn't give up much in terms of field of view. Then there's the cheek weld issue. Then there's the durability issue. I guess they might be better than the "flop over" hinge mounted rings since nothing moves, but at least the hinge mounted rings gave you a repeatable cheek weld. Even when see through rings were popular I didn't like them. With today's high quality, repeatable, QD rings, surely its time for see through rings to pass into history.
Click to expand...

I agree completely!

In fact, my Nosler M48 Outfitter has QD Leupold rings & the scope is a 1.25-8x32 Elite 6500.

No need for see through rings IMHO... Ruins the cheek weld!

Cheers
Jay
 
Last edited:
I use the see thru for my Henry Frontier just for fun and it works as I can move from one distance to another easily everything else goes au Naturale
 
Boomer said:
If a guy has a good quality fixed or variable, low power scope mounted on his rifle, like the one on your 88, the see through rings aren't much of a benefit. The scope works better than irons in low light, and doesn't give up much in terms of field of view. Then there's the cheek weld issue. Then there's the durability issue. I guess they might be better than the "flop over" hinge mounted rings since nothing moves, but at least the hinge mounted rings gave you a repeatable cheek weld. Even when see through rings were popular I didn't like them. With today's high quality, repeatable, QD rings, surely its time for see through rings to pass into history.
Click to expand...

Well said! These rings provide more disadvantages than advantages.
 
Noted and expected the western guys to respond as they did.
Once you are used to it, cheek weld isn't an issue.
As I said, you can't expect it to be a bean field rifle, but out to 200 yards or a bit more, the set up works fine.
Light gathering ability of the Leupold is excellent, and the peep is fast, if you lift the scope to find it unusable for any reason.
Cheek weld on the aperture is just fine BTW.
Adding a pad would make the peep unusable, ain't going to happen.
Have I used the peep? Absolutely! Walking in thick bush with fresh snow on the trees is very hard to do with scopes. Yes, you can try to keep it under your armpit, or hope the brush doesn't snag the linkage on the flip ups and wreck 'em, or they freeze shut. Been there, done that.
I use this rifle a lot. The only one set up this way, and damned handy.
Never had it move, it's stronger than you might think.
Consider it an eastern set up if you will, as you will still find a lot of them in eastern hunt camps.
Line of sight is higher than the same scope with a traditional mount, but not higher than a large varmint scope, so I don't give that argument any weight.

Oh yes, I have a hinge mount, but on this rifle, it would require much taller irons to allow them to be used.
 
6MT said:
Makes a good carry handle.
Click to expand...

Right there. Used to see tons of the old Kwik Site see thru mounts out east, they seemed very popular in the 80s-90s, and usually served well as carry handles, infact when I was setting them up I used to try flipping one around 'backwards' so it gave you a bigger space to get your hand through. Frankly, they were cheap junky rings anyway, and fairly cheap.
 
The see through and flip over mounts are left over from a different era rather than being a fudd thing. If you see a rifle with open sights at all any more, perhaps a "scout", "alaskan", or "african". Older rifles with sights are post war, scopes were poor and unreliable, and people had a lack of trust in them.

My fathers rifles growing up; a Savage 99 308 with flip mounts and a 4X Weaver, and a converted 1903 Springfield 30-06 with a post and crosshair 4X in see thru's. I ate a lot of moose shot with the 308.
 
Droopy78 said:
I personally like them. Where we deer hunt it can be quite thick. (I'm usually the dogger) and I've had deer pass by me without being able to find them in the scope before they vanish back into cover. I carry a lever with open sights now but sometimes at the end of the day/drive I will sit at a marsh where it would be nice to have a scope.
Click to expand...

There are still tons of them down this way also. A long shot here for deer is not the norm for most guys and they work well in the thick brush and close range
Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom