Optimal Scope Height

[Tedhunts]

I found a great deal on a CA MPR in 6.5 PRC and am trying to determine optimum scope height. I had some high Vortex rings and although the scope sits abt .5 inch above the top barrel ( visually it looks high to me), when I get on the gun with the comb moderaterly adjusted (#3 position), my view into the scope is clear w/ no black out. Is there a reason I should find medium rings and get closer to barrel or should I take that the view from scope looks good and call it?

Intended use is whitetail hunting from a box, where i could possibly shoot up to 500yds, which will cover my ag fields from corner to corner. Scope is Ziess v4 6x24x 50mm with a #89 reticle.

Thoughts? Thanks in advance...

Ted

 

[LuvDog]

Is it a natural and comfortable position for you when you shoulder the rifle? Then that’s the right height. I’ve tried the “get as low as possible” approach. And it does look tacticool, but it sucks for getting a quick target acquisition.

I say the optimal is as low as is comfortable and natural when you shoulder it.

 

[MTNHUNTER76]

There is no optimum scope height. Scope height is a function of rifle stock design and personal preference.

 

[Plim92]

I have mounted my scopes as low as possible in the past, but am not opposed to mounting higher if it feels comfortable. As others have said, personal preference.

 

[Justin Crossley]

I personally mount scopes as close to the bore as possible without sacrificing cheek weld/ergonomics.

 

[SAM55]

I too have always mounted scopes as close to the bore as possible. But, in my old age I think I would keep the scope in it's higher position if you are in a good, comfortable position on the stock comb. A comfortable, natural shooting position probably trumps the old "as low as possible" guidance. My ARs tend to have high rings and they shoot just fine.

 

[mtnwrunner]

I personally mount scopes as close to the bore as possible without sacrificing cheek weld/ergonomics.

Yeah, what he said.

Randy

 

[XLR]

If you are shooting long-range, just make sure your sight over bore height is measured correctly. Otherwise, it doesn't really matter... Leave it where it is comfortable and send it! I am running a 2.5-inch height over bore but it is comfortable and I get proper sight alignment in any position.

 

[BigSky]

There's actually a lot of good input in this thread. People are usually advised to get as low of rings as you can and leave it at that. I speculate there are a lot of hunters or shooters out there who are using rings that are lower than optimal for them because internet experts said to get low or ultra low rings. As has been stated by several above, get as low of rings as you can while still allowing a proper technique with proper cheek weld. What's the best way to test this? After the scope is mounted, close your eyes, shoulder the rifle, get a good cheek weld and firing position and then open your eyes. You will know immediately whether the rings you are testing are of a proper height.

 

[35WhelenAI]

I heard years ago to get it as low as you can. The reason being higher rings create more leverage at the scope and bases during recoil. It's a matter of physics. It made sense to me back in the day and still does. I am very tall and need to get down on the rifle, relatively speaking, more than most shooters. Never had an issue with good head placement with low rings on rifles, the MPR is a bit different than my hunting rifles so may not be applicable.

 

[wind gypsy]

I’ve heard more about people going the opposite direction of conventional wisdom (low as possible) lately. A little extra height can prevent a shooter from having to lower their head into the rifle and be more naturally upright. Of course having an adjustable cheek piece helps but I think a lot of people put too much cheek pressure on their rifle too.

 

[35WhelenAI]

Good thought on the cheek pressure, hadn't thought of that. Go higher though and it's not as stable with a conventional stock at some point. There definitely is shooter awareness to use some sense and not mash the cheek onto the stock to adversely affect the shot.

 

[bbckfh]

Arguably, the only real reason lower is “better”, is because the optical axis and bore axis are thus closer.

But that’s math and can be accounted-for.

I’d personally argue that comfort and a natural shooting position trump that, since the alignment of biomechanics with bore axis is a larger source of error.

I’m personally moving from lowest-is-best to best-fit-is-best.

 

[UTJL]

Resurrecting this thread. Is there a way to determine which ring height is optimal, other than buying several sizes and trying them? Could you measure the height of your eye above the comb and then calculate the necessary ring height, using the drop at the comb, action height, base height and scope dimensions?