so i see that everyone tries to get their scope as low as possible to be inline with the barrel. can someone tell me the reasoning for this. is this a functional reason or looks. how important is it to have the scope as low as possible? the reason why i ask is my scope's 50mm bell sits at least a good 1/2" above my barrel. this may seem like a novice question but i guess that just means i'm a novice in this area. thanks.
Rifle Scopes Importance of scope height to barrel...
- Thread starter base
- Start date
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
Better cheek weld <span style="color: #999900">(for me). </span>
Too low can be an issue with AI/AICS setups, but its hard to get too low with conventional tactical/precision stocks and a R700 <span style="color: #999900">(if you have a longer narrow or smaller face structure)</span>
Better cheek weld <span style="color: #999900">(for me). </span>
Too low can be an issue with AI/AICS setups, but its hard to get too low with conventional tactical/precision stocks and a R700 <span style="color: #999900">(if you have a longer narrow or smaller face structure)</span>
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
A month or so ago I saw where Ty at Barnes posted on thier web site that a higher scope seems to flatten trajtory over a lower mounted scope. I like a 2" high mounting, but I like Weatherby stocks. My custom stock was even higher.
Has anyone tested this?
A month or so ago I saw where Ty at Barnes posted on thier web site that a higher scope seems to flatten trajtory over a lower mounted scope. I like a 2" high mounting, but I like Weatherby stocks. My custom stock was even higher.
Has anyone tested this?
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
Being comfortable behind the rifle is more important than how low the scope is to the bore line.
There will be slight differences in scope heights at longer ranges but the place you will see it the most is in close, 25 yards and in. They can easily be adjusted for so there's no need to have the scope riding right on the barrel unless that's the most comfortable for you. Go to a ballistic program like JBM and put in different scope heights with all other data being the same.
Being comfortable behind the rifle is more important than how low the scope is to the bore line.
There will be slight differences in scope heights at longer ranges but the place you will see it the most is in close, 25 yards and in. They can easily be adjusted for so there's no need to have the scope riding right on the barrel unless that's the most comfortable for you. Go to a ballistic program like JBM and put in different scope heights with all other data being the same.
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
My main rifles have scopes with the center of the objective from 1.75-3" above center of the bore. The high one being a POF due to the tall rail. The main thing is that it fit you for cheek weld and you account for it in the ballistic program you use. For example, I went to a PRS with adjustable comb stock for the POF due to optic height to make the gun fit me as far as cheek weld and eye relief. The scope is way off the barrel but the whole set up shoots really well.
My main rifles have scopes with the center of the objective from 1.75-3" above center of the bore. The high one being a POF due to the tall rail. The main thing is that it fit you for cheek weld and you account for it in the ballistic program you use. For example, I went to a PRS with adjustable comb stock for the POF due to optic height to make the gun fit me as far as cheek weld and eye relief. The scope is way off the barrel but the whole set up shoots really well.
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
If you're like me (pic below), too low can be a problem and interfere with your cheekweld and getting a good sight picture. I have found that a 1.5" mount is about as low as I can go and still get a comfortable cheekweld. That puts the centerline at 2.4" above the bore axis and the bottom of the bell for a 50 mm objective ~1/4"-1/3" above the rail. There are definitely good mounts available that would get the scope lower, but I doubt I would be able to wedge my fat melon in close enough to use it.
If you're like me (pic below), too low can be a problem and interfere with your cheekweld and getting a good sight picture. I have found that a 1.5" mount is about as low as I can go and still get a comfortable cheekweld. That puts the centerline at 2.4" above the bore axis and the bottom of the bell for a 50 mm objective ~1/4"-1/3" above the rail. There are definitely good mounts available that would get the scope lower, but I doubt I would be able to wedge my fat melon in close enough to use it.
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Being comfortable behind the rifle is more important than how low the scope is to the bore line.
There will be slight differences in scope heights at longer ranges but the place you will see it the most is in close, 25 yards and in. They can easily be adjusted for so there's no need to have the scope riding right on the barrel unless that's the most comfortable for you. Go to a ballistic program like JBM and put in different scope heights with all other data being the same. </div></div>
Very true. I didn't mean a blanket "lower is better", I always think low because that's my facial build-I run my cheekpieces at max height usually with low rings, because that's where my eye (and where my scope needs to be) is when I set up behind the rifle, get comfy with my eyes closed and then open them.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Being comfortable behind the rifle is more important than how low the scope is to the bore line.
There will be slight differences in scope heights at longer ranges but the place you will see it the most is in close, 25 yards and in. They can easily be adjusted for so there's no need to have the scope riding right on the barrel unless that's the most comfortable for you. Go to a ballistic program like JBM and put in different scope heights with all other data being the same. </div></div>
Very true. I didn't mean a blanket "lower is better", I always think low because that's my facial build-I run my cheekpieces at max height usually with low rings, because that's where my eye (and where my scope needs to be) is when I set up behind the rifle, get comfy with my eyes closed and then open them.
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
This is a good discussion, so the bottom line, as I perceive it, is that the scope height above barrel has to be tailored to your individual comfort and acceptable cheek weld. Before this discussion I thought it was gospel you had to get the scope centerline as close to barrel centerline as possible for maximum cheek weld.
This is a good discussion, so the bottom line, as I perceive it, is that the scope height above barrel has to be tailored to your individual comfort and acceptable cheek weld. Before this discussion I thought it was gospel you had to get the scope centerline as close to barrel centerline as possible for maximum cheek weld.
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Being comfortable behind the rifle is more important than how low the scope is to the bore line.
There will be slight differences in scope heights at longer ranges but the place you will see it the most is in close, 25 yards and in. They can easily be adjusted for so there's no need to have the scope riding right on the barrel unless that's the most comfortable for you. Go to a ballistic program like JBM and put in different scope heights with all other data being the same. </div></div>
this,
everyone seems to want their scope to hug the barrel, whats worst is when people change a perfectly good mount and go with a completely different system to accommodated butler creek flip up covers,
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Being comfortable behind the rifle is more important than how low the scope is to the bore line.
There will be slight differences in scope heights at longer ranges but the place you will see it the most is in close, 25 yards and in. They can easily be adjusted for so there's no need to have the scope riding right on the barrel unless that's the most comfortable for you. Go to a ballistic program like JBM and put in different scope heights with all other data being the same. </div></div>
this,
everyone seems to want their scope to hug the barrel, whats worst is when people change a perfectly good mount and go with a completely different system to accommodated butler creek flip up covers,
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
What fits me will not work for pumpkinhead and vice versa.
Like every other aspect of a quality tool, the job should mandate the selection, and the entire purpose of amounting system is to present the sighting device in such a manner that the application of marksmanship fundamentals are complemented, not challenged.
What fits me will not work for pumpkinhead and vice versa.
Like every other aspect of a quality tool, the job should mandate the selection, and the entire purpose of amounting system is to present the sighting device in such a manner that the application of marksmanship fundamentals are complemented, not challenged.
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
You can be too close. I had a Burris signature scope that was mounted on a custom encore barrel. There was about .020" clearance +/- between the adjustable objective and the barrel. During recoil the tube would flex and objective would contact the barrel. I have reverse image of the knurled surface of the adjustable objective imprinted into the bluing of the barrel. Also the finish on the scope was removed/polished due to contact with the barrel.
This was a really long scope with a 1"tube and a heavy objective lens and housing.
Just wanted to point out that you can be too close to the barrel with the objective and still not be touching.
A shorter/lighter scope with a 30mm tube might not have had this problem.
BTW this was a 25-06 improved with a 27" heavy (.800" muzzle) barrel on a TC Encore. Moderate recoil on a semi-heavy rifle.
BLK
You can be too close. I had a Burris signature scope that was mounted on a custom encore barrel. There was about .020" clearance +/- between the adjustable objective and the barrel. During recoil the tube would flex and objective would contact the barrel. I have reverse image of the knurled surface of the adjustable objective imprinted into the bluing of the barrel. Also the finish on the scope was removed/polished due to contact with the barrel.
This was a really long scope with a 1"tube and a heavy objective lens and housing.
Just wanted to point out that you can be too close to the barrel with the objective and still not be touching.
A shorter/lighter scope with a 30mm tube might not have had this problem.
BTW this was a 25-06 improved with a 27" heavy (.800" muzzle) barrel on a TC Encore. Moderate recoil on a semi-heavy rifle.
BLK
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Old man now</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A month or so ago I saw where Ty at Barnes posted on thier web site that a higher scope seems to flatten trajtory over a lower mounted scope. I like a 2" high mounting, but I like Weatherby stocks. My custom stock was even higher.
Has anyone tested this? </div></div>
Not that i disagree or anything, just me thinking... it seems like it would be the other way around? it seems like the lower mounted scope would be a flatter trajectory and a higher mount would produce more vertical travel for the bullet to hit 0 in the scope - at say... 100 yds zero. Right?
hmmm - i played around on bullet flight with the sight height at 1 inch and 4 inches - and funny thing - with the 4 inch height around 100 - 200 yds the bullet did stay flatter for a longer time (150 gr), but the verticle travel was a little quicker. Weird, that makes no sense to me still, maybe it's a gravity/velocity thing.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Old man now</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A month or so ago I saw where Ty at Barnes posted on thier web site that a higher scope seems to flatten trajtory over a lower mounted scope. I like a 2" high mounting, but I like Weatherby stocks. My custom stock was even higher.
Has anyone tested this? </div></div>
Not that i disagree or anything, just me thinking... it seems like it would be the other way around? it seems like the lower mounted scope would be a flatter trajectory and a higher mount would produce more vertical travel for the bullet to hit 0 in the scope - at say... 100 yds zero. Right?
hmmm - i played around on bullet flight with the sight height at 1 inch and 4 inches - and funny thing - with the 4 inch height around 100 - 200 yds the bullet did stay flatter for a longer time (150 gr), but the verticle travel was a little quicker. Weird, that makes no sense to me still, maybe it's a gravity/velocity thing.
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
ummm - okay i understand now. With the higher scope mount vs lower scope mount both zeroed at the same distance, the higher one will have a slighter steeper angle upward for the bullet to travel initially, thus less gravity effect = flatter trajectory in the long run. Kinda like shooting up an incline.
ummm - okay i understand now. With the higher scope mount vs lower scope mount both zeroed at the same distance, the higher one will have a slighter steeper angle upward for the bullet to travel initially, thus less gravity effect = flatter trajectory in the long run. Kinda like shooting up an incline.
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
cyrekzz, the gravity effect and bullet drop at any range is the same...
The only thing that changes with scope height is how you "see" this bullet path related to the line of sight (LOS).
cyrekzz, the gravity effect and bullet drop at any range is the same...
The only thing that changes with scope height is how you "see" this bullet path related to the line of sight (LOS).
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
yeah - i just meant that initially say 0 - 100 yds the flight would be a sharper incline up trajectory-wise, than with a the higher sight height in which gravity would have less effect on it than the lower mounted.
Also, if you were shooting at something like 25 yds out both the higher and lower mounted scoped rifles zeroed at 100 yds - on the higher mount you would aim slightly higher than the target than the lower mounted scope to get the same point of impact at that distance.
yeah - i just meant that initially say 0 - 100 yds the flight would be a sharper incline up trajectory-wise, than with a the higher sight height in which gravity would have less effect on it than the lower mounted.
Also, if you were shooting at something like 25 yds out both the higher and lower mounted scoped rifles zeroed at 100 yds - on the higher mount you would aim slightly higher than the target than the lower mounted scope to get the same point of impact at that distance.
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Old man now</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A month or so ago I saw where Ty at Barnes posted on thier web site that a higher scope seems to flatten trajtory over a lower mounted scope. I like a 2" high mounting, but I like Weatherby stocks. My custom stock was even higher.
Has anyone tested this? </div></div>
well the higher the scope off the bore line the steeper the angle to meet the bullets trajectory at what ever range you zero. so with that steep angle it would SEEM that the trajectory is flatter... in actuality the bullets doing the same thing but your angle is steeper so its compensating for some of the needed adjustment over a scope mounted lower.
if you mount a scope 5in above bore then you might have a POI way high at 400 yards still. because the bullets not dropping as fast as the angle you created when you zero'd the rifle at 100 yards.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Old man now</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A month or so ago I saw where Ty at Barnes posted on thier web site that a higher scope seems to flatten trajtory over a lower mounted scope. I like a 2" high mounting, but I like Weatherby stocks. My custom stock was even higher.
Has anyone tested this? </div></div>
well the higher the scope off the bore line the steeper the angle to meet the bullets trajectory at what ever range you zero. so with that steep angle it would SEEM that the trajectory is flatter... in actuality the bullets doing the same thing but your angle is steeper so its compensating for some of the needed adjustment over a scope mounted lower.
if you mount a scope 5in above bore then you might have a POI way high at 400 yards still. because the bullets not dropping as fast as the angle you created when you zero'd the rifle at 100 yards.
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
Don't think anybody's made this point yet....The higher the scope is off the bore. The more you are affected by rifle cant. Think of it as a circle, with the center of the bore in the middle, the further off center you go the more your accuracy is affected by an unlevel rifle.
That's why I mount my optics as close to the bore as possible.
Don't think anybody's made this point yet....The higher the scope is off the bore. The more you are affected by rifle cant. Think of it as a circle, with the center of the bore in the middle, the further off center you go the more your accuracy is affected by an unlevel rifle.
That's why I mount my optics as close to the bore as possible.
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
X amount degrees of cant is X amount of degree of cant no matter how far off the receiver the scope is. it is just perceived to be more by the line of sight as mentioned above.
to sum up all of the above once clearance of the objective lens is achieved, the lower the scope:
1. the better the line of sight is in relation to the actual bullet trajectory
2. the closer the line of sight is to the trajectory, the less amount of adjustment on the optic is used up for zeroing purposes in relation to the bullet arch.
3. some consideration HAS to be give to cheek weld / eye alignment / comfort - if you are struggling to see through the optic you are opening another can of worms when it comes to consistancy or pulling shots, etc. as you are trying to fit yourself to the rifle / optic combination instead of making the rifle / optic combination fit to you,
4. the degree of canting stays the same, but the effects are more pronounced when taking the line of sight into play, referencing #1 & #2.
5. not mentioned yet, but for practicality (field use) the higher the optic is off the receiver, the better chance of it getting knocked around, getting caught on stuff, etc. Keeping closer also allows you to "work the dials" closer to your rifle, decreasing movement.
X amount degrees of cant is X amount of degree of cant no matter how far off the receiver the scope is. it is just perceived to be more by the line of sight as mentioned above.
to sum up all of the above once clearance of the objective lens is achieved, the lower the scope:
1. the better the line of sight is in relation to the actual bullet trajectory
2. the closer the line of sight is to the trajectory, the less amount of adjustment on the optic is used up for zeroing purposes in relation to the bullet arch.
3. some consideration HAS to be give to cheek weld / eye alignment / comfort - if you are struggling to see through the optic you are opening another can of worms when it comes to consistancy or pulling shots, etc. as you are trying to fit yourself to the rifle / optic combination instead of making the rifle / optic combination fit to you,
4. the degree of canting stays the same, but the effects are more pronounced when taking the line of sight into play, referencing #1 & #2.
5. not mentioned yet, but for practicality (field use) the higher the optic is off the receiver, the better chance of it getting knocked around, getting caught on stuff, etc. Keeping closer also allows you to "work the dials" closer to your rifle, decreasing movement.
G
Guest
Guest
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vegas</div><div class="ubbcode-body">so i see that everyone tries to get their scope as low as possible to be inline with the barrel. can someone tell me the reasoning for this. is this a functional reason or looks. how important is it to have the scope as low as possible? the reason why i ask is my scope's 50mm bell sits at least a good 1/2" above my barrel. this may seem like a novice question but i guess that just means i'm a novice in this area. thanks. </div></div>
Depends on what your using the stick for. LR target, low as you can get an still be comfortable. Hunting, high as you can an still be comfortable for all positions you shoot, so you can increase your max point blank range.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vegas</div><div class="ubbcode-body">so i see that everyone tries to get their scope as low as possible to be inline with the barrel. can someone tell me the reasoning for this. is this a functional reason or looks. how important is it to have the scope as low as possible? the reason why i ask is my scope's 50mm bell sits at least a good 1/2" above my barrel. this may seem like a novice question but i guess that just means i'm a novice in this area. thanks. </div></div>
Depends on what your using the stick for. LR target, low as you can get an still be comfortable. Hunting, high as you can an still be comfortable for all positions you shoot, so you can increase your max point blank range.
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
I have an AICS with a rem700 LA and krieger MTU 27in tube...At the end of that I have an AWC Thundertrap and a TAB gear suppressor cover on it. I bought a used Razor that came with low 35mm IOR rings but due to the low setup its not comfortable and when I make any elevation adjustments for shots past 500 yards I can see my suppressor cover in the scope which really bothers me. Ive just been alittle lazy lately to order some new mounts but sometimes low just wont work out...
I have an AICS with a rem700 LA and krieger MTU 27in tube...At the end of that I have an AWC Thundertrap and a TAB gear suppressor cover on it. I bought a used Razor that came with low 35mm IOR rings but due to the low setup its not comfortable and when I make any elevation adjustments for shots past 500 yards I can see my suppressor cover in the scope which really bothers me. Ive just been alittle lazy lately to order some new mounts but sometimes low just wont work out...
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
Cheek weld and rifle ergonomics are a very important consideration for obvious reasons. If you want to understand the effect scope height has on long range ballistics play around with the exterior ballistic programs on the net and simply adjust the scope height parameter, a simple way to look at it is since the projectile travels in an arch if it starts from a lower point it will require less adjustment to achieve a given distance. And maximum point blank range is increased which is a valuable tool for a hunting/field gun. Cheek weld can always be adjusted through the use of a stock pack/pad.
Cheek weld and rifle ergonomics are a very important consideration for obvious reasons. If you want to understand the effect scope height has on long range ballistics play around with the exterior ballistic programs on the net and simply adjust the scope height parameter, a simple way to look at it is since the projectile travels in an arch if it starts from a lower point it will require less adjustment to achieve a given distance. And maximum point blank range is increased which is a valuable tool for a hunting/field gun. Cheek weld can always be adjusted through the use of a stock pack/pad.
Re: Importance of scope height to barrel...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Nostradumbass</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Don't think anybody's made this point yet....The higher the scope is off the bore. The more you are affected by rifle cant. Think of it as a circle, with the center of the bore in the middle, the further off center you go the more your accuracy is affected by an unlevel rifle.
That's why I mount my optics as close to the bore as possible. </div></div>
The angle that is important regarding cant is the TOTAL angle or line of sight to the bore. You do increase a little this angle with higher scope height but it is not significant compared to the 30+ MOA you have to dial up at long ranges, where normal canting errors become significant.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Nostradumbass</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Don't think anybody's made this point yet....The higher the scope is off the bore. The more you are affected by rifle cant. Think of it as a circle, with the center of the bore in the middle, the further off center you go the more your accuracy is affected by an unlevel rifle.
That's why I mount my optics as close to the bore as possible. </div></div>
The angle that is important regarding cant is the TOTAL angle or line of sight to the bore. You do increase a little this angle with higher scope height but it is not significant compared to the 30+ MOA you have to dial up at long ranges, where normal canting errors become significant.
Has everyone else lost sight of common sense and the fact that the laws of physics always apply! Good looking out.
Well, its a decade old thread.
Maybe someone should have the common sense not to revive it?
(But I do agree, where the scope is mounted does not change the trajectory.)
Maybe someone should have the common sense not to revive it?
(But I do agree, where the scope is mounted does not change the trajectory.)
1. Non-sequitur necro post.
2. Awkward concluding statement "Good looking out" has kind of an engrish vibe.
3. First and only post by new member.
Sounds like a bot testing the site. Change my mind.
2. Awkward concluding statement "Good looking out" has kind of an engrish vibe.
3. First and only post by new member.
Sounds like a bot testing the site. Change my mind.
Hello everyone. I just bought a tactical 1 piece 20 moa 30mm/1,18" high mount for my 42mm scope... and there is like 1/2" space between. After I read this thread and many similar ones, I'm no longer sure it was an optimal pick. I picked the mount instead of rings for a more fixed scope position (thought it is just better), so I bought the lowest 20 moa mount I was able to get my hands on.
I would like my .308 rifle to be as much allround as possible from 50 up to 1000y. The stock has an adjustable cheek rest. I have no problems with eye relief, it is comfortable enough...
But now I'm wondering if a 20 moa base + some 0,9" rings would be a better choice. It would mean a reduction to aprox. 1/4" between the barrel and the optic, and a tiny (like 1/20") gap between the front tip of the base and the optic - can that possibly be a problem, or does a 1/8" minimum gap rule applies only to the barrel?
Does it make sense to try the other setup? Or should I just not give a damn and stick to the current one?
I would like my .308 rifle to be as much allround as possible from 50 up to 1000y. The stock has an adjustable cheek rest. I have no problems with eye relief, it is comfortable enough...
But now I'm wondering if a 20 moa base + some 0,9" rings would be a better choice. It would mean a reduction to aprox. 1/4" between the barrel and the optic, and a tiny (like 1/20") gap between the front tip of the base and the optic - can that possibly be a problem, or does a 1/8" minimum gap rule applies only to the barrel?
Does it make sense to try the other setup? Or should I just not give a damn and stick to the current one?
Last edited:
Trash it all and start over. Your current setup is unusable and will get you killed, and you’re too new for any of us to miss you.
OP...@TheHorta is just a kind and caring type of person. He would want to miss your absence.
I'd leave it as is since you are able to use the adjustable cheek rest to get into good position.
Also, the smaller gap (1/20") might be an issue if you decide to use a lens cap of any sort or use a clip-on for thermal or NV....@TheHorta would be the better resource for that info.
Similar threads
Advanced Marksmanship Where on the rifle do you measure scope height?
