• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

  • Site updates coming next Wednesday at 8am CT!

    The site will be down for routine maintenance on Wednesday 6/5 starting at 8am CT. If you have any questions, please PM alexj-12!

Rifle Scopes Vortex HD gen II 4.5-27 question

A

Aggrofish

Wut
Full Member
Minuteman
Nov 18, 2013
108
44
I have a gen II Razor 4.5-27 in route. I'm putting it on a Ruger RPR in 6.5CM. I currently have a Burris XTR II 5-25 with Burris signature rings with the inserts. I'm in the market for rings and the obvious answer is Vortex/Seekins 1.45 but I dont know if they'll clear scope caps with a 56mm objective. Anyone know?

Also I'm not a hold type guy and even though I've only had the the rifle out to 1400 I want enough up elevation to be able to go to a mile which is around 21 MRAD. In the previous scope I had a 20 MOA base and 30MOA in the rings. The Burris rings are weird though and not quite 30 MOA, but point is all but 2.5 mils was up. Anyone know about how many MRAd up a guy would have with a 20 MOA base and a 100 yard zero on a 6.5CM?

I think the answer might be to get a 40MOA base and standard rings if they're high enough.
 
20 MOA is 6 mils’ish. I don’t think you need 40 MOA personally. 20 is more than adequate. As long as you don’t have a full top rail on your RPR the 1.5” rings will be fine with a 56mm objective (I think). I have a full rail and a 50mm objective on mine with room to spare and scope caps
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sig Marine
I have a full rail with a 50mm objective right now, but i believe my rings are 1.5 and yeah there's room.
 
930A9247-ED8F-40A7-90B6-19E693F93B92.jpeg


These are badger 1.5” rings and a 50mm obj. There might be enough room for a 56mm plus my caps but it would be close
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aggrofish
I have a Tikka T3X TAC A1 which has a full rail out front and I have the Razor Gen II. I used the Seekins 1.45" rings and there was just enough clearance for the Vortex Defender scope caps.
Note the rail on the Tikka is 0 moa so if there were any tilt like on a 20moa pic rail you might not have enough clearance for the scope caps.
Zero'd at 100 yards for a 6.5CM I had about 16 mrad of elevation adjustment using the turrets only. Of course you have more on the reticle but sounds like you don't want to go there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aggrofish
This was a total of 1.6” with that setup on factory 20 moa rail and had 19.5 mil of adjustment left in turret. Maybe tomorrow if I remember I can mock it back up and get out the mics and see how much room there was to play with.
 

Attachments

  • E3FE3AC2-DAFA-4003-8148-48C773DDD6D8.jpeg
    E3FE3AC2-DAFA-4003-8148-48C773DDD6D8.jpeg
    517.4 KB · Views: 152
  • Like
Reactions: Aggrofish
Thanks all. It looks like it's going to be real close with any scope caps. Seems like everyones rings are 1.45"
 
With my RPR and a Vortex Razor Gen II in Seekins 1.45" rings I can not get a scope cover on the objective lens without it touching the rail.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aggrofish
Cant go wrong with the 1.45 but one thing: do you have the first or second generation rpr?
The first had a samson handguard that was level the whole way which required the 1.45".
The recent generations drop down a bit which allows you to get away with slightly lower rings but you might bottom out the cheek adjustment though before you can get low enough to look through the scope.
My cousin went with 1.45 and though he has a good bit of room between the scope and rail he is glad he went higher as hes bottomed out on his cheek adjustment.
 
I have a gen 1 with the stock sampson rail. I'm going to try a set of 1.5" Burris Signature rings that I have and see how much room is left.

spife7980 said:
Cant go wrong with the 1.45 but one thing: do you have the first or second generation rpr?
The first had a samson handguard that was level the whole way which required the 1.45".
The recent generations drop down a bit which allows you to get away with slightly lower rings but you might bottom out the cheek adjustment though before you can get low enough to look through the scope.
My cousin went with 1.45 and though he has a good bit of room between the scope and rail he is glad he went higher as hes bottomed out on his cheek adjustment.
Click to expand...
 
Invest in some Tenebraex caps. Lower profile than the factory storm caps, and you should be able to run with low pro rings.

Also, much better in inclement weather. Shot at a match with my vortex caps and it was raining/snowing, and those things were worthless as they kept sliding off when pressure applied vs opening up. Buy once cry once.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aggrofish and trob_205
Thanks I'll check them out.

tenringx said:
Invest in some Tenebraex caps. Lower profile than the factory storm caps, and you should be able to run with low pro rings.

Also, much better in inclement weather. Shot at a match with my vortex caps and it was raining/snowing, and those things were worthless as they kept sliding off when pressure applied vs opening up. Buy once cry once.
Click to expand...
 
Here's my Vortex Razor HD Gen2 4.5-27x56, with AADMOUNT caps, on a Spuhr SP-4603B mount on a Tikka T3x Tac A1: Rail is 0MOA, mount is 38mm (1.496") high with 6mil (20.6MOA) of rake.

The AADMOUNT cap clears the rail by 1.9mm (0.075") -- 6 playing cards (0.0690") will fit in the gap, 7 cards (0.0805") won't.

scope_clearance.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aggrofish
Thanks. I doubt 1.45 which seems to be standard ring height will work with a 20 MOA base and caps.
 
Aggrofish said:
I doubt 1.45 which seems to be standard ring height will work with a 20 MOA base and caps.
Click to expand...
It'll be very close. If your front ring is at the same location on the scope tube as mine, but the center of your ring is 0.046" lower and your rake is 20MOA vs my 20.6MOA, you'll end up with 0.030" (0.76mm) clearance between the rail and a cap like mine. Thirty thousandths of an inch might be enough to absorb the manufacturing tolerances in the scope, cap, rings, and rail... But if I were you I'd be looking for taller rings or a thinner cap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aggrofish
I'm not seeing any 34mm rings higher than 1.45 outside of the Burris signature whatever they are that I'm using now. They're 1.5. I have 30MOA in the rings from the inserts in addition to the 20 MOA base. What can I say I want all up elevation lol
 
3E7F78B5-1CAA-4440-8FCE-CA444BC9C1FD.jpeg
I’m running the Seekins 1.45 on the factory 20 moa base. With a 100 yard zero with factory 143 eld-x leaves me with 18.3 MIL’s on the turret.
 
Here's another mounting option: https://www.jprifles.com/buy.php?item=JPFTSM-34-20
That is a JP one-piece mount with 20 moa built-in, and 1.47 to centerline. I got mine used with my 4.5-27 razor gen2. I have been happy so far, and can't imagine having any problems with anything moving. The quality seems to be top notch, but the price is $185 less than the comparable Spuhr.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aggrofish
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
SOLD WTS - Vortex Razor Gen II 4.5-27
Replies
3
Views
488
Greenmoustache
G
D
SOLD WTS: Vortex Razor HD Gen II 4.5-27X56 FFP EBR-7C MRAD
Replies
3
Views
590
cricket77
cricket77
M
SOLD Vortex Razor Gen 2 4.5-27 Tremor3
Replies
3
Views
287
cricket77
cricket77
A
Gen 2 56mm Razor behind clip-on thermal?
Replies
2
Views
243
AwkwardlySocial
A
D
SOLD Vortex Gen II Razor 4.5 - 27 ebr7c MRAD
Replies
3
Views
623
cricket77
cricket77
Top Bottom
Back