What is the comb hight in relation to scope size some scopes have to be set on taller mounts. So you would need a taller comb on your stock. I like to have my cheek on the stock when I look through the scope. So my? is what size comb hight fits what size scope. Do you buy a scope to fit the stock or stock to fit the scope? Is 3/8" comb normal middle of the road? Is there a rule to thumb on this matter?
Rifle Stock Comb
- Thread starter ky hunter
- Start date
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Heh. Time to start measuring stocks, I guess. 
fatwhiteboy
New member
Buy a stock with an adjustable cheek piece.
^^^
This, if you've got the dough. I made my own stock with one, but if you're handy around wood/fiberglass, you can modify many stocks for this.
One of the most popular (and inexpensive) ways to get an adjustable cheekpiece is with the Karsten:
http://www.tacticalworks.com/Karsten-s-Custom-Cheek-Rest-A-Model.html
Depending on how much you need, a padded stock pack, or cheek pad is even cheaper, can hold ammo and other junk, and you don't need to drill your stocK:
http://www.tacticalworks.com/Tactical-Operations-Ammo-Cheek-Pad.html
You should use the lowest height rings that will allow the front bell of the scope to just clear the barrel. This obviously is what minimizes the height of the comb to get the proper cheekweld and eye relief.
It's a function of the ring heights, the diameter (or really, half the diameter) of the front bell housing, the length of the optic and how you have it positioned on the rifle, and the diameter/taper of the barrel... a lot of variables.
This, if you've got the dough. I made my own stock with one, but if you're handy around wood/fiberglass, you can modify many stocks for this.
One of the most popular (and inexpensive) ways to get an adjustable cheekpiece is with the Karsten:
http://www.tacticalworks.com/Karsten-s-Custom-Cheek-Rest-A-Model.html
Depending on how much you need, a padded stock pack, or cheek pad is even cheaper, can hold ammo and other junk, and you don't need to drill your stocK:
http://www.tacticalworks.com/Tactical-Operations-Ammo-Cheek-Pad.html
You should use the lowest height rings that will allow the front bell of the scope to just clear the barrel. This obviously is what minimizes the height of the comb to get the proper cheekweld and eye relief.
It's a function of the ring heights, the diameter (or really, half the diameter) of the front bell housing, the length of the optic and how you have it positioned on the rifle, and the diameter/taper of the barrel... a lot of variables.
There is a tremendous difference between a rifle stocked for iron sights and one stocked for a scope. An extreme example: I just restocked a 1937Savage 99, and there is almost 1/2" of difference in comb height between the factory stock and the new stock. Most would not show that much difference, the Savage is an example of old stock design that aligned the shooter's eye with the top of the receiver for iron sight use.
There will not be a great difference in comb heights going from a rifle with a 32mm objective lens to even a 54mm objective lens. Assuming you were to move up in objective size and mounted the scope as close to the barrel as possible, there would be less than 3/8" difference theoreticallly, in actuality about 1/4". Check the difference between a set of low rings and high rings. Could it make a difference? Sure, but you need to find a scope that fits your rifle.
There will not be a great difference in comb heights going from a rifle with a 32mm objective lens to even a 54mm objective lens. Assuming you were to move up in objective size and mounted the scope as close to the barrel as possible, there would be less than 3/8" difference theoreticallly, in actuality about 1/4". Check the difference between a set of low rings and high rings. Could it make a difference? Sure, but you need to find a scope that fits your rifle.
Which rifle, and stock design? Which scope and what is the objective size? There is no rule, but knowing a bit more about your componets will help with advice.
With most of my rifles I like 40mm or smaller scopes mounted in low rings. That is about perfect for me on most of my rifles with classic styled stocks with no cheekpiece, or a very low one. But my Kimber has even less drop than most. Low rings are just too low. Mediums work better on this rifle.
If I were to try to use a 50mm scope on my rifles I'd need medium or possible high rings for the scope to clear the barrel. With the scope high enough to clear the barrel, I'd never see through it and keep my cheek on the stock. If I owned a gun with a very high cheek piece, (Weatherby MK-V is a good example), It would work much better.
With most of my rifles I like 40mm or smaller scopes mounted in low rings. That is about perfect for me on most of my rifles with classic styled stocks with no cheekpiece, or a very low one. But my Kimber has even less drop than most. Low rings are just too low. Mediums work better on this rifle.
If I were to try to use a 50mm scope on my rifles I'd need medium or possible high rings for the scope to clear the barrel. With the scope high enough to clear the barrel, I'd never see through it and keep my cheek on the stock. If I owned a gun with a very high cheek piece, (Weatherby MK-V is a good example), It would work much better.
Model 70 classic SS 300 win mag factory plastic stock Leupold vxll 50mm scope on Le high 2 piece scope base & rings.Don't like the stock much would like to replace it with a laminated wood with tall comb and cheek piece.But don't know the size I need.
THANKS FOR HELP IN THIS MATTER.
THANKS FOR HELP IN THIS MATTER.Most bolt-action rifles today are made for scope use, but the shape of your face and length of your neck dictate whether you need to have a higher or lower scope mount. You need to mount the rifle with your eyes closed a few times, opening your shooting eye to see where you're looking. If you have to move up, down or sideways each time, the outfit doesn't fit, so changes are in order. In any case, a scope should be mounted as low as possible without having the objective touch the barrel and back far enough to see full view without altering head position.
However, if you have a scope that is more than 40mm objective, you might have to add height to the comb by using a lace-on or glue-on pad, or change stocks or scopes.
Fitting a stock also involves trying it with the clothes you will be using most when shooting it. That means hunting coat, etc. Unfortunately, most factory synthetic stocks don't lend themselves to changing lengths.
However, if you have a scope that is more than 40mm objective, you might have to add height to the comb by using a lace-on or glue-on pad, or change stocks or scopes.
Fitting a stock also involves trying it with the clothes you will be using most when shooting it. That means hunting coat, etc. Unfortunately, most factory synthetic stocks don't lend themselves to changing lengths.
Ideal Tool
Moderator
What about those rifles designed for both sighting systems..the early German sporters for intance, using claw mounts for quick scope removal..and multiple leaf open irons?
IHMO rifles with two sighting systems were designed during a time when scopes weren't very reliable and people weren't very used to them. Dual sighting systems are compromises and result in poor rapid alignment of the scope. See-thru scope mounts are an abomination!!! They place the primary sighting system at a very unnatural sighting plane.
A person would be better served by having Weaver or Picatinny bases and carrying a small red dot sight as a spare sighting device. On hunting trips, a second scope, already sighted-in, could be a savior. Rifles get dropped sh-t happens.
A person would be better served by having Weaver or Picatinny bases and carrying a small red dot sight as a spare sighting device. On hunting trips, a second scope, already sighted-in, could be a savior. Rifles get dropped sh-t happens.