What height rings
- Thread starter Linker
- Start date
It depends entiret entirely on the scope you use. Find out where the optic needs to be and where that places the front Bell of the optic. You can then measure to the bottom of the tube, then add one half diameter of the tube to find how high above the rail the center of the optic needs to be. USUALLY medium is fine. If your optic has a large objective lens you might need taller, or shorter could work.
Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk
stagpanther
New member
Bolt throw might have some influence too. I'll dig up my Hawkeye and take a look.
stagpanther
New member
BornFighting88
New member
Drooling a plenty!!! I love CRF actions. Like pretty red headed women. I know, I am a nut job. All these answers are on point. Check your objective bell size on your glass, bolt throw, and also if you have a cheek piece or not, this will make a difference, if albeit is a small one.
You want the rings that are going to naturally put your eye in line with the scope, and little to no jostling about to get your picture straight. When you snap that rifle to your shoulder, you want to be looking through the scope as a natural part of the movements. Too high, and your cheek will be off the stock, too low, and you might as well be eating stock, as well as issues of brass clearance, bolt handle impact, and improper mounting.
You want the rings that are going to naturally put your eye in line with the scope, and little to no jostling about to get your picture straight. When you snap that rifle to your shoulder, you want to be looking through the scope as a natural part of the movements. Too high, and your cheek will be off the stock, too low, and you might as well be eating stock, as well as issues of brass clearance, bolt handle impact, and improper mounting.
The folks who answered pretty much covered it all.
The ring height must be high enough the scope does not contact the barrel or bolt handle.
This gets to be more of a factor if you choose a scope with a large objective lens.
The ring height or stock geometry must also fit the shooter. Some folks struggle with scopes trying to "find" the image in the scope. Thats an indication the rifle is not set up right.
Its true the perfect stock fit might be a little different in different positions. Prone versus standing,for example.
So the "correct" answer might be a little different for a 14 lb bench gun versus a light hunting rifle you might want to tune for a shot standing on your hind legs.
For a hunting rifle,what I do for myself.. I tune for standing. I'm less wobbly when my inner ears are in a natural,level position. I don't scrunch my head down to the gun.
I bring the gun to my face,standing naturally.
My scope is positioned correctly if,with my rifle low,at "port arms", I can look at a target,close my eyes,then shoulder the rifle naturally,eyes still closed. Now I open my eyes. I must see the full,open field of view in the scope,crosshairs in the general direction of the target.
Its not OK to have to lift my head or wiggle my face to "find" the scope.
Once you set up your rifles this way,the struggle of "finding the target in the scope" goes away. I'm not suggesting you launch rifle bullets into the sky,but its not unrealistic to be able to find a target like a flushing pheasant in a 6X scope. Look at the target,shoulder the rifle,you should have full field of view through the scope.
Along with ring height,this is when you adjust eye relief. Use all the scope has to offer so long as you get full field of view.
That scope bell hitting your eyebow will make you bleed. Then you have a flinch to get over.
This ring height thing is why,IMO,the big astronomical 50 mm or 56 mm objective scopes are out of place on a hunting rifle.
In my experience,the "sweet spot" is usually 42mm objective lense or smaller,mounted in low rings.....But You have to find what fits you with your rifle.
The ring height must be high enough the scope does not contact the barrel or bolt handle.
This gets to be more of a factor if you choose a scope with a large objective lens.
The ring height or stock geometry must also fit the shooter. Some folks struggle with scopes trying to "find" the image in the scope. Thats an indication the rifle is not set up right.
Its true the perfect stock fit might be a little different in different positions. Prone versus standing,for example.
So the "correct" answer might be a little different for a 14 lb bench gun versus a light hunting rifle you might want to tune for a shot standing on your hind legs.
For a hunting rifle,what I do for myself.. I tune for standing. I'm less wobbly when my inner ears are in a natural,level position. I don't scrunch my head down to the gun.
I bring the gun to my face,standing naturally.
My scope is positioned correctly if,with my rifle low,at "port arms", I can look at a target,close my eyes,then shoulder the rifle naturally,eyes still closed. Now I open my eyes. I must see the full,open field of view in the scope,crosshairs in the general direction of the target.
Its not OK to have to lift my head or wiggle my face to "find" the scope.
Once you set up your rifles this way,the struggle of "finding the target in the scope" goes away. I'm not suggesting you launch rifle bullets into the sky,but its not unrealistic to be able to find a target like a flushing pheasant in a 6X scope. Look at the target,shoulder the rifle,you should have full field of view through the scope.
Along with ring height,this is when you adjust eye relief. Use all the scope has to offer so long as you get full field of view.
That scope bell hitting your eyebow will make you bleed. Then you have a flinch to get over.
This ring height thing is why,IMO,the big astronomical 50 mm or 56 mm objective scopes are out of place on a hunting rifle.
In my experience,the "sweet spot" is usually 42mm objective lense or smaller,mounted in low rings.....But You have to find what fits you with your rifle.
stagpanther
New member
Far from it--there are plenty of people who love the model 77's and model 70's--perfect examples of the classic rifles made right (for more reasons than just the CRF bolt) and "if it ain't broke, fix it and make it worse."
stagpanther
New member
Not to steal your thread--but since I dug up my 77 I just had to go out a put a few cartridges through it.
35 whelen is probably at or near the top of the list for "most under-appreciated but truly useful cartridges of all time" IMO. It's at the top of food chain for 30-06 parented cartridges IMO and really is a "poor man's big game magnum" in disguise. I fire other big-hitting magnums, but what's especially nice about the 35 whelen is that it delivers immense energy in a wide bullet which for the bullet type is flat shooting and affords an excellent point-blank trajectory out to 300 yds or so, probably as far or further than most hunters will ever shoot. My guess is that it fell out of popularity because it was initially fielded in lightweight hunting rifles which took advantage of conventional long actions, in which it can give the shooter a very sharp kick. My ruger 77 which is zeroed at 200 yds is very accurate with 225 gamekings driven to around 2700 fps by H4895.
35 whelen is probably at or near the top of the list for "most under-appreciated but truly useful cartridges of all time" IMO. It's at the top of food chain for 30-06 parented cartridges IMO and really is a "poor man's big game magnum" in disguise. I fire other big-hitting magnums, but what's especially nice about the 35 whelen is that it delivers immense energy in a wide bullet which for the bullet type is flat shooting and affords an excellent point-blank trajectory out to 300 yds or so, probably as far or further than most hunters will ever shoot. My guess is that it fell out of popularity because it was initially fielded in lightweight hunting rifles which took advantage of conventional long actions, in which it can give the shooter a very sharp kick. My ruger 77 which is zeroed at 200 yds is very accurate with 225 gamekings driven to around 2700 fps by H4895.
Ruger uses a unique mounting system. Most come from the factory with one medium ring meant to be mounted on the rear and a single low ring for the front. That works well for most scopes up to 40mm.
If you want to mount higher you only have to buy 1 new ring. Buy a high ring and mount it on the rear and move the medium to the front.
You can see the difference in Stagpanthers photo.
I think Ruger offers 4 or 5 different ring heights , but you can't use 2 of the same due to the way the receiver is milled.
With most bolt rifles the rear receiver ring is lower than the front. The rear base will be thicker to get the scope level. But since Ruger has dovetails cut into the receiver they make up the difference in the ring height.
If you want to mount higher you only have to buy 1 new ring. Buy a high ring and mount it on the rear and move the medium to the front.
You can see the difference in Stagpanthers photo.
I think Ruger offers 4 or 5 different ring heights , but you can't use 2 of the same due to the way the receiver is milled.
With most bolt rifles the rear receiver ring is lower than the front. The rear base will be thicker to get the scope level. But since Ruger has dovetails cut into the receiver they make up the difference in the ring height.
I noticed the same when looking at the photo. How do the rings align their axis? Then I noticed the pivoting pins at the base. It is indeed different.
But still with different ring heights the scope is pointing down. 1/4" in 4" or something like that. That's 225 MOA! How does it work? What's the benefits of doing that? Apparently they are doing it for a reason. Just wondering.
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
stagpanther
New member
This one has strayed off into the twilight zone--what's so hard about buying a properly matched set?
Perhaps. But I don't see that in the picture. The scope looks pointing downwards. Is it for extremely long range? Puzzling.
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
stagpanther
New member
Optical conclusion
(and distortion from an iPhone)--it's 0 MOA (otherwise you'd have a cant in the scope by the rings). Offset height rings are actually quite common.It must be the case, or it is not making sense. Thanks.Optical conclusion
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
When buying the rifle you get a set. One low, one medium. But when buying rings separate from the rifle they are sold individually and you have to know which one to buy. You normally only need to buy a single ring to change scope height with a Ruger.
And the more I look at the photo the more it does appear to be canted forward. It looks like there is a low ring on the front. If so the rear ring should be a medium. But someone may have put a high ring on the rear by mistake. Another photo without the scope caps would help clarify.