I genuinely can't see any negatives to be honest
I genuinely can't see any negatives to be honest
cant fault the system and very happy with it , I genuinely can't see any negatives to be honest
Oftentimes the scope with rail has to be installed higher than scope w/o rail.
I've had zeiss and swaro scopes on rails... far superior to rings in pretty much every way. The downside, as usual, is that all the manufacturers insist on using their own slightly different version of the same thing making them less desirable as they are more difficult to sell and non interchangeable without purchasing the same manufacturers mounts.
If they could all act like grown ups and agree on a standard system/mount, rings on new scopes would become extinct very quickly!
There is an agreed std - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picatinny_rail Regards JCS
the Mauser and blaser rails will mount a 56mm scope at the same height whether rings or rail
I don't keep up with the latest innovations, but I was on a website and noticed this. Seems like a good idea. Only downside I can see is it is hard to clean in the gap underneath. I assume they are easy to take off.
Just wondering what those ahead of the curve think?
Germans have used them now for decades, difficult to sell on now in Germany. I would never want a rail scope on a precision rifle as one can't adjust the scope to the mechanical turret movement. You won't see proper sniper rifles with a rail scope.
edi
Mechanical zero for windage is fixed on a rail mount rifle and on a sniper rifle with rings and a picatinny rail it can't be adjusted unless I'm wrong
Mechanical zero for elevation is fixed on a rail mount which you are correct as you cannot buy a rail etc with more MOA
but realistically for hunting or a max range of 400-500 yards a rail will do just fine as you don't need to be shooting out to 1000 yards +