Scope Height - can it be too low?

SSN100

Well-Known Member
I have a 44mm objective Leupold mounted on a Kimber 84. It’s mounted on Leupold standard bases and low rings. There is sufficient clearance at the objective and for bolt operation and it goes with the low is better advice. However, I wonder if I might be more comfortable and shoot better with a slightly higher mount. Most of my shots are standing of sticks or from a seat. The stock is very straight and actually rises slightly through the butt. I find with the butt nicely in the shoulder I have to scrunch down to get a good sight picture. Is lower always better? Has anyone found slightly higher can be better?
IMG_6723.webp
 
Not if you can't get a comfortable cheek weld and also see clearly through the scope

If you have force your cheek onto the comb in order to see through the scope, it is going to hurt when you pull the trigger

I've that problem at the mo with one of my riggs - I also found it with a friends 375 H&H and iron sights

j

As your mounts get higher then paying attention to 'rifle cant' becomes a little more critical
 
Depends largly on personal build etc ie the height from your cheak bone to the Center of the eye, this should be comfortable on the stock for you. the set up looks fine unless your looking at a point above the centerline of the scope when your heads on the stock with a resonable check weld etc.
If you happy with having slightly hight mounts to make life comfortable for you then go for it.
 
I have a 44mm objective Leupold mounted on a Kimber 84. It’s mounted on Leupold standard bases and low rings. There is sufficient clearance at the objective and for bolt operation and it goes with the low is better advice. However, I wonder if I might be more comfortable and shoot better with a slightly higher mount. Most of my shots are standing of sticks or from a seat. The stock is very straight and actually rises slightly through the butt. I find with the butt nicely in the shoulder I have to scrunch down to get a good sight picture. Is lower always better? Has anyone found slightly higher can be better?
View attachment 398064
Definitely would be too low for me. But if your happy with it. Then all's well.
 
What you need is good contact of the stock with your face. The two extremes are barely touching it with your jaw and crushing your cheak bone.
Anything in the middle is good.
The other issue is peope having to lower their heads in order to achive the above at all. This is not mended by a higher scope mount and a cheak raiser but by better ergonomic behaviour of the shooter.
 
I ve had a kimber 84 and initially mounted a swarovski 4x32 on low leupolds but found i was scrunching my head down to see through the scope. Changed to medium then high. The most comfortable and natural position for me was using high mounts with the advantage of better access for loading the rifle handled much better with them , although maybe didn t look quite as sleek as a low mounted scope.
 
I ve had a kimber 84 and initially mounted a swarovski 4x32 on low leupolds but found i was scrunching my head down to see through the scope. Changed to medium then high. The most comfortable and natural position for me was using high mounts with the advantage of better access for loading the rifle handled much better with them , although maybe didn t look quite as sleek as a low mounted scope.
Thanks. That’s what I think might also work for me. The comb on the stock is quite high so I feel I’m having to force on to it somewhat.
 
Depends on how big (or small) your head is I guess. The low as possible advice generally refers to people with 50 or 56mm scopes, where you regularly need a cheek riser to get a decent shooting position. Regularly see 56mm scopes that birds could fly between the scope and the barrel . People shooting these rifles are spending ages to get a site picture and never find the same one twice.

As you are a 44mm objective scope it will be very nearly the same diameter at each end so the only advice would be make it comfortable for you.
 
Confort is obviously paramount, but just a reminder that in terms of accuracy [common wisdom dictates that] lower is better.
 
Back
Top