quote:

---

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
[QB]Tomjac: Congratulations! You are one of the few Europeans who seems to have both a high enough comb and a scope mounted low enough to actually position your head correctly on the stock. I dare say you will easily outshoot your bobble-headed competitors.
QB]

---

Hey Stonecreek, I choose not to be offended by that comment!
- mike

quote:

---

Originally posted by mho:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
[QB]Tomjac: Congratulations! You are one of the few Europeans who seems to have both a high enough comb and a scope mounted low enough to actually position your head correctly on the stock. I dare say you will easily outshoot your bobble-headed competitors.
QB]

---

Hey Stonecreek, I choose not to be offended by that comment!
- mike

---

As often is the case, I have chosen my words poorly. I should have said "one of the growing number of increasingly enlighented Europeans who seems to have both a high enough comb and a scope mounted low enough . . ."

And I thank you for not taking offense, Mike.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
As often is the case, I have chosen my words poorly. I should have said "one of the growing number of increasingly enlighented Europeans who seems to have both a high enough comb and a scope mounted low enough . . ."

And I thank you for not taking offense, Mike. [/QB]

---

Hey, Stonecreek, that is just the way I am, a naturally "un-offendable" guy (I wish it was so) You certainly exercise the best of your diplomatic skills in your latest post - all we European AR participants extend our hearfelt thanks - I'm sure

Back to the issue at hand, of course there is an element of truth in what you are saying, it is just that generalizations don't come across very well...

It is indeed rare to find European mounts, that come with different ring heights (or mount height for rail mounted scopes). Since 56 mm objective lenses are pretty common here, most mount manufacturers make their mounts high enough to take that size scope. This is obviously less than ideal for smaller size scopes. If I'm not much mistaken, Tomjac's rifle sports a set of Leupold QD mounts - at least the mount looks decidedly American to me. So he would have benefitted from the availability of a rings matching the scope chosen.

In general it is obvious that a lower scope mount is an advantage. However I will say this. I have rifles with pretty varying scope heights - both because of varying objective lens sizes, and because of using both US and European mounts. When I get used to using a particular rifle for a while, I find myself adapting to the particular ring height. Let's assume I have used a higher mount for a while, when I pick up a rifle with a super low mount, I find myself shouldering that with my head held higher than I otherwise would - thus needing a tad of adjustment before the scope picture is perfect. It also happens the other way round. So I think that as long as your cheek has solid contact with the stock, the real issue is probably more one of habit as opposed to a specific mount height. Thus I would maintain it is quite possible to use a higher mount - as long as you get used to it, and as long it is not too high to prohibit solid contact of cheek-stock.

One man's opinion - mike