I was foolin' around with several of my rifles and noticed something today. My favorite ones, regardless of caliber, seem to fit better. (well duhh! I know, I know...) They are steadier, balance better, carry well, and most importantly-- when shouldered the scope is right there where it needs to be.

Anyhow, my question is this: Can/should the fit of a gun (meaning the stock vs head and eye placement) be adjusted by the height of the scope? Might the handling/shooting characterists be altered favorably by raising the height of the scope? And why is it exactly we always mount the things as close to the bore as possible? There's a ballsitic reason I think, but I forget things....

The tighter you can tuck yourself into the rifle, the more solid you and your rifle become. In a low profile shooting position, you are less likely to be affected by recoil. A low center of gravity is always more stable than a high one. The more you have to stretch your neck, the more out of balance you become. If your scope sits too high, then you end up with little to no support for your head and your sight picture and accuracy will suffer.

Malm

The main reason for the "low scope" theory is that it minimizes the parallax between the line of sight and the trajectory, much like iron sights on the barrel. In all practicality, it doesn't really make a difference unless you are shooting beyond 300 meters, where most cartridges begin to experience serious bullet drop.

In regards to the stock, your comfort is the deciding factor that will influence your ability to shoot accurately. The low pad - high ring style has been around for a hundred years. It allows you to keep your shoulders back and your head up while maintaining a proper stock weld. This position also allows for your body to flex during recoil, minimizing felt recoil.

The high pad - low ring style requires that you curl your shoulders forward and bend your head down. This is a very sturdy position, but does not allow your body to flex during recoil. It is best suited for low recoil cartridges. It became popular during the post WWII years, as millions of shooters had been trained to shoot that way by the military. The original reason was to create a low profile and smaller target for the enemy to shoot at.

You can best experience the difference between these two styles when shooting from a bench. After you shoot with your body curled forward and your head down, try it again with your back straight up (as if you were standing). You will have to raise your forend rest or lower your seat.

Personally, I need medium to high rings with most factory stocks. With low rings, I need to put my head down, forward, which works, BUT, when the rifle fires, my head kinda slides over the top of the stock. The result is that I need much more eye relief. When the stock (or rings) are such that I can keep my head straight, I can get away with a scope with much less eye relief, because my head automatically moves back with the stock upon recoil. Gun fit is pretty important, any way you look at it. FWIW, Dutch.

Malmborg said it precisely. Most factory stocks have a comb low enough that they require the lowest possible positioning of the scope in order to provide proper contact between the comb and cheek. This arises from the continued and obsolete effort to make stocks that are low enough for iron sights.

I have to respectfully disagree with Kurt C. -- if your head is back and erect it will (1) not be in contact with the stock, making acquisition and holding the sight picture slower and more difficult, and (2) exhibit more of a "whiplash" effect under recoil, which presents more possibility of the eyebrow contacting the occular ring of the scope. Also, the parallax problems of a high-mounted scope (negligible as they are) are more pronounced at shorter ranges (prior the first coincidence of bullet and line of sight) than at longer ranges. Canting the rifle and scope off of vertical does theoretically create a bit more error in windage with a high-mounted scope, but who is it that makes a practice of holding their rifle sideways like gang-bangers shooting pistols in a robbery on TV?

[ 12-16-2002, 20:40: Message edited by: Stonecreek ]