AR Sponsor
Posted: 3/5/2003 4:37:44 PM EDT
|
Hello all, I am looking to mount a scope onto a RRA varmint upper. The upper itself will not arrive for a couple of weeks, but I would like to have the correct mounting hardware in hand by then. As this is the first rifle I have mounted a scope on, I have a couple of questions. I like the height of the iron sight on my A2, and the eye relief of the scope (3-9x40 Zeiss Conquest) will put the eyepiece right about where the A2 peep sight is. What height rings, measured from the top of an A.R.M.S. 36-EX rail, do I need to get the scope at the same height as the A2 peep? I need a minimum of .85" from the centerline of the scope to the top of the rail for eyepiece clearance. If a 14" rail is necessary (see below) I will need at least .90" to clear the objective. Second, can anyone recommend a good scope ring manufacturer? The A.R.M.S. rings look nice, but I do not need, or really want, their QD feature on this rifle. Also, the Zeiss Conquest uses a 1: tube and the rings (at least the ones I could find) are for 30mm tubes. Finally, assuming the back end of the 36-EX rail is flush with the back end of the upper receiver, it looks like the 8.4" length may not be long enough. If the front ring is right up against the windage/elevation adjustment knobs (on the front side), I can probably get it mounted on the 8" rail. Assuming the back ring is right next to the eyepiece, is this enough spacing between the rings? Would it be better to go to the 14" rail and spread the rings farther apart? Can the rail be mounted further forward than described above? Thanks, Jeff |
|
The #38 is 0.46" high. The irons are about 1.4" above the receiver rail. You therefore need about 0.9" or 1.0" rings. The Leupold QRW 1" rings ($40 from [url]www.premierreticles.com[/url]) on top of a #38 would be just a hair above the level of the irons. As to your third question, I dunno. |
AR Sponsor