Ring height

There are so still a dozen or so good ring manufactures
I like leupold and its a good start matching manufactures
You have a “lite” gun no sense in weighing it down with some crazy heavy rings.
As far as height? Tall enough to clear the front bell, bolt swing , round ejection and tall enough to get to your eyeball level.
I seem to have a low eye to cheek distance so scopes are almost always to high on a factory fixed stock comb height.
 
Leupold has a handy mount/ring selector, just don't go with their cheap ones:

 
Depends on how fat your head is. Last time I bought rings they were NightForce 30mm X-HIGH? its been to long to remember the details. I do remember just because the scope fits the gun that doesn’t mean the rifle will fit you. A good gun shop can mock up a mount to see if it will be good for your body type.
 
Something like these that fit your scope. ?
Yes. This is what I was thinking. I rather not place a rail on there, just more screws to have to worry about getting loose.

Right now I have a one piece on there. I love those things. Rock solid all the time.
 
I try to buy rings as low as possible, but 44mm I think you need at least mediums to clear the bell end of the scope with the barrel.

Leupold or Warne Steel only for me. If I want it removable for travel i buy the Warne detachables.
 
A lot will depend on the scope and rifle.
Vortex makes good rings (I only order their "pro"). I order their SHORT and MEDIUM from Amazon, test and return the one I don't want. Some rifles I keep the small, some rifles I keep the MEDIUM.

Also, I like they put their torque specs on the ring. However, if you call them they will tell you if using loctite to go down in torque from 18lbs to 11lbs. I always ignored that, no issues.

I have an OPTIKA6 on a Tikka T3X CTR, I believe I used the medium rings. The Optika6 has a 50mm lens with a 30mm tube.
 
Last edited:
For tikkas I always default to Sportsmatch rings. They have a few sets that fit directly onto the tikka dovetail. If you wanna splurge I’d do a Spuhr hunting mount for Tikka.


As stated I also have defaulted to higher rings due to more natural alignment and comfort on the rifle. I typically run 1.4-1.5” height on everything now.
 
I set my ring height for what is a natural/comfortable cheek weld and shooting position. Getting my scope as low as possible is not my priority... getting it so that it lines up naturally with my eye when I shoulder the rifle is my number one concern.
Getting a scope as low as possible is outdated thinking. Spot on with natural eye alignment. I run highs, makes a big difference.

Fit the gun to the shooter first, scope second.
 
A lot will depend on the scope and rifle.
Vortex makes good rings (Inonly order their "pro"). I order their SHORT and MEDIUM from Amazon, test and return the one I don't want. Some rifles I keep the small, some rifles I keep the MEDIUM
I did this, and then forgot to return the mediums. :rolleyes:

If anyone wants a great deal on a set of Vortex Pro 1" medium rings, let me know.
Amazon product ASIN B07MSJP2JYView: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07MSJP2JY?psc=1&ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_product_details
 
Also, I like they put their torque specs on the ring. However, if you call them they will tell you if using loctite to go down in torque from 18lbs to 11lbs. I always ignored that, no issues.
Torque requirements are based on the friction force required to create the proper bolt stretch (clamping force)
Locking compounds act as a lubricant therefore drastically reducing the friction required to achieve the proper stretch.
Using the dry torque when lubricated usually pushes the stretch into the plastic region so you achieve similar clamping force but also permanently deform the bolt, internal threads or both.
In other words, just follow the damn directions.
 
Torque requirements are based on the friction force required to create the proper bolt stretch (clamping force)
Locking compounds act as a lubricant therefore drastically reducing the friction required to achieve the proper stretch.
Using the dry torque when lubricated usually pushes the stretch into the plastic region so you achieve similar clamping force but also permanently deform the bolt, internal threads or both.
In other words, just follow the damn directions.
Yes, that is the explanation they gave me.

However, I haven't seen any issues (although I agree, the factory knows best). To me, a ring is a permanent thing so f*ck it. Maybe compromise, go down to 14lbs.

I have a friend that had issues when torquing to 11lbs, but I wasnt present so I cant cofirm if he did something else wrong. I will see him tonight, hopefully the scope is still on the rifle and I can take a look. 11lbs is so light, I don't trust it. 18lbs feels like nothing.
 
Yes, that is the explanation they gave me.

However, I haven't seen any issues (although I agree, the factory knows best). To me, a ring is a permanent thing so f*ck it. Maybe compromise, go down to 14lbs.

I have a friend that had issues when torquing to 11lbs, but I wasnt present so I cant cofirm if he did something else wrong. I will see him tonight, hopefully the scope is still on the rifle and I can take a look. 11lbs is so light, I don't trust it. 18lbs feels like nothing.

11 in-lbs on a lubricated #6 bolt produces almost 500 lbs of clamping force

18 in-lbs dry is about 640 but that assumes steel on steel and would have more stretch to resist the recoil impulse loosening the bolt.

In other words - screws don't need to be twisted like a gorilla to work properly, especially with thread locker resisting loosening forces.
 
Getting a scope as low as possible is outdated thinking. Spot on with natural eye alignment. I run highs, makes a big difference.

Fit the gun to the shooter first, scope second.
Unless I have a raised cheekpiece stock, for me the lower the better eye alignment. Those high rings always having me pulling my cheek weld off the stock. That said, I don't have any of these huge objective 44 or 50mm scopes either. No need for them in the northeast hunting woods.
 
Yes, that is the explanation they gave me.

However, I haven't seen any issues (although I agree, the factory knows best). To me, a ring is a permanent thing so f*ck it. Maybe compromise, go down to 14lbs.

I have a friend that had issues when torquing to 11lbs, but I wasnt present so I cant cofirm if he did something else wrong. I will see him tonight, hopefully the scope is still on the rifle and I can take a look. 11lbs is so light, I don't trust it. 18lbs feels like nothing.
Don't take it apart or retorque unless necessary - I'm on my phone or else I'd do the stress calculation but intuitively I'd say you overstretched the bolt or threads so it's a done deal.
 
Unless I have a raised cheekpiece stock, for me the lower the better eye alignment. Those high rings always having me pulling my cheek weld off the stock. That said, I don't have any of these huge objective 44 or 50mm scopes either. No need for them in the northeast hunting woods.

Same here.
 
Can't get any better than this, IMO, use the dovetail mount to your advantage (not sure why someone wouldn't) and eliminate the bases/base screws, simpler and stronger. And made in the USA by a great company.

 
Last edited:
Can't get any better than this, IMO, use the dovetail mount to your advantage (not sure why someone wouldn't) and eliminate the bases/base screws, simpler and stronger. And made in the USA by a great company.

Thanks for this. This looks like the simplest, lightest, yet most solid solution.
 
Thanks for this. This looks like the simplest, lightest, yet most solid solution.

I have Warne rings on my CZ 527, similar to Tikka's dovetail, I love how there are no bases/base screws whatsoever, just one less worry, plus you can easily double check the tightness of the ring screws now and then, not so simple with the base screws when they are covered by the rings/scope.
 
I have Warne rings on my CZ 527, similar to Tikka's dovetail, I love how there are no bases/base screws whatsoever, just one less worry, plus you can easily double check the tightness of the ring screws now and then, not so simple with the base screws when they are covered by the rings/scope.
I used a set of Warnes on my Ruger Stainless American .22. Fit the dovetail on the reciever perfectly.

I have the removable Warnes on my 308 American. That has a rail on it if I remember right.
 
Back
Top Bottom