Does it exist?

mellow_c · May 29, 2019, 09:08 PM

I know exactly what I need, but I can't seem to find it.

I'm mounting a scope to an AR, and this is exactly what I need.

30mm rings with a 1.25" centerline... (which is easy enough)

BUT...

I also need 1.5" of offset for the front ring so I can mount the scope 1.5" further forward.

There are one piece 30mm mounts that have 2 inches of offset, which is great, but they all have a centerline of about 1.5"

I've found that a 1.25" centerline is perfect for this project, and I don't want to go higher if I don't have to.

I see plenty of 30mm rings out there with a 1.25" centerline, but nothing that provides 1.5 inches of offset as well.

Does anyone know if what I need actually exists? Where can I find it? Any other recommendations?

Thanks :-)

T. O'Heir · May 30, 2019, 01:20 PM

Just doing the front ring will not move the whole scope forward.
And what you need is a cantilevered mount like this.
https://www.brownells.com/optics-mou...rod113444.aspx

zukiphile · May 30, 2019, 01:30 PM

TO'H, that has a 1.4 centerline.

Mellow, you might have to build your own. 1.25 inches is quite low. I find mm easier for these projects.

half inch riser (12.7) + half the 30mm scope (15mm) + rings with a 4mm saddle height = 31.7mm

This riser could work as a cantilever so you aren't mounting anything to your handguard:
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/26...flat-top-matte

EDIT - I've had some luck locating both rings between the ocular and adjustment turrets rather than use a cantilever mount. That works only on scopes with odd proportions.

mellow_c · May 30, 2019, 08:07 PM

So I asked Optics Planet’s customer service and this is some of what they said to me.

These both have a center ring height of 33mm which is 1.3”. The first one is a 34mm offset, or 1.33”, the second one is a 50mm offset, or 1.97”.

https://www.opticsplanet.com/leapers...nny-rings.html

https://www.opticsplanet.com/leapers...nny-rings.html

And that was all they could find.

So that’s pretty dang close to perfect. Am I a big UTG fan? Well, not necessarily. But if it’s what I need and it’s all that exists, I guess I’d rather it be $35.00 than $350.00.

I tested out some 30mm 1.25” centerline scope rings on the rifle with the scope (just setting things in place without tightening anything much) and found the 1.25” centerline height to be pretty much perfect. I could even say that it COULD be lower and I’d still be ok. I felt like it was still even just a tad higher than perfect , but I’d much rather the mount/rings be a bit too tall than a bit too short.

So with these 1.3” centerline mounts being just .05” taller. I think I’ll be in good shape. 1.5” centerline is too tall for me to get anything but a jaw or chin wield on a regular A2 stock or the like AR. Not to say that I can’t or don’t shoot them like that, but in this particular case. I really wanted to go lower.

I’m surprised that non of the high end mount companies make anything like this.

Based on my own height, weight, and the size of my head compared to most other people in the USA, it always surprises me how high most AR mounts are. That being said, there are some big fellas out there with big faces, and the standard AR height sights were probably designed with them in mind. And so it continues.

I personally have found HK height sights on a typical AR to be quite nice (If I remember correctly, it’s been a while)

zukiphile · May 31, 2019, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Am I a big UTG fan? Well, not necessarily. But if it’s what I need and it’s all that exists, I guess I’d rather it be $35.00 than $350.00.

I have some UTG QD rings on an AR, and they've given me no trouble. One nice thing about UTG/Leapers rings and mounts is that they make a wide range and publish the dimensions on everything.

In your position, I would use the UTG mounts before building something on a Yankee Hill riser.

Quote:

Based on my own height, weight, and the size of my head compared to most other people in the USA, it always surprises me how high most AR mounts are. That being said, there are some big fellas out there with big faces, and the standard AR height sights were probably designed with them in mind. And so it continues.

I think 1.41/36mm works very well for iron sights for most people, but those iron sights aren't plagued by parallax and shadowing.

Of course, you could use your current predicament as an excuse to buy a PRS stock.

mellow_c · June 1, 2019, 02:57 AM

I guess I would have to agree with the idea that iron sights set at 1.41” makes sense in a lot of ways. Some folks really do have faces that big that they need that extra room, and for everyone else, having a more heads up posture to align the sights, or to even be a bit above them for index shooting, could be a benefit in a quick shoot scenario.

But when it comes to scopes I’d prefer a proper cheek wield.

The PRS stock is always an option.

In this case, I’m happy to have the basic A2 stock, and since the scope is smaller than a 50 mm objective, I’ve got plenty of room to work with to bring it down to my level.

Thanks for the recommendation of the riser. While it may not be the best route for this project, I hadn’t put much consideration into that idea, and it is a good one.

May 29, 2019, 09:08 PM	#1
mellow_c Senior Member Join Date: January 7, 2008 Location: Colorado Posts: 1,862	Does it exist? I know exactly what I need, but I can't seem to find it. I'm mounting a scope to an AR, and this is exactly what I need. 30mm rings with a 1.25" centerline... (which is easy enough) BUT... I also need 1.5" of offset for the front ring so I can mount the scope 1.5" further forward. There are one piece 30mm mounts that have 2 inches of offset, which is great, but they all have a centerline of about 1.5" I've found that a 1.25" centerline is perfect for this project, and I don't want to go higher if I don't have to. I see plenty of 30mm rings out there with a 1.25" centerline, but nothing that provides 1.5 inches of offset as well. Does anyone know if what I need actually exists? Where can I find it? Any other recommendations? Thanks :-)

May 30, 2019, 01:20 PM	#2
T. O'Heir Senior Member Join Date: February 13, 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 12,453	Just doing the front ring will not move the whole scope forward. And what you need is a cantilevered mount like this. https://www.brownells.com/optics-mou...rod113444.aspx __________________ Spelling and grammar count!

May 30, 2019, 01:30 PM	#3
zukiphile Senior Member Join Date: December 13, 2005 Posts: 4,450	TO'H, that has a 1.4 centerline. Mellow, you might have to build your own. 1.25 inches is quite low. I find mm easier for these projects. half inch riser (12.7) + half the 30mm scope (15mm) + rings with a 4mm saddle height = 31.7mm This riser could work as a cantilever so you aren't mounting anything to your handguard: https://www.midwayusa.com/product/26...flat-top-matte EDIT - I've had some luck locating both rings between the ocular and adjustment turrets rather than use a cantilever mount. That works only on scopes with odd proportions. __________________ http://www.npboards.com/index.php

May 30, 2019, 08:07 PM	#4
mellow_c Senior Member Join Date: January 7, 2008 Location: Colorado Posts: 1,862	So I asked Optics Planet’s customer service and this is some of what they said to me. These both have a center ring height of 33mm which is 1.3”. The first one is a 34mm offset, or 1.33”, the second one is a 50mm offset, or 1.97”. https://www.opticsplanet.com/leapers...nny-rings.html https://www.opticsplanet.com/leapers...nny-rings.html And that was all they could find. So that’s pretty dang close to perfect. Am I a big UTG fan? Well, not necessarily. But if it’s what I need and it’s all that exists, I guess I’d rather it be $35.00 than $350.00. I tested out some 30mm 1.25” centerline scope rings on the rifle with the scope (just setting things in place without tightening anything much) and found the 1.25” centerline height to be pretty much perfect. I could even say that it COULD be lower and I’d still be ok. I felt like it was still even just a tad higher than perfect , but I’d much rather the mount/rings be a bit too tall than a bit too short. So with these 1.3” centerline mounts being just .05” taller. I think I’ll be in good shape. 1.5” centerline is too tall for me to get anything but a jaw or chin wield on a regular A2 stock or the like AR. Not to say that I can’t or don’t shoot them like that, but in this particular case. I really wanted to go lower. I’m surprised that non of the high end mount companies make anything like this. Based on my own height, weight, and the size of my head compared to most other people in the USA, it always surprises me how high most AR mounts are. That being said, there are some big fellas out there with big faces, and the standard AR height sights were probably designed with them in mind. And so it continues. I personally have found HK height sights on a typical AR to be quite nice (If I remember correctly, it’s been a while) Last edited by mellow_c; May 30, 2019 at 08:17 PM.

June 1, 2019, 02:57 AM	#6
mellow_c Senior Member Join Date: January 7, 2008 Location: Colorado Posts: 1,862	I guess I would have to agree with the idea that iron sights set at 1.41” makes sense in a lot of ways. Some folks really do have faces that big that they need that extra room, and for everyone else, having a more heads up posture to align the sights, or to even be a bit above them for index shooting, could be a benefit in a quick shoot scenario. But when it comes to scopes I’d prefer a proper cheek wield. The PRS stock is always an option. In this case, I’m happy to have the basic A2 stock, and since the scope is smaller than a 50 mm objective, I’ve got plenty of room to work with to bring it down to my level. Thanks for the recommendation of the riser. While it may not be the best route for this project, I hadn’t put much consideration into that idea, and it is a good one.