What is the advantage or not of increased scope height? I mean the rules are there for a reason. I shoot smallbore prone mainly, and I like a good cheek weld, and use leupold 11mm high rings on all my sil rifles and seem to be doing fine. Could I do better? You guys all seem to have high mounts.

As far as I am aware the higher rings help you get into a good position with the head up. I am 6'4" tall and if I had low rings I would have to pull my head down to see through the scope or move the butt of the stock up on my shoulder. So it helps to get the butt stock firmly mounted in your shoulder while allowing you a heads up view through the scope at the same time.

There may be other benefits I am unaware of as I just started last year myself I am sure someone will mention more.

Dee

there is a balance that has to be maintained between the height of your scope and the height of your comb. an erect head is a good thing as long as your stock configuration allows for contact with your comb at the same time. a higher comb also allows for your rifle to sit lower in your shoulder essentially making your forearm longer... allowing your elbow to find your hip bone.

it is a delicate balancing act that must be attended to carefully. raising your scope mounts with a rifle that is a classic stock, straight stock in the back end with no monte carlo roll or cheek piece, could cause you to lose contact with your rifle. an erect head is a good thing as long as your rifle allows for it.

dave

Thanks, Dave. I am 6' tall and have a pharr rts on my 1712 and a mcmiilan on my 54.18, both with high combs. so, are you saying maxing them out would be a good thing? I use a thumb and fingers hold and rest on my hip bone.

hmmm... i don't really want to say max it out... makes me uncomfortable...

Our muscles, skeletal and nervous system are set up to keep our head erect. If it isn't we unconsciously use different muscles to compensate. So a head that isn't erect somewhat defeats the purpose of our efforts to relax our muscles and use only bone when we shoot. Keeping that in mind, you want to get your head as erect as possible within the confines of the configuration of your stock. How is that for covering my bases! :)

If you are using custom rings, getting it "right" can be an expensive proposition. When I worked with Marv and his gorgeous rings we used tongue depressors and blocks of wood to get the scope where I thougt I wanted it before he made the rings. I still got it wrong once. Second time we hit it on the nose.

All that said you will see some very successfull shooters with low mounts. They have learned to shoot past the limitation. I'm for removing as many limitations as the rules will allow.

Then, of course... most of our limitations are in our head anyway. :)

dave

Amen. In smallbore, I have simpled it up to a good hold, a good sight picture, and a good sqeeze . In silly, I just aim at the middle, and hope a bunch. But I can tell we both love to tinker, I'll get back to you... Thanks

My current theory is to get the butt squarely shouldered, lay on the stock like it's a pillow (quiet Kitty - I know what you're thinking), see if the scope is where it belongs and then adjust as needed. BKL standard rings were tall on a 1712, but just about right - almost too short - when the action was put in a Pharr RT/S stock. On a sporter stock even low rings leave just the jaw in contact with the stock.

so that goes back to the challenge of balance. You can still get an erect head with low rings on a straight stock... you just have to raise the rifle up to your eye. This typically requires using muscles in your forward arm or hand. either lifting your elbow off your hip or raising your rifle to your eye with your fingers. An oft result from this effort is we slightly flex just as we break the trigger and bump the shot over the top or we relax as we break and the shot goes low. Neither very good.

Within the confines of the rules, Mark's stocks do a wonderful job of facilitating that balance.

BlauBear wrote:BKL standard rings were tall on a 1712, but just about right - almost too short - when the action was put in a Pharr RT/S stock.

Same for me. The slightly higher version of the BKL rings (257H-A, I think) were perfect.

How much higher are the high BKL's??
My new 1712 in a Pharr RT/S has me pushing down on the comb with my cheek just a wee hair more than I'd like.........

Never mind, found their website, .2" higher, pulled the rifle out and looked through it, emailed Innocent for Coates' contact info, I need a pair!

I ended up needing riser blocks with my BKL rings on a 54:18 MSR. I'm really struggling with my left hand position, in that I really want to shoot ISU/ISSF style with a reversed fist, but I can't get the rifle up high enough due to the stock restrictions. The scope is right at the limit of height as far as the rules go. It's in a McMillan sil Master stock.

I'm 6'3" and like to shoot with my head as erect as possible, it seems to keep my upper body from driving the rifle.

In the next edition of my magazine, I have a review on the MEC book; Ways of the Rifle. It's mostly about Olympic smallbore and Air rifle, but it is by far the very best book on body mechanics in all shooting positions.

I have been collecting info on Silhouette body positions, but have been shocked to see a wide and successful variation in positions.

I have been collecting info on Silhouette body positions, but have been shocked to see a wide and successful variation in positions.

Could have something to do with differences in body shapes, sizes, physical conditioning, and to a certain extent differences in ability/disabilty....

Kitty

Had good results today with anschutz 20 mm riser blocks below my leupold high rings on both my 1712 and 54.18. Thanks everyone, it was a great discussion; we need more of this type.