Project Appleseed

Chris,

If you don't mind, I'd like to ask some follow up questions, only because I think something is wrong, but I don't know what.

Quote from: navybowhunter on November 12, 2016, 10:05:50 AM
Not sure about the eye relief on your UTG scope.  That may be an issue.  Only you can tell if it is, or....post a pic as Aggrivere mentioned.

Manufacturer lists it as 3"-3.4".

But, here's photos to help illustrate. Wife wasn't able to take photos at the best angles, as space in the room was somewhat limited, but it should be good enough. If not, please let me know.

In all three positions, I have NTCH. Prone and seated I noticed just a slight amount of ghosting, and I figured I could move the scope forward just a bit. Standing I had a great picture. In all three I'm in the third notch on the stock (so position 4).

So, now seeing what I'm doing, what's wrong?

Quote from: navybowhunter on November 12, 2016, 10:05:50 AMHe has designed a purpose built mount, at exactly 1.3" height over bore...and a 3 inch FWD offset.
Check it out at:
http://www.keystoneaccuracy.com/a5nmscopemount.html

Another option....cost wise, and what I am using, is the DNZ Freedom reaper.  That is a 1.375" bore height, but it is working for me and several others as well.  Here is a link to that on Amazon....keep in mind this is for a 30MM scope, you will want a different mount if your scope is a 1 inch tube:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00403LJLW/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Are either of those quick-release? They don't look like it. Any suggestions on a mount that is quick-release, 1.3" bore height, 3 inch FWD offset that won't break the bank? Assuming, of course, I need a 3" FWD offset . . .

Your first mistake is sitting and prone upside down, how did you get into those positions ? Is it a yoga thing ? 😜

If only.

They're right side up on my computer . . . so I don't know what's up.

If you only have a slight ghost ring now these may work for you:

https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Riflescope-Picatinny-Mount-Inch/dp/B00B5F02ZW/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1479100109&sr=8-3&keywords=nikon+rings

They worked for an Instructor here but didn't get my scope far enough forward.  They are about $40.

SpecialK,

Your optic does not appear to have a cantilever offset.  I'd suggest a 3 inch offset mount, like one of the ones I mention previously.

That my friend is the culprit.  The mount.

None of the mounts I had mentioned are quick release.  The Larue is, but that height is 1.5, you could make it work though.

I think the DNZ is a great deal for the $$.

Quick release, return to zero mounts are not cheap.  Larue would be my recommendation if looking for a quick release.  It will cost though!

On the optic you are using, is that a 50MM objective?  If so...the DNZ mount I mention may not work.  You may need a higher mount.  A quick Google for DNZ would be what I would do.  Get the # to DNZ and call them.  Make sure you have the specs for your scope.  Tell them you want a 3" offset, and explain what optic you are using.

Change that, and you will be amazed!

I'll be offline for the better part of the day.  You can feel free to email me at: navarchgolf@gmail.com if you have any pressing questions.

R/
Chris

Quote from: navybowhunter on November 14, 2016, 08:28:27 AM
Your optic does not appear to have a cantilever offset.  I'd suggest a 3 inch offset mount, like one of the ones I mention previously.

That my friend is the culprit.  The mount.

I think I'm more concerned about how far forward the scope will be after I put a cantilever offset on it. Right now it's pretty far back, in comparison to other photos I've seen of the "correct" way to do it, but I'm only getting a slight amount of ghosting in the seated and prone positions. Maybe enough to need to move the scope another 0.5" FWD. But even then, I'm no where near forward enough compared to where I should be.

What's different between what I think I need to have set up and what I'm being suggested should be set up, or am I missing something?

Quote from: navybowhunter on November 14, 2016, 08:28:27 AM
Quick release, return to zero mounts are not cheap.  Larue would be my recommendation if looking for a quick release.  It will cost though!

My concern, with using a cheap scope, would be if the scope doesn't work out I can hopefully take it off and use MBUS for the time being. But I guess if it really came down to that, I wouldn't be using the scope for the remainder of that shoot anyway, avoiding the need for a return to zero mount.

I also have a hard time spending more on the mount than I did on the scope.

Quote from: navybowhunter on November 14, 2016, 08:28:27 AMOn the optic you are using, is that a 50MM objective?  If so...the DNZ mount I mention may not work.

It is a 50MM objective. Actual dimensions of the objective is 53mm.

One of the reviews to the DNZ through Amazon mentioned they've used it with a Vortex Viper PST 6-24x50, which has actual dimensions of the objective at 57.4mm. So that DNZ should work for me, although I'll probably call just to make sure before dropping the $140.

Quote from: navybowhunter on November 14, 2016, 08:28:27 AM
I'll be offline for the better part of the day.  You can feel free to email me at: navarchgolf@gmail.com if you have any pressing questions.

Nothing too pressing to bother you offline. Thanks for the offer though.

Specialkay,

I think the reason most are using a cantilever mount is that they cannot get a good, non ghosted or non ringed sight picture through their optics when the optic is mounted on only the receiver's rail with standard rings. The offset of the cantilevered rings allows one to maintain mounting to the receiver, not mounting to the receiver and hand guard rail.

Since optics and shooters are different you may not need to use cantilevered rings to obtain a good picture in all 3 positions.

My interpretation is that it is preferable to mount the optic to the receiver only, not having the front scope ring attached to the hand guard rail. My thinking is that it is a more solid mounting strategy and less prone to mount movement. Perhaps the hand guard can wobble but I am not sure about this.

I think it is possible to run out of rail on barrel end of the receiver before one can get a forward enough scope mount to give a clear sight picture. This is dependent on the eye relief of the optic. The lower the eye relief, the closer one's eye needs to be to the scope to get a clear sight picture.

I am sure the more experienced members of the forum will correct me (by firing line, LOL). My experience is mainly with the Ruger 10/22 platform. I have had to fiddle a lot with the placement of the scopes on the rifles I use in order to find the sweet spot. I have had an occasional rifle and scope combination that just wouldn't work without aftermarket rails or rings. I could not get enough forward movement of the scope to let me do a good turkey neck and cheek weld.

I hope you find the combination that works for you. Just remember to persist until you do.

Best regards, Goodoldfriend

Quote from: navybowhunter on November 12, 2016, 10:43:15 AM
Airplanejoe,

Good points.

I'll throw in for consideration, JMDavis is likely 5'5" (at a stretch...standing by to get shot LOL), Aggrivere is likely 5' 10", I'm 6ft, and as mentioned John Scandale from Keystone is at least 6' 3".

I'm only mentioning the above cause all of us, have our optics set up pretty much as FWD as JMDavis picture above.

I believe Aggrivere, and JMDavis are NRA "Master" class shooters, John Scandale is a High Master to lend credibility to what I am saying. ...
Chris

Chris, thanks for the extra inch on height. I am actually 5'4" with a wrestlers neck. My mount is  3" cantilever. The photos above are the original Primary Arms. It was 1.45" in height but I was happy with it until I tried something lower and then I was much happier. Also, I am only an expert at this point. I need .5 points on my average to make master. Hopefully that will happen early in 2017.

OK all of that said. I will make a point that I think needs to be made. Shooting is a process and every process involves different amounts of trial and error to get it right. Sometimes we are lucky and get it quickly, other times not so much. I personally have done better with pistol than rifle. But a big part of that is shooting ALOT of matches and practicing 3-4 days a week and mentally rehersing 5 or 6 days a week. For example this past year I shot 40- 60 and 90 shot matches and 7-2700's. On the highpower side I mostly practiced 1 or 2 days a week and rehersed 3 or 4. I shot less than 20 matches total of all types since Jan 2016. I will add another 3 rifle and 2 pistol matches in early December at the Talledega 600.

If you put in the effort the results can seem miraculous to people looking from the outside. But they are far from miraculous.They are work. Work in bad weather and good. Work when you are tired and when you are fresh.

I will get some photos of the current rifle config in the near future. But I absolutely believe that each person will have some amount of trial and error to fine tune his or her system.

Mike

Quote from: goodoldfriend on November 14, 2016, 01:56:57 PM
I think the reason most are using a cantilever mount is that they cannot get a good, non ghosted or non ringed sight picture through their optics when the optic is mounted on only the receiver's rail with standard rings. The offset of the cantilevered rings allows one to maintain mounting to the receiver, not mounting to the receiver and hand guard rail.

Oh yeah, no doubt.

Right now I've got the scope rings as far forward on the receiver as they will fit, and I still get a little bit of ghosting. Not too much, but some. I know the scope needs to move further forward.

Here's where my understanding is getting a little bit fuzzy:
1. If you look at JMDavis' photo, the back of the scope appears to be at least 3" from the charging handle.
2. The eye relief on my scope is 3"-3.4"
3. Which would lead one to believe that, if you put NTCH, you would want the back of the scope to be 3"-3.4" forward of the charging handle (roughly).
4. Right now my rifle has the back of its scope probably 1" away from the charging handle, and I'm seeing a little ghosting. Probably enough that I need to move it another .5" forward.
5. But, assuming the eye relief on the scope is 3"-3.4", shouldn't I need to move the scope forward another 2"?
6. If I move the scope forward another 2", I don't get proper eye relief.

Clearly the back of the scope should be ~3" from the charging handle. So I'm doing something wrong. But I don't know what.

Or am I not understanding something?

Your data is more important than any stat for any tool. If 1.5 works for you. that is good, as long as it works in all positions.

Personally I think that your but postion may be a little high on the shoulder but its hard to tell and I would only change it to improve an upright head position or if I felt like my stability was compromised.

Quote from: jmdavis on November 14, 2016, 06:02:31 PM
Personally I think that your but postion may be a little high on the shoulder but its hard to tell and I would only change it to improve an upright head position or if I felt like my stability was compromised.

Very good feedback. Thank you JMDavis. I'll try to pay more attention to it.

Quote from: navybowhunter on November 14, 2016, 08:28:27 AM
A quick Google for DNZ would be what I would do.  Get the # to DNZ and call them.  Make sure you have the specs for your scope.  Tell them you want a 3" offset, and explain what optic you are using.

I called. No answer. So I emailed. What I emailed was:

"Hi,

I was looking to get a 3" offset picantinny rail scope mount to fit my Accushot UTG 3-12x44 30mm Compact Scope (https://www.leapers.com/prod_detail.php?itemno=SCP3-UM312AOIEW) ontop of a flat top AR15. The scope as a 53 mm objective. Will the Freedom Reaper be a good scope mount for what I'm looking for?"

The response I got didn't instill too much confidence:

Quote
It should work fine if it will fit in the rings.

Thanks
DNZ

I guess good enough?

SpecialKay,

Browse through the opticsplanet.com catalog. Search AR scope bases/rings. I don't like to recommend products, but check out Leupold. Lots of other choices just as good or better.

For my rifle, I tried every possible location on the rail until I found the one that worked for me.

aj

Quote from: navybowhunter on November 10, 2016, 08:42:26 AM
Basically, for 3 position shooting, the typical competitor needs a 3 inch offset mount.  That allows one to get the proper eye relief and a repeatable cheek weld (NTCH).

. . .


Height over bore....as stated above, accomplished NRA competitors *Hi Masters* have tested a lot of stuff.  The ideal scope height over bore is found to be 1.300".

I tend to listen closely to those much more knowledgeable than myself. But upon doing my own research, it appears that there are not many scope mounts that offer a 3" offset that is 1.300" above the rail (you said over bore, but I think you meant over rail, right?). And by not many, I mean very very few. So if this is such an ideal set up for the vast majority of shooters, why isn't it readily available?

Quote from: airplanejoe on November 15, 2016, 08:55:49 AM
Browse through the opticsplanet.com catalog.

I like opticsplanet.com, and they have plenty of options. Only problem is for most scope mounts they don't list how forward the cantilever is, how far the scope mount places the optic above the rail, the maximum objective the rings can "hold", or all three.

So I decided to contact customer service. They told me the closest thing they had that could fit a 53mm objective with a 3" forward offset is a vortex mount (http://www.opticsplanet.com/vortex-30mm-cantilever-riflescope-ring-mount-for-ar-15.html), but it's 1.59" above the rail.

So it looks like I can:
1. Go with the freedom reaper for $135 (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00403LJLW/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1) and hope it fits.
2. Go with the vortex for $88 (https://www.amazon.com/Vortex-Cantilever-3-Inch-Absolute-Co-Witness/dp/B009QJLBDQ/ref=sr_1_3?srs=5454532011&ie=UTF8&qid=1479322492&sr=8-3&keywords=vortex+optics+cantilever+mount) and live with the extra .29" in height.
3. Poney up for the Keystone mount (https://www.creedmoorsports.com/product/2632/see-all-departments) and likewise hope it fits.

What would you do?

I'd go with the DNZ, as long as you don't torque it in, you can return it.

As far as why no major manufacturers offer a height of 1.3, the high power shooting community is relatively small.

We only were allowed to add an optic to the rifle as of last year.

3 position shooting, is what we are talking about, and that is likely why no other manufacturers offer what we are discussing.

Look at some upgrades regarding the iron sighted rifles.  A LOT of stuff came from the HP community, like rear peep diopters (Bob Jones)....sight blackening gadgets *Ray Vin Smoker*, etc etc.  The major companies that support HP community are:
Creedmoor Sports
Compass Lake Engineering
Gieselle Automatics
Rock River
Keystone Accuracy

Not an inclusive list, but...good enough to illustrate a point, and also somewhat answer your question as to "Why others have not come up with this".

Again...only in the past year have optics been allowed.  Most BIG manufacturers like those mentioned above are starting to offer "stuff" for the new change.

Hope that helps.

R/
Chris

Another point to the "Why other manufacturers don't offer"....

Scopes!  Night Force just came out with a "purpose built" HP optic. 

The rest of the field (HP community) are using Leupold VXR *think that is what it is...JMDavis mentions it in here* and the Vortex Viper PST 1x4 TMCQ MOA. 

The Viper optic is great for the price point, and I would say the majority are using that.  BUT it is not ideal.  I mean...it is not specifically designed for NRA HP.  It was just a scope in their lineup that competitors found to work, and work very well.

I'd venture to say that in the next 2 years, you will see more major optic manufacturers offer "purpose built" NRA HP optics AND RETICLES, and of course mounts.

It's just "too new" of a rule change.  Past 50+ years were all iron sights, so it was a HUGE deal when they CMP/NRA allowed the optic.

Ideally, I'd like a 1/4 min click scope (not needed...but nice), with a duplex reticle without the hash marks and business in the reticle for ranging.  I'd like a simple duplex reticle, with a circle that corresponds with the aiming black of the 600 yard target.

Watch..., it will come eventually.  Who knows who will be first, Leupold?  Vortex?  Night Force?....Night Force is leading the way now I think.

Wanna know what the PROS are using, google the AMU (Army Marksmanship Unit) and you will see.  I bet they are using Night Force scopes with Gieselle mounts.  Not sure...I have not researched that.  But you can if you desire to?

The AMU also offers excellent shooting tips and reloading advice.  Rest assured, if they are using it...IT WORKS!  And WORKS VERY WELL.

Hope that helped?

Again...relatively speaking the NRA HP shooting community (3 position shooting) is a small group, when you take into account the PRS stuff, 3 Gun, and all that other stuff.

R/
Chris

I happen to be Facebook friends with SFC Brandon Greene from the AMU.  He just texted me that the mount they use is the Giessele and they use the Night Force scope.

Wanna see a dude that can "shoot" and do it very well.  All disciplines, google him.

OK...headed out for the day.  I'll likely be online later, if you have any more questions.

R/
Chris

I'm a big believer in the idea that good outcomes generally involve some trial and error. I also believe in minimizing that trial and error via research.

So here's the best advice I can offer on an inexpensive system that will work. White Oak sells a 3" cantilever rail that you can use with your own rings. Thus depending in the objective of your scope you can choose low, medium or high rings. That will be the most adaptable system that you can get and should be very cost effective.

Highpower shooting uses three positions and takes place out to 600 yards for Across the Course matches. This means that a scope needs to be usable in standing, sitting and prone from 200-600 yards. If you are a belly shooter, you only need a scope that works in prone.

My personal carbine wears an ARMS QD mount, an extended rail and 30mm rings to mount a Vadala M2. It is set as far forward as possible and has worked for everything I have used it for. But gor High a Power precision the scope is too high due to the combination of mount, rail and rings. Stand by for a photo of my current HP setup. It uses a UBR stock and a Keystone 1inch mount. It works for me.

Sorry for the shadows




Note the marking on the stock in this one. That mark is for standing and sitting, I open up one for prone. There are also witness marks on my scope, my mount, my sling, and my coat.

Thank you to everyone for all the great advice. Additionally, thank you to those reading who have allowed me to hijack the thread.

I hope one day to get into HP shooting. But probably not today. Until that time happens, in recreational shooting and KD shooting I'd prefer to acquire the "right" equipment along the way, so if I do jump into HP it doesn't cost me several (more) thousands of dollars.

I know every shooter is different. Some will need a 1" offset, others a 3". Some would prefer a 1.300" rise, while others a 1.59" is probably just fine. Finding out where you fall is the difficult part. At $100-350 each, it's tough to look at it as a "we'll try this, and if it doesn't work we'll get another one." Well, at least for me. And that's only as it relates to the scope mount. No need to even talk about the barrel length, twist rate, trigger group, stock, optic, or any of the other "HP gadgets." Your mind starts to get blown.

Quote from: jmdavis on November 16, 2016, 04:52:03 PMWhite Oak sells a 3" cantilever rail that you can use with your own rings.

https://www.whiteoakarmament.com/shop/highpower-competition/service-rifle-optics/extended-scope-rail-10-min-elev.html

I noticed it's elevated 1/2". If I'm using standard rings now and my eye relief is fairly good (at least, for someone who doesn't know for certain if it's good, it feels good), wouldn't rising it 1/2" cause problems? I'm not attempting to sound argumentative, not at all. I just want to make sure I avoid spending $100 on a riser, only to then have to spend $100 on new low profile rings, rather than getting a $150 mount.

Quote from: navybowhunter on November 16, 2016, 03:20:55 PM
I'd go with the DNZ, as long as you don't torque it in, you can return it.

The direction I'm leaning at the moment. Since both DNZ and Vortex are offered through Amazon, I could return both of them fairly easily.

JMDavis' pic of his HP rifle....is pretty much like mine.

Great point on Witness Marks.  I use a white permanent "very fine" marker to make marks on all mounting bolts/screws/etc for the mount.

Regarding every shooter being different.  To a point yes..., but a minimum of a 2 inch offset is pretty much required for proper eye relief with NTCH.  I won't harp on this anymore.  I tried the 2 inch, and it was not enough....especially in seated.

Amazon...great return policy..., so simple to check with the DNZ mount.  It "Should" work just fine for you.  Only you will know.

As far as building up a rig for possibly future HP shooting....

I like your idea.  Don't sweat barrel types and all that.  It is really easy.  20" match grade barrel, at least 1:8 twist *to be able to shoot 80 grain bullets at 600 yards*.

Gonna start a new thread on that...as some may be interested in that.  Gear for CMP competition/3 Position shooting.  I'll call it a FWIW/YMMV post as always.

Please do update us SpecialKay...whatever mount you decide to go with. I'd be interested to see how that works out for you.

R/
Chris

Quote from: navybowhunter on November 16, 2016, 06:55:03 PM

Gonna start a new thread on that...as some may be interested in that.  Gear for CMP competition/3 Position shooting.  I'll call it a FWIW/YMMV post as always.

Please do. I'd be interested in that. As well as suggestions on progressing from Appleseed to CMP/HP.

Quote from: navybowhunter on November 16, 2016, 06:55:03 PMPlease do update us SpecialKay...whatever mount you decide to go with. I'd be interested to see how that works out for you.

Will do, although it may take me some time to get the right system down and test it out.

Here is what works for me.
GG&G GS-1 FIRE System Optical Mounting Rail Flat - https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005Z58HDC/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o04_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Use low profile rings (I use Vortex Low hunting rings and a Vortex Crossfire scope).
The scope won't fit so I had to mill unused part of that mounting rail. Took about 30-40 min with file but it's probably faster with an actual mill.
The upside is that scope is very low, also as far forward as it needs to be. Overall the setup is rock solid.

Specialkay
I think I understand your "problem". The pics on this thread, including mine, have a relatively low power scope with small diameter objectives. As an example. mine is a 1-4X24mm. Yours, I understand has a 53 mm objective. The choices become less in number. In your shoes I would try to find fellow shooters and try their equipment.

I'm sure that out there there is something that will suit your needs. It doesn't have to be a mount, you can find some pretty high rings.

aj
 

Specialkay

Regarding rings, Badger rings are 0.883" std. But they also offer an extra high 1.45". They are for 30mm scope tubes, but you can get inserts to reduce that to 1"scope tubes. Downside is they are pricey.

aj

The relevance and timeliness of this thread is uncanny.  This is one of the most helpful threads that I have read in any forum on any subject in a long time!  This is very helpful to solving my optic problem for my AR15.  Thank you to everyone who participated in this discussion!  This should be a sticky!

Quote from: airplanejoe on November 18, 2016, 12:55:31 PM
Specialkay
I think I understand your "problem". The pics on this thread, including mine, have a relatively low power scope with small diameter objectives. As an example. mine is a 1-4X24mm. Yours, I understand has a 53 mm objective. The choices become less in number. In your shoes I would try to find fellow shooters and try their equipment.

What's the benefit of having a relatively low power scope with small diameter objectives?

EDIT: Because more than a 4.5x and 34mm objective isn't permitted per the rules. Sorry for the dumb question.

Specialkay.

No such thing as a dumb question. If anything isn't clear, ask.

aj

Actually a 4x, 1-4.5x or a 2-7 are excellent general purpose scopes. I prefer them to 3x9 optics for hunting and all round use in the east. Anything over about 6mm of objective per 1x starts to lose benefit. A larger objective captures more light, but it also weighs more.


Mike

Chief Chris aka Navybowhunter hooked me up with the proper eye relief for 3 position shooting an AR today, so I have no excuses at the next KD.

Was great to see Chesty Puller yesterday (Hank).

Some things to also consider.....

I mounted Hanks scope yesterday for him...well he did I supervised.  Anyways, Hank is a Rifleman so....he understands what NTCH means.

I also mounted a scope for another friend (non Appleseed Rifleman) on a slug gun yesterday.  NIGHT and DAY difference between the two people.  Granted the rifles are different also.

SO...
Position is very important.  One will never likely "get" where the scope should really be....are they not using a proper/solid position.

The pic of Hank in standing, is really a good one.  Head is erect....NTCH, elbow is supported by his stuff, it really is a pretty good pic of what NTCH in standing should look like.

Personally, I think Hank's scope should come back maybe a notch on the Pic Rail....but that is Hanks call, his position will dictate that for him.  The mount he chose will allow him to move the entire mount FWD or AFT on the upper....without disturbing the "levelness" of the scope.

What he has now....is a crystal clear and immediate (key word immediate) sight picture in the seated position.  If one needs to prarie dog their head....it is not "immediate", and that lends to a non repeatable position.

Mounting the scope....how do I do it?

It starts with one roughly placing the scope in the rings.  Tighten them just enough to allow for FWD/AFT movement of the optic.

Have the shooter get in the seated position.  Close the eyes, and bring rifle to the head (establish the position).  If the sight picture is not crisp/clear and IMMEDIATE, have them remove the rifle...and move scope fore or aft....and repeat.  Until that crisp/clear and IMMEDIATE sight picture is there.  Then....

Well....On a 1 piece solid mount it is fairly easy.  Take a set of feeler gages, and the flat on the mount, and the flat on bottom (of most) scopes....allow for one to easily level the scope in the rings.  No feeler gage?  Use a brand new deck of playing cards.

Thats pretty much my mounting process for a 1 piece solid mount.

Advanced:
Most one piece mounts come from reputable companies....Larue, DNZ, Giessele etc.  The rings do not need to be lapped.  However...on some rings...lapping may be in order.
You can YouTube ring lapping.  It is not that hard.

But...in my experience, even with good Leupold dovetail mount rings...you are really only getting like 15% of contact between the rings and the scope tube.

After a lapping session, you can get it to where you have almost 90% surface contact.

Why is lapping important?  Not too critical on say an AR15...low recoil rifle.  Big bore bolt rifles, slug guns, muzzleloaders....those that PUNISH optics...a Lapping session may be in order....if you are not using a reputable 1 piece mount as mentioned above.

R/
Chris

Thanks for helping me out with the scope mount Chief. 

I was surprised that pushing the scope forward and shortening the stock worked so
well in all 3 positions.