Downside to 1.285 Scope Mount (LT120) compared to standard (1.535)?

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

I have a Premier 3-15x50 that I'm going to be using between a bolt and LMT-MWS for awhile. I'm working out a gun and scope matrix for what I want to do for my son and me. I had it in a Sphur 4001, and it cleared the rail with out the objective lens cap, but it was just too low. The 1.285 clears (just barely) the standard caps and I feel like I get a nice eye relief position and image through the scope. It definitely is lower than standard, but I used to run the check weld a bit higher when I ran 1.535 mounts, so I think that I'm good- Sometimes I think that I am making things work, rather than have them optimal.

I like the 1.285 since it works on the bolt gun with out getting silly high there.

Is there any other consideration with a lower mount when on a AR that I might be missing?

I'm blessed with high cheek-bones, so I seem to be able to make it work.

[TomMcC]

Depends on your face shape. 1.285 would be much too low for me. 1.5 usually works for me, but just barely. Anyway to try it before you buy it?

[SomeOtherGuy]

Depends on your face shape. 1.285 would be much too low for me. 1.5 usually works for me, but just barely. Anyway to try it before you buy it?

This would be my problem as well.

Could you get a quality .25" high add-on rail for the MWS? If you left that on the MWS, you'd have a roughly 1.5" overall height on it, using the same lower mount.

[jsbhike]

The free Steiner T series mount they did as a promo with the P4XI last year is 35mm high (1.378") and was difficult for me to pick up on an AR compared to everything else.

[GH41]

It wouldn't work for me either. Using one scope on multiple rifles would be a pain in the ass. Chance of the zero being the same on both is slim to none. What about eye relief?? If you have to loosen the rings to make the swap you may as well buy a second mount/rings. The best option would be getting a second scope and mount. Anything else would involve compromise I wouldn't want to deal with.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

I actually have the 1.285 now. It seems to work. With a 1.535 I actually run my PRS cheek rest at about a 1/4 inch high, so that kind of jives. Obviously I can’t mount any back up sites under the ocular portion of the scope. I’m old enough to realize that when you go off standard stuff there are sometimes a reason why there is standard stuff. Besides room for back up sights, any other issues with lower scope mounts outside of ergonomics?

[TomMcC]

You have to put a picture up of your face so we can see what's wrong with it... to be able to get that low.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

You have to put a picture up of your face so we can see what's wrong with it... to be able to get that low.

Don’t hate me for my high cheek bones.......

Actually a 0.25-0.30-inch rail with 20MOA built into would be the slick answer. I have 20MOA rails on all my bolt guns, but ARs with out any pitch to them. A rail in that range would make switching between the two guns with one mount a lot easier.