Bobro Mount Positions: Extended vs Sightly Forward

[ScottsBad]

I have two Bobro scope mounts and I like them. I always bought the Extended Bobro mount because it gives you a little more flexibility in where you mount the scope on the rail. Especially, if you use a scope with longer eye relief. One of my mounts is used with a Trijicon TR24R, which has a lot of eye relief. If I used the slightly extended instead of the Extended mount the mount would be way up on the front of the receiver instead of in the middle of the receiver.

This all depends to a certain extent on your stance, stock, and resulting cheek weld. But I would suggest getting the Extended.

----Finally, if you get the specs, and by this I mean the dimensions, of the scope and the dimensions of the Bobro it is possible to calculate the approximate mounting position given eye relief and your usual preference for a cheek weld. This is the way I do my scope mounts.

Good luck.

I shoot nose to CH so bought extendeds for my 1-4 & 2-12 out of concern base might not be able to be mounted far enough forward using slightly extended to get enough eye clearance. Sure enough, properly positioned for me, even with the extended, there is only one available forward slot without bridging the rail gap.

Assuming the slightly extended has more than a one slot reach difference, it would not work for me at all. But the extended still has three slots rearward adjustability which would put the eyepiece even with the rear edge of the CH. That seems enough for all except the ape-armed among us. So the extended will work for the majority of shooters while the slightly for a more narrow group. Or is my logic faulty? I'm partly basing this conclusion on photos of 1-4s showing almost all mounted forward of the rear edge of BUIS.

From my experience ^this is correct.

[FourT6and2]

If I used the slightly extended instead of the Extended mount the mount would be way up on the front of the receiver instead of in the middle of the receiver.

Right. This is what I'm talking about. My question is would you rather have the mount farther forward or farther rearward (keeping in mind the scope doesn't change position either way)? Or does it not really matter to you?

[ScottsBad]

Right. This is what I'm talking about. My question is would you rather have the mount farther forward or farther rearward (keeping in mind the scope doesn't change position either way)? Or does it not really matter to you?

I intended to imply that it is better to have the mount in the middle which gives you the ability to move the mount forward or rearward if necessary. Also, if you decide to change scopes you will may be able to re-use the Bobro mount if the eye relief changes. If the question is would I rather have the mount to the rear or to the front, I prefer have my mounts further to the rear. Just a personal preference. Now, if there is a weight shift involved then you probably want the weight shifted farther to the rear rather than toward the muzzle too, because adding weight to the front of the rifle is not conducive to fast handling.

JMHO

[FourT6and2]

I intended to imply that it is better to have the mount in the middle which gives you the ability to move the mount forward or rearward if necessary. Also, if you decide to change scopes you will may be able to re-use the Bobro mount if the eye relief changes. If the question is would I rather have the mount to the rear or to the front, I prefer have my mounts further to the rear. Just a personal preference. Now, if there is a weight shift involved then you probably want the weight shifted farther to the rear rather than toward the muzzle too, because adding weight to the front of the rifle is not conducive to fast handling.

JMHO

Thanks

[GH41]

I understand that. But that isn't my question.

If you took the same scope with the same cheek weld, the same eye relief—the same distance between the scope's eyepiece, turrets, and bell—and mounted it so it lines up where you need it on an "extended" cantilever mount, but the mount happens to be in the middle of the receiver, and then took the "slightly forward" mount and mounted it at the very forward edge of the receiver, the scope would be in the exact same place. It is the mount that has moved.

My question is, why would you choose one over the other? Again... the scope has not moved positions. The mount has moved underneath the scope.

This situation means the extended mount is too far forward for the scope in question. So you'd mount it farther to the rear. And the slightly extended mount puts the scope too far the rear, so you'd mount it farther to the front. In either case, the scope itself has not moved.

While I understand your argument I don't understand why you are arguing. Pick the scope you want and select a mount that serves your shooting style with a little adjust-ability. One size doesn't fit all!!!

[FourT6and2]

While I understand your argument I don't understand why you are arguing. Pick the scope you want and select a mount that serves your shooting style with a little adjust-ability. One size doesn't fit all!!!

Well, seems like I've made an enemy.

I don't know how to respond to this. I'm trying to have a rational discussion here; I'm not arguing with anybody. Your first post in this thread was in response to a question I didn't ask. And while you don't understand what I'm talking about, everyone else does and my question was answered.

[ScottsBad]

I don't know how to respond to this. I'm trying to have a rational discussion here; I'm not arguing with anybody. Your first post in this thread was in response to a question I didn't ask. And while you don't understand what I'm talking about, everyone else does and my question was answered.

Has your question been answered yet? Sometimes its hard to understand what people are getting at. Hope you got the answer you are looking for.

[FourT6and2]

Has your question been answered yet? Sometimes its hard to understand what people are getting at. Hope you got the answer you are looking for.

Yeah, I think my question was answered.

I was just wondering if there was some benefit to going with one over the other if the scope's position doesn't change. And it seems that it comes down to either personal preference or maybe it's just the mount someone already had from a previous scope. But possibly because the extended mount might be a little more versatile in some situations. Does that sum it up accurately?

[uffdaphil]

I DO understand what you are talking about. One problem lies with your statement that you can position the scope in preferred position and use either mount equally well by simply moving the base. As I explained that is not true for me and many others who shoot NTCH. I'll try one more time. If my scope is where I want on the extended mount the base is as far forward as I can go without bridging the rail gap, I CANNOT use the slightly forward by simply moving the base unless I am willing to straddle the chasm, which I am not.

[FourT6and2]

I DO understand what you are talking about. One problem lies with your statement that you can position the scope in preferred position and use either mount equally well by simply moving the base. As I explained that is not true for me and many others who shoot NTCH. I'll try one more time. If my scope is where I want on the extended mount the base is as far forward as I can go without bridging the rail gap, I CANNOT use the slightly forward by simply moving the base unless I am willing to straddle the chasm, which I am not.

Yes, I understand that it doesn't work for you that way on your rifle. I am grateful for your input. But I'm not talking about your specific situation. I'm talking about a situation where one could use either mount and get the scope in the same position. And I ask because I have seen the same scope mounted on different people's rifles using Bobro mounts. And on one gun, it's the extended mount. And on another it's the slightly forward. But they both had the scope in the exact same position. So I was curious if there was some other difference between the two besides just scope position. I think that question was answered, though.