Precision AR Cheek Weld Position

[Cobra66]

I am building my first precision AR rifle. I was trained to place my nose beside the charging handle when firing from iron sights and have done so for years.

However when looking at ARs with scopes mounted I have noticed that most people mount the objective just forward of the charging handle. Given the eye relief on most magnified optics this results in the head placement much further back than I (and many in the military) were trained.

As a result, I ended up purchasing a LaRue SPR-E mount with the extended eye relief. With the scope I am using (an old Redfield 3-9x) I am needing to put it as far forward as it will go in the mount to prevent bridging the receiver and rail. Now I realize that my scope may not have the most generous eye-relief but it is seems that most mounts are designed to place the objective further back requiring the shooter to get a cheek weld further back on the buttstock.

So my question is why is this? Is there a disadvantage to putting your nose on the charging handle when using magnified optics? Is this simply a result of "hunting rifle" type cheek welds coming down to the AR platform? What are most of you doing?

Since I am used to keeping my nose on the charging handle when shooting irons, I would like to keep it the same when shooting through glass. Is there something I'm missing here?

[Belmont31R]

The whole nose to charging handle thing was/is to teach new shooters to get consistent sight pictures through irons. You don't need to do that with an optic in the same way, and you can put your head further back on the stock. Its just a consistency thing with irons for people who don't have a whole lot of shooting experience which most military trainees don't have.

[MistWolf]

The whole nose to charging handle thing was/is to teach new shooters to get consistent sight pictures through irons. You don't need to do that with an optic in the same way, and you can put your head further back on the stock. Its just a consistency thing with irons for people who don't have a whole lot of shooting experience which most military trainees don't have.

What Belmont said is spot on.

Each shooter must find what works best for them. You should set up your rifle to suit your shooting style. Play around with different cheek welds. You may find that you're comfortable with pulling your head back a bit. Or you might find that you definitely prefer keeping your nose to the charging handle.

The reason AR scope mounts place the objectives a bit to the rear is the limited space and location of the rails on top of the upper receiver combined with the shape and design of most optics.

There are rail/handguard combos that will give you continuous rail estate from charging handle to gas block and beyond but they can be pricey and only you can determine if that's the righ solution for you.

Some optics have shorter eye relief. The AR chambered in 5.56 is a light recoiling weapon and a shorter eye relief shouldn't be any trouble. For myself, I don't care for a short eye relief as I don't want something too close to my eye when shooting. That's a personal thing. Again, you must decide for yourself what will and will not work

[harkem]

If you need to move the scope forward because that's your preference look at A.R.M.S. inc. swan sleeves they come in various lengths and won't raise the scope to high. They are expensive at online stores but look around I have found them around $60. on gunbroker and other auctions / forums.

[Cobra66]

Thanks for the reply guys. I mounted the scope and shot the rifle last Friday. Playing around with it, I decided to keep it forward since I want to keep my nose by the charging handle as that is the way I have been shooting the platform for 20 years and I want to keep things consistent. The only thing that concerns me now is that I did have to bridge the receiver and the handguard/rail. My SPR is the BCM Vikings Tactics upper (http://www.bravocompanyusa.com/Photo...8+SS410+VTRX13). I'm thinking that with the LaRue mount, it should provide enough rigidity to not affect zero, but I do wonder if it will be an issue if I really crank down on a sling. As mentioned, the scope is an old Redfield Illuminator Widefield which is just acting as a place holder until I can afford a different scope. Compared to my Leupold scopes, the Redfield is a lot less forgiving on eye relief so hopefully a new scope will allow me not to bridge the receiver.