Impact M3 scope mounts

Jump to latest Follow Reply
N

Neiding

Member
Mar 6, 2020
33
13
OH, United States
Good afternoon, everyone!

New Impact M3 owner here. I’m coming from a Marauder that I’ve had for the last 5 years. It was springers, nitro pistons, and multi-pumps before that as well as lots or powder burnt in my younger years.

For the Impact M3, I’m trying to decide what scope mount or scope rings I need to order along with the scopes I’ve been eyeing (between an Arken and Athlon FFP) and have 3 basic questions that I was hoping those with M3 experience could help me with.

  1. Ring height — I measured the comb to optic distance for rough figment purposes and it seems like I’ll need a mount/rings that are about 1.5” to the center of the optic as the comb is just 5/8” below the top of the pic rail. I’m considering 34mm tube scopes. So, a high mount/rings it is. Does that sound right?
  2. Cantilevered one-piece or two-piece rings — I think I’d prefer two-piece rings just because that’s what I’ve always used in other hunting rigs, etc. Do I need a cantilevered one-piece to gain the appropriate eye relief on or will two-piece rings fit? I ask as I know friends need cantilevers on their AR style rifles and I’m wondering if this is similar.
  3. A mount with cant — I know that the Impact M3 rail has 20 MOA of cant built in. I’ve seen other folks in the forum use single-piece cantilever mounts with additional cant. My intention is to use this primarily in my back yard, so I only have up to 75 yards total and will likely zero at 30 to 40. If I have 20 MOA in the rail and 20 MOA in the mount (let’s say) that’s 40” of drop from the aggregate cant at 100yds, 20” at 50yds, and 10” at 25yds relative to a horizontal line. Shooting a 18.13 at 900fps should only see about 16” of drop at 100yds, so why do folks want the extra cant? Just trying to see if I’ve misinterpreted how all of this fits together.

Sorry for the long post, but thank you for your help in advance!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 450BM
  1. Ring Height is very personal. Your head angle changes, how you sight in for short or long range could change. You most definitely do NOT need 1.5” rings on a stock Impact, unless you are running an extended rail. The bell of the scope should be well out in front of the stock scope rail, where there is tons of room. That being said, I used 1.5” rings when mine was stock, because I like being more upright. It also requires an adjustable check rest. I now have 1.45” rings with my Saber Tactical rail and the bell just clears on my Arken 5-25 (34mm tube).
  2. 1 or 2 piece rings again is just personal preference. Cantilevered should not be required either, but it depends on your approach to the rifle. I have used both 1 and 2. I really like 1 piece because I feel like there is less room for user error in install, but I mostly use 2 piece. Never used cantilever on any of my impacts.
  3. If you only have 75 yards, you have no need for more than the base 20MOA…. That being said, everything depends on your scope and how much adjustment it has. Most scopes today have more than you will ever need. If you are shooting that short range, do not add more cant. You only need that to get out much further. 20MOA has been plenty for me and every scope I’ve used under 100 yards.
Best thing you can do is get the rifle and the scope and test it out before getting your rings. I use stacks of paper on top of my rifle to find my appropriate height and eye relief, then buy the rings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 450BM and saitama
Upvote 0
Another option for your rings would be the adjustable one’s which you can have set to low, medium or high based on your preference. I have the eaglevision mounts on one and the FX one’s on another.
As far as a lot of the folks you may have seen with extra cant; many are shooting longer distances and want all the additional dialing they can achieve. So some will zero at 35 yards with turrets dialed basically all the way down, give or take 20 or so clicks. Then they use the adjustable rings to zero. Once they have zero they have all the additional moa for longer shots. I use 30 to 35 yards as the zero because at that distance anything under is still dialing up and anything over is dialing up as well.
Sorry for the long explanation and hopefully I have given the correct information, if not one of the other more skilled members will chime in and let us know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 450BM
Upvote 0
Smok3y said:
  1. Ring Height is very personal. Your head angle changes, how you sight in for short or long range could change. You most definitely do NOT need 1.5” rings on a stock Impact, unless you are running an extended rail. The bell of the scope should be well out in front of the stock scope rail, where there is tons of room. That being said, I used 1.5” rings when mine was stock, because I like being more upright. It also requires an adjustable check rest. I now have 1.45” rings with my Saber Tactical rail and the bell just clears on my Arken 5-25 (34mm tube).
  2. 1 or 2 piece rings again is just personal preference. Cantilevered should not be required either, but it depends on your approach to the rifle. I have used both 1 and 2. I really like 1 piece because I feel like there is less room for user error in install, but I mostly use 2 piece. Never used cantilever on any of my impacts.
  3. If you only have 75 yards, you have no need for more than the base 20MOA…. That being said, everything depends on your scope and how much adjustment it has. Most scopes today have more than you will ever need. If you are shooting that short range, do not add more cant. You only need that to get out much further. 20MOA has been plenty for me and every scope I’ve used under 100 yards.
Best thing you can do is get the rifle and the scope and test it out before getting your rings. I use stacks of paper on top of my rifle to find my appropriate height and eye relief, then buy the rings.
Click to expand...
Smok3y — Thank you for the response.

  1. You’re right about personal preference, I was looking more for a high level guide to what other folks have found with the M3 platform. That said, I’m a bigger person (6’4”) and used the method of measuring from just below my cheek bone to the outside corner of my eye to guide comb to optic. That measure is just under 2” for me and I like a more upright head position, so that’s how I came up with needing roughly 1.5” rings as it’s a 5/8” ride from top of comb to top of the pic rail. I do want to keep the scope as close to the barrel as possible for balance, etc, but would rather not mash my face to get there!
  2. It’s good to hear that I don’t have to do the cantilevered mount. I wasn’t sure as the M3 does seem very similar to the AR platform and I believe many of those require a cantilever to avoid having the front ring to be mounted on the hand guard rail. I guess the one-piece might just be easier for some too, not sure.
  3. Regarding additional cant, that’s kind of what I figured. I still wanted to make sure I wasn’t missing something as I always try to avoid falling into the trap of thinking I know everything! Ha!

Regarding your Arken, do you have an SH4, EP4, or EP5? I was actually considering the SH4 G2 4-16 model. I also considered a Vortex Venom, and Athlon Talos or Argos. I like the lower parallax adjustment of the Athon, but the bang for the buck of the Arken is hard to ignore. That and I also prefer MOA as it’s easier for me the think 0.25” per click at 100 then 0.36”. Anyway, how do you like the Arken? How long have you had it, etc.?

Thanks again!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 450BM
Upvote 0
ram2jeep said:
Another option for your rings would be the adjustable one’s which you can have set to low, medium or high based on your preference. I have the eaglevision mounts on one and the FX one’s on another.
As far as a lot of the folks you may have seen with extra cant; many are shooting longer distances and want all the additional dialing they can achieve. So some will zero at 35 yards with turrets dialed basically all the way down, give or take 20 or so clicks. Then they use the adjustable rings to zero. Once they have zero they have all the additional moa for longer shots. I use 30 to 35 yards as the zero because at that distance anything under is still dialing up and anything over is dialing up as well.
Sorry for the long explanation and hopefully I have given the correct information, if not one of the other more skilled members will chime in and let us know.
Click to expand...
ram2jeep - Thanks for your response. I did think about the adjustable rings but thought I might want to transfer the rings and scope to on of my powder burns one day and wasn’t sure it the slip joint in the adjustable rings would withstand the recoil. That said, adjustable rings would provide a lot of versatility, after all. Doyou have thoughts on FX vs. Eaglevison just in case I change my mind? Thank you for your input!
 
Upvote 0
Airgunmann said:
Eagle vision adjustable rings are very nice I like them better than the fx no limits rings as for scope I have a helos ffp gen 2 34 mm tube very good glass in it I really like it i have not tried the arken yet so I can't speak for that
Click to expand...
Thanks, Airgunman!
I was just asking that exact question of ram2jeep! What about the Eaglevision is better? Fit/finish and precision by chance?

Also, I was thinking about a Helix, but was really hoping to have a lower minimum magnification. Aim small, miss small sort of thing for me, I guess. That’s personal preference too, though as I know a lot of FT folks run it right up to the 18x limit which seems like a lot to me at those distances. That said, I might be missing something there too!
 
Upvote 0
The FX rings have one screw to hold the rings in place while the Eaglevision has holding points on both sides of the rings. The Eaglevision has additional points to allow for their bubble level on the side.
They both will get the job done but my preference has been the Eaglevision rings. I have the Eaglevision on my M3, Leshiy 2 and my M2 and the FX rings are on my daughters Dream-Tac.
I also own the Arken SH-4 4-16 scope and really like it. The only, and to me only, downside is the weight. Another item, that does matter to many, is the parallax only goes down to 20 yards.
I also owned the Helix but sold it recently. It is a nice scope as well but didn’t fit my eye the way I would prefer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Airgunmann
Upvote 0
Neiding said:
Good afternoon, everyone!

New Impact M3 owner here. I’m coming from a Marauder that I’ve had for the last 5 years. It was springers, nitro pistons, and multi-pumps before that as well as lots or powder burnt in my younger years.

For the Impact M3, I’m trying to decide what scope mount or scope rings I need to order along with the scopes I’ve been eyeing (between an Arken and Athlon FFP) and have 3 basic questions that I was hoping those with M3 experience could help me with.

  1. Ring height — I measured the comb to optic distance for rough figment purposes and it seems like I’ll need a mount/rings that are about 1.5” to the center of the optic as the comb is just 5/8” below the top of the pic rail. I’m considering 34mm tube scopes. So, a high mount/rings it is. Does that sound right?
  2. Cantilevered one-piece or two-piece rings — I think I’d prefer two-piece rings just because that’s what I’ve always used in other hunting rigs, etc. Do I need a cantilevered one-piece to gain the appropriate eye relief on or will two-piece rings fit? I ask as I know friends need cantilevers on their AR style rifles and I’m wondering if this is similar.
  3. A mount with cant — I know that the Impact M3 rail has 20 MOA of cant built in. I’ve seen other folks in the forum use single-piece cantilever mounts with additional cant. My intention is to use this primarily in my back yard, so I only have up to 75 yards total and will likely zero at 30 to 40. If I have 20 MOA in the rail and 20 MOA in the mount (let’s say) that’s 40” of drop from the aggregate cant at 100yds, 20” at 50yds, and 10” at 25yds relative to a horizontal line. Shooting a 18.13 at 900fps should only see about 16” of drop at 100yds, so why do folks want the extra cant? Just trying to see if I’ve misinterpreted how all of this fits together.

Sorry for the long post, but thank you for your help in advance!
Click to expand...
I don’t remember writing this post… :) You just described my history almost exactly except for one thing, I’ve never owned a nitro piston!

I just got an 25 caliber FX Impact about a month ago. I thought I wanted the lowest rings possible and mounted my new Vortex Diamonback 6-24 first focal plain with low Vortex mounts. It was way too low. I thought, because the pic rail was raised above the barrel that low mounts would be perfect, they were not and I exchanged them for Vortex mediums and they seem to be just about right. And I love the scope, would like to get more for some of my powder burners.

I didn’t put any extra cant in, the 20 MOA built in should be as much as I ever need. If I do, there’s always the hash marks on the crosshairs. If you watch the South Africa channels on youtube, like airarmshuntingsa or air tac hunting, they shoot really long ranges and use a lot of MOA. If I need to take shots as long as they are, I’ll use a powder burner.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Neiding
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Resources
Menu