Impact scopes....how low can you go?

[qball]

Hey gang



when I got my impact I read somewhere the impact needs high scope rings, now I had it for a while it seems a bit high. Without a cheek riser I found it hard to find the eye box quickly and I done see any obstructions to mount it lower. 



what’s the lowest scope rings have you used on your impact? Mid? Low? 

 

[Redick]

You can use any height you want, just be cautious of the objective lens clearance. 

 

[Yo]

Try different ones and it's best to use the one which are most comfortable for proper cheek weld in relation to eye placement depending on the scope. Comfortable most important.

 

[DirtyDovi]

I've seen wayyy too many comments from people in the peanut gallery 
on here, other sites, Amazon, Youtube, etc. stating that "you have to go with High mounts/rings on bullpups" [Impacts included]

This is NOT true, and people need to stop repeating/regurgitating that..

As mentioned, you can use just about any height mounts/rings that you need/want.

I have high cheekbones, so, I almost always have to go with super-low / low rings, or mediums - then deal with custom cheek-risers.

Since my Impact has FX's adjustable mounts/rings on it - and they are only offered in high, it made the rifle a terrible fit for me..
The OEM cheekpad wasn't even close to be high enough, and I had to opt for an aftermarket adjustable setup that offered more height..

The two main things you have to pay attention to is the size of the front bell of the scope that you'll be using, 
and the shape of your face.. How close your cheeks are to your eyes - If you even hope to achieve a solid cheek-weld to the rifle.
*You want your cheek planted firmly on the cheek-rest, and your eye level w/ the center of the scope.

Hopefully that makes a bit more sense and helps out.

Sam -

 

[qball]

Thanks! 


not sure where people got that either! I can see the argument on guns need magazine clearance but the impact has raised rail to begin with and I’m baffled by the comments on high rings! I am almost certain I can use low ring and 56mm objective still. Part of it is because I mount my scope as far forward as possible to give a little room for the Pard007. I guess it’s time to order both lower and medium rings to see how it goes, doesn’t hurt to have some extras on hand since the vortex rings on amazon seem to be quite reasonable. 

 

[DirtyDovi]

qball, right on buddy! Yup, you've definitely nailed it, and double checking just confirms that! 
It's cool to hear that you're also using the Pard 007. I'm S-T-I-L-L checking those out! 
One of these days, [hopefully] I'll make up my mind between that or the 008/008lrf or the x-site 20x pro
Decisions Decisions.

Sam -

 

[Nathan]

Minimum Height: 30mm tube (1.375” from top of rail to center of ring)

34mm tube (1.4” from top of rail to center of ring)

 

[qball]

qball, right on buddy! Yup, you've definitely nailed it, and double checking just confirms that! 
It's cool to hear that you're also using the Pard 007. I'm S-T-I-L-L checking those out! 
One of these days, [hopefully] I'll make up my mind between that or the 008/008lrf or the x-site 20x pro
Decisions Decisions.

Sam -

not an easy decision between 007 vs 008

007 is cheaper and mobile between rifle/scopes 

can see further more clearly because of the optical zoom on the scope, then it has 3.5 digital zoom on top of that

008 has wider FOV and better for close up 30 yards and closer

008 has range finder option which is very useful! 



IMHO 008 is better for dedicated close range pesting gun and 007 is better for longer range or add night time capability to your scope for occasional use. Cool part of 007 is also occasional scope cam capability and additional zoom add on during the day. 

 

[ctshooter]

For a rail like the Impact's I wouldn't be using rings. It's optimally setup to use something like the AeroPrecision Ultralight scope mount.

 

[qball]

For a rail like the Impact's I wouldn't be using rings. It's optimally setup to use something like the AeroPrecision Ultralight scope mount.

I thought about that too, would it give enough clearance for the sling mount? 

 

[DirtyDovi]

qball, thanks a bunch for the breakdown!
These pros/cons are super helpful when it comes to trying to weigh out the differences between the two / three.

As a life long photographer, I know that optical zoom trumps digital zoom in a huge way - no matter what some people say.. 
That's why I gravitated towards the 007 1st/foremost, and.. for the fact that it can be swapped around between scopes.. 
I have handfuls of rifles, so, that's a great option!

The 008 [and the x-sights] have a few more really nice features though.. 
Mostly when it comes to the ease of zeroing - Huge plus if/when used rifle to rifle and/or for using different calibers/weights of ammo..

Record through is great, night visibility is great, I just that all of the end result of the recording footage was the same.. 

When comparing videos from all of them, the 'add-on' / 007 is still awesome, but, seems to show a serious vignette [black haze around the edge]
while with the 'stand alone models / 008/008lrf and x-sights, you'll see a more uniform picture from center to outer edges..

I wish I could go with both, but, that's a big ol' impossibility unfortunately.
Especially when it's already a buy once cry once purchase from the beginning. lol

Taking Your Opinion into consideration - I think I'm with you there! Nice conclusion! 

I recently purchased a high end / high magnification Bushnell Nitro scope, hoping/thinking that I was going to like it as an all around'er, 
The glass is Amazing, so adding the Pard 007 would be a no-brainer.. The other scopes are all nice, but, not that nice..
Going from 10 meters to 25 yards re-zero was okay.. But then zeroing for different ranges ended up being more of a pain.. 
That said, as nice as the 007 would have been.. at this point, maybe selling the Bushnell and going w/ an 008 may be the best option.

Sorry for the long 'thoughts out loud'. lol

Sam -

 

[IraLite]

Whatevers comfortable with your cheek weld, depending on your scopes eye relief a ring or mount with a cantilever maybe needed. I needed one with my Hawke's 4 foot eye relief...



PRO-TIP: I order rings and mounts (same brand and type) in 3 or 4 different heights, then just return the ones I didn't need. Saves alot of time and hassle finding the perfect height or having to settle for a sub par configuration.

 

[ctshooter]

For a rail like the Impact's I wouldn't be using rings. It's optimally setup to use something like the AeroPrecision Ultralight scope mount.

I thought about that too, would it give enough clearance for the sling mount?

I'd think so - check Amazon - they come in a variety of setup options.

 

[Smok3y]

I agree that this a question that comes up too often, because it comes down to what you like. I will often ask someone with a similar rifle what size rings they are, because the height looks good and I’ll be curious if a starting point, but you need to test. 

On my Impact I found that buying the cheek rest was the best thing I ever did. Then I was able to dial in the height perfectly with rings that were comfortable. I actually settled on the highest rings I’ve ever used on a non-AR at 1.5” and with the check rest, it is the best setup I’ve ever had!

One thing I do before buying rings (usually) is to test the scope on top of the rifle first to find a comfortable height (especially when o don’t have an adjustable cheek). Put the rifle in a stable setup, in a vise or something else. Find something you can easily stack on the rifle and sit the scope on to test different heights. I actually use copy paper. I stack it up on top, set the scope on it, and get behind the scope and adjust with less or more paper until I find the height I like for my setup. Then I buy rings of that height. 

This is also one reason I like having an adjustable cheek on any rifle. I can make it perfect. The ads on foe the Impact is actually super affordable, and I would recommend it first.

 

[steve123]

Just mentioning this but I raised my cheek piece with washers, delrin sleeves that fit into the center of the washers, and longer screws, to raise the cheek piece. About $8 worth of stuff I got from Home Depot.

I lent my Impact to a friend and the cheek piece was too tall for him so he figured a even better way. He just took a square piece of wood about 4" long he found laying around his shop and put it wedged behind the long screws and the back side of the cheek piece. If that piece was painted black you wouldn't even know it was there.

 

[Smok3y]

Just mentioning this but I raised my cheek piece with washers, delrin sleeves that fit into the center of the washers, and longer screws, to raise the cheek piece. About $8 worth of stuff I got from Home Depot.

I lent my Impact to a friend and the cheek piece was too tall for him so he figured a even better way. He just took a square piece of wood about 4" long he found laying around his shop and put it wedged behind the long screws and the back side of the cheek piece. If that piece was painted black you wouldn't even know it was there.

Great ideas! Your idea is basically all that Manners does on their new add on cheek risers on their stocks. It works great. I can add or remove plastic spacers until it is the height I want it.