# Scope mounts



## massmanute (Apr 23, 2012)

I have a question about scope mounts. A hypothetical shotgun with a rifled barrel and a Weaver rail needs to have a scope mounted in a forward position for an extended eye relief scope. The rail isn't far enough forward to use conventional rings for this purpose. There are some cantilevered mounts that have two rings integrated into a single unit that can move the scope forward a bit, but probably not far enough forward.

I see that there are also some single-ring mounts that could move the scope still further forward. However, what I don't know is whether a single ring would be suitable for mounting a conventional scope. For example, I am interested in a conventional 2.5X scope with an eye relief of about 10 inches. I am concerned whether a single ring would be solid enough, or whether the whole setup would be flimsy and prone to damage from forces exerted during recoil.

To clarify, the mounting scheme, imagine that the single ring mount is cantilevered forward. The ring would attach to the scope on the narrow part of the scope body, between the eyepiece and the middle part of the scope containing the elevation and horizontal adjustments. The majority of the scope would therefore be cantilevered forward of the single mounting ring.

There would also be a hypothetical .22 caliber lever action Henry rifle that would need the same treatment. The difference is that the Henry rifle has a 3/8 inch rail built into the top of the receiver rather than a Weaver rail.

What d'ya think?


----------



## BPturkeys (Sep 13, 2007)

OK, so are you saying you want to mount a "conventional" scope using one ring from a two ring set? If so , I don't think that would be a good idea. If your "conventional" scope is a short one you might get away with it but I think you would be running a great risk of actually breaking the scope...not so much from recoil as from a bump or drop. Maybe something like a "red dot" type scope would solve your problem??


----------



## massmanute (Apr 23, 2012)

BPturkeys said:


> OK, so are you saying you want to mount a "conventional" scope using one ring from a two ring set? If so , I don't think that would be a good idea. If your "conventional" scope is a short one you might get away with it but I think you would be running a great risk of actually breaking the scope...not so much from recoil as from a bump or drop. Maybe something like a "red dot" type scope would solve your problem??


Here are a couple of links to pictures of the type of scope mount I had in mind. (I hope it is OK to post links.)

http://www.boomingisland.com/p-757-cant ... -ring.aspx

http://www.nextag.com/Barska-Optics-Can ... rices-html

As you commented, I think these are usually used to mount red dot scopes. What i had in mind was to mount something more along the lines of the these scopes.

http://swfa.com/Burris-Scout-Scopes-C60.aspx

http://www.optic-sales.com/proddetail.a ... C_SPB2530B

This link has a picture showing the approximate location of where the scope would be mounted.

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=585469

Another possibility for a mount would be something like this

http://cgwgun.com/Scope-Mounts/American ... UT-30.aspx

which has two rings, but I don't think it would place the scope far enough forward.


----------



## BPturkeys (Sep 13, 2007)

I guess that the Barska mount would work, it appears to be made to use only one ring but I guess I am old school and just think a little more support(two rings) would give you the needed support in the advent your scope was dropped or bumped. How about this mount:
http://swfa.com/Millett-1-to-30mm-Scope ... 48519.aspx


----------



## massmanute (Apr 23, 2012)

BPturkeys said:


> I guess that the Barska mount would work, it appears to be made to use only one ring but I guess I am old school and just think a little more support(two rings) would give you the needed support in the advent your scope was dropped or bumped. How about this mount:
> http://swfa.com/Millett-1-to-30mm-Scope ... 48519.aspx


I agree that the risk of breakage may be greater with a one ring mount, and that is one reason I am hesitant about a single ring mount.

The one in the link you posted looks interesting, but my fear is that it might not position the scope far enough forward. If there were a two ring mount that cantilevered further forward it would be close to being ideal.

I suppose there is the possiblity of a custom-machined mount, but I probably could not afford the cost of that solution.


----------



## massmanute (Apr 23, 2012)

I found something that will work... not perfect but I would call it an 80% solution to the problem.

The scope on the .22 caliber Henry rifle is located in almost the same position as the scope on the .357 caliber Rossi model 92 rifle. It's a little bit higher and a little bit further back, but a reasonable approximation to the same position. The scope is basically the same on both rifles, an inexpensive NcStar SEPB2530B in the case of the Henry and a SEPS2530B in the case of the Rossi. It's a 2.5 power intermediate eye relief scope.

The dimensions of the Henry (model H001Y) are almost the same as the Rossi (version with 16 inch barrel). The idea behind all this is to use the Henry as a practice gun to simulate the Rossi, except it's a lot less expensive to shoot.

(By the way, I realize that mounting a scope on a model 92 is almost a sacrilege, but does make it a bit easier to sight.)


----------

