Mounting rings vs single piece mounts

RicoAnthony16 · Jul 17, 2023

I am new to using lpvos so I am curious about mounting. I see a lot of mounts but no one using rings. Is there an advantage? I was thinking of getting rings so I can place them where I want and not be stuck by the set distance of a mount. This made me think of an lpvo's center of gravity. The weight seems to be behind the turrets, so maybe 2 rings behind the turrets would be better. I've never seen anything like that, so there has to be a reason. Can anyone teach me why this would be a bad idea?

osprey · Jul 17, 2023

I assume we are talking about mounting on a pic rail on a flatop AR? The cantilever mounts have several advantages. They are very robust and provide a solid mount for an optic. Having Two separate extra high rings does not scream robust. Also, they generally are machined very straight and won't pretzel your scope even without lapping. The separate rings should be checked for alignment and lapped if necessary, which is likely. The cantilever design will allow proper forward mounting of the scope all on the upper receiver pic rail. This is not necessarily the case with separate scope rings.

DirectDrive · Jul 17, 2023

RicoAnthony16 said:
I am new to using lpvos so I am curious about mounting. I see a lot of mounts but no one using rings. Is there an advantage? I was thinking of getting rings so I can place them where I want and not be stuck by the set distance of a mount. This made me think of an lpvo's center of gravity. The weight seems to be behind the turrets, so maybe 2 rings behind the turrets would be better. I've never seen anything like that, so there has to be a reason. Can anyone teach me why this would be a bad idea?

Probably the #1 reason, in regards to AR mounting is that the cantilever mounts you see everywhere, keep the mount confined to the receiver.
Having one ring on the receiver and one ring on the rail is considered undesirable, even though some people do it.
I've never seen a professionally built rifle set up that way, though.

powermad · Jul 17, 2023

Build a Mk12 and you can use rings instead of a one piece mount.

RicoAnthony16 · Jul 18, 2023

Thanks for all the replies. I guess I'll stick with a mount. I didn't think about having the rings lapped and I am too lazy for that.

Warne · Aug 1, 2023

It depends on what rifle you are mounting an LPVO scope on. If you mount on an AR15, the scope must be higher due to the cheek weld. Also, another reason one-piece mounts (AKA MSR mounts) are used on AR15-style rifles is for the cantilever. Since most LPVOs have generous eye relief, a one-piece cantilever mount allows the optic to be mounted beyond the receiver's rail yet still attached to the receiver just enough to give the shooter the correct eye relief. It is not advised to attach a scope with one ring on the receiver and the other on the handguard except when using a rail like powermad is using, which provides one solid rail without a break in it.

Having two rings behind the turrets is a bad idea because your scope requires even support. Having no support on the front part of your tube, you risk damaging your scope.

elitejake · Jan 16, 2024

The mark 12 has a single homogeneous rail that spans across the top of the handguard and top receiver.
A cantilever mount is superior bc of the lack of torsion on the tube.
Spanning the handguard/ receiver junction can be problematic at best. If you need to for optics position. A low riser with a single long compression rail is best with multiple cross bolts for alignment. Loosen the mounting screws for the hand guard and let the receiver be the guide for alignment.
I did it this way for my first NVG optic. It worked on every pig and coyote I nailed for 3-4 years out to 250y