To each their own... or shame on you...

[FATAL125]

Recently met up with a buddy who wanted to show off and sight in his new rifle.

When he opened the case something looked weird. Took me a second, but I realized the cantilever mount was "backwards". Already knowing the answer, I asked who installed the scope and mount. He replied "I did." Followed quickly by "wait... why?" So, I politely told him that I thought his mount was backwards. Then he said something along the lines of, he had to in order to get the eye relief correct. Didn't want to poo-poo on his excitement, so I let it be and we had a good outing.

I've never run a cantilever mount, but I've also never seen one cantilever to the rear. I did a quick Google search before I decide to pose the question here, but came up with a split of "it doesn't matter" and "your an idiot and shouldn't own a gun".

So seriously, does it really matter which way it's mounted? If so, why?

Read More

 

[Kruel J]

Because backwards looks stupid.

 

[FATAL125]

Because backwards looks stupid.

Its funny, cause it's actually kinda true. Its goofy looking backwards.

But still... is it wrong?

 

[bradsteen]

The cantelever mount is supposed to keep the point at which the scope connects to the weapon on the receiver. With an AR the scope may need to be a little forward. Traditional rings would land one set of rings on the receiver and one on the handguard, which is not ideal because the handguard is more likely to shift, affecting zero. It's certainly not in the "you shouldn't own a gun" category of sins... That should be limited to "cannot operate a gun safely". No reason to get spun up about it - just explain the purpose of the cantilever and let the dude do what he wants. It's his gun and his shooting experience.

 

[Yarome]

It depends on the type of rifle, the mounting system, the cantilever and scope.

If you're talking something like an AR with a "typical" modern scope, then functionally... "standard type" cantilevers... it doesn't matter... so long as it doesn't interfere with ejection or so far back that it interferes with the charging handle.

It does look a bit goofy, but under most conditions, there is nothing "wrong" with it.

 

[Koda]

But still... is it wrong?

Its subjective because it can work, but what I recently learned is cantelevers come in various offsets to accommodate various eye reliefs. If you have to mount it backwards you bought the wrong mount.

 

[FATAL125]

The cantelever mount is supposed to keep the point at which the scope connects to the weapon on the receiver. With an AR the scope may need to be a little forward. Traditional rings would land one set of rings on the receiver and one on the handguard, which is not ideal because the handguard is more likely to shift, affecting zero. It's certainly not in the "you shouldn't own a gun" category of sins... That should be limited to "cannot operate a gun safely". No reason to get spun up about it - just explain the purpose of the cantilever and let the dude do what he wants. It's his gun and his shooting experience.

Awesome, thank you.

I'm not spun up at all, as I fit in the to each their own category. Assuming there isn't an actual reason for something to be done a certain way.

What you said makes perfect sense, so I appreciate that.

 

[Yarome]

Its subjective because it can work, but what I recently learned is cantelevers come in various offsets to accommodate various eye reliefs. If you have to mount it backwards you bought the wrong mount.

Or... you shouldn't be using a cantilever at all. Standard rings will likely serve you better. As long as your rings stay on the upper receiver rail... there's really no point to a cantilever unless you're going with a quick detach.

 

[FATAL125]

It depends on the type of rifle, the mounting system, the cantilever and scope.

If you're talking something like an AR with a "typical" modern scope, then functionally... "standard type" cantilevers... it doesn't matter... so long as it doesn't interfere with ejection or so far back that it interferes with the charging handle.

It does look a bit goofy, but under most conditions, there is nothing "wrong" with it.

So in this case he got a new POF Rogue. Warne mount with a Vortex scope.

Appreciate the response.

 

[FATAL125]

Its subjective because it can work, but what I recently learned is cantelevers come in various offsets to accommodate various eye reliefs. If you have to mount it backwards you bought the wrong mount.

Didn't know about the various eye reliefs available. Again, I've never run one so I've never really looked into it.

Appreciate the response.

 

[Yarome]

So in this case he got a new POF Rogue. Warne mount with a Vortex scope.

Appreciate the response.

Yeah. That would be fine on a flat high rail and high cheek weld (IE., AR). You didn't mention what rifle he was packin.

 

[FATAL125]

Or... you shouldn't be using a cantilever at all. Standard rings will likely serve you better. As long as your rings stay on the upper receiver rail... there's really no point to a cantilever unless you're going with a quick detach.

That was my thought too... why not use rings. Where his scope landed on the receiver, rings would have fit just fine.

 

[FATAL125]

Yeah. That would be fine on a flat high rail (IE., AR). You didn't mention what rifle he was packin.

Yeah, my bad. I neglected to mention some important details...

 

[Yarome]

That was my thought too... why not use rings. Where his scope landed on the receiver, rings would have fit just fine.

Yup. That's pretty common with folks running backward cantilevers. All you can do is smile and think quietly to yourself, "rings buddy... rings!".

 

[FATAL125]

Yup. That's pretty common with folks running backward cantilevers. All you can do is smile and think quietly to yourself, "rings buddy... rings!".

Yes sir. I started with rings on my first bolt gun and I've yet to run into a situation where they didn't work (even on an AR). Not hating on cantilever, just never needed one.

I'll need to have him send me a pic, but now that I'm really thinking about it, I'm pretty sure the front of the mount where it attached to the rail crossed the plain of the receiver/handguard...

 

[Koda]

I haven't exactly paid attention to this but my observation is most dedicated AR type scopes like LPVO's have the turret housing too far forward requiring a cantilever mount. More traditional hunting scopes Ive seen a few with traditional rings on an AR and thats ideal too. Longer range shooters might often shoot prone so then back to mounting the larger scope farther forward requiring a cantilever mount.
My guess overall is most AR options need a cantilever but not all.

On my 223 I couldn't mount my LPVO not quite far enough back for me, so I bought a different cantilever with less cant and now its great. I shoulda saved myself the money and mounted the first mount backwards....
but that woulda looked really silly.

 

[Yarome]

I haven't exactly paid attention to this but my observation is most dedicated AR type scopes like LPVO's have the turret housing too far forward requiring a cantilever mount. More traditional hunting scopes Ive seen a few with traditional rings on an AR and thats ideal too. Longer range shooters might often shoot prone so then back to mounting the larger scope farther forward requiring a cantilever mount.
My guess overall is most AR options need a cantilever but not all.

On my 223 I couldn't mount my LPVO not quite far enough back for me, so I bought a different cantilever with less cant and now its great. I shoulda saved myself the money and mounted the first mount backwards....
but that woulda looked really silly.

A lot really do need cantilevers. Some honkin big/long optics these days and the upper rail really isn't all that long. Especially if you're using flip up irons as well. I only run a couple with scopes (typically red dot and maybe a magnifier), but the ones I do have cantilevers. If I could use rings on them though.... I would.

 

[Koda]

I had to look it up. Sub 6lbs in a 308 semi is impressive, would make a nice hunting platform. The POF Rogue is a really sweet looking rifle....

 

[asiparks]

as long as the mount isn't angled, ( I have one 20 MOA ADM cantilever), then it's going to work fine.
I just got another scope for a bolt gun and I only have 1 spare mount that will fit. And it's cantilevered and I have to reverse it to get eye relief. And it looks arse. But it works.
But it does look arse.

 

[FATAL125]

I had to look it up. Sub 6lbs in a 308 semi is impressive, would make a nice hunting platform. The POF Rogue is a really sweet looking rifle....


View attachment 1436860

Yeah man, POF makes some nasty shiz!

That rifle was an absolute dream to shoot. All things considered, a pretty fair price too.

They got a lever 9mm I really want to get my hands on also. Unfortunately, I live in a dumb state and their lever gun has a detachable mag and threaded barrel so I'm SOL for the time being...