View Full Version : This might be a dumb question, but...

05-15-2012, 12:38 PM
Is there any advantage to using a 1-piece scope mount over a more standard 2 rings setup?

I know some of the 1-pice mounts are angled so you can mount the scope further forward on the rifle, but other than that, is there really any advantage or is mounting a scope with two individual rings perfectly fine?

Rifle in case would be an AR15.

05-15-2012, 12:58 PM
1 pieces have more purchase on the rail this is important on small rails such as dovetail rails.
Picatinny I'd assume that 2 piece would be fine

05-15-2012, 3:35 PM
Yes, it is a Picatinny rail.

05-15-2012, 3:38 PM
It adds a little stiffness above the ejection cut out in the action and gives you more flexibility in scope placement, fore and aft.

05-15-2012, 3:39 PM
I think the other advantage is also QD (quick detach).

05-15-2012, 3:51 PM
I think the other advantage is also QD (quick detach).

Two piece rings have the QD feature, also.

05-16-2012, 6:44 AM
So the main advantages would be added stiffness and more flexibility in mounting positions?

05-16-2012, 7:25 AM
I think the main advantage is so that you don't have to put the front ring on the handguard or quad-rail.

If the scope you are mounting will allow you to mount it with both rings on the upper receiver AND give you the correct eye relief then there isn't a problem.

05-16-2012, 8:04 AM
I think you can get lower to the rail with separate rings also, which is probably not what you are looking to do on an AR-15, but would on a bolt rifle like R700, etc. LaRue, Spuhr and other manufactures have some really low separate ring mounts for those that are looking.

You typically can get MOA tilts more easily on one piece mounts, although Barret and others have two piece mounts with some MOA...just not as common IMO.

05-16-2012, 12:55 PM
Single piece is really all about guns with limited rail space like flat top Ar15s, which with many scopes leaves you with no place to put the ring on the objective side.