10/22 scope mount to low?

[Merc1138]

Just going by the objective lens doesn't tell you anything. You need the actual outside diameter of the bell surrounding the objective lens. Typically scope manufacturers list this on their product pages, and some retailers do as well.

[RawHP]

I know conventional wisdom says to mount the scope as low as possible, but in my opinion, you really need to take into account the comb height of your stock. If you shoulder your weapon and put your cheek on the comb, you should naturally be looking straight through the scope. Otherwise it will never feel right when shooting, and make it difficult to have a consistent hold. I think the low mounting may be more important with flatter shooting rounds, not 22LR.
I know when I eventually move my action to the silhouette stock that I'm finishing, I'm already anticipating having to spend money on new rings.

[Mayor McRifle]

One more question. Is the scope to big?

For me it is. I would get a rimfire scope for a 10/22.

[TMB 1]

For me it is. I would get a rimfire scope for a 10/22.

It's bigger than I'd want for a 10/22 like OPs. But the Center Point scope is a good scope for 22s and pellet guns. I have one on my pellet gun it's adjustable from 5yds to infinity. Works really well for zooming in at closer 22 & pellet gun ranges.

[JTROKS]

It seems you just have to get a higher base or rings. When mounting a scope with minimal clearance for the bell you have to consider barrel flex when firing. I know a 22lr doesn't create much whip even with the factory barrel, but it still does.

[Merc1138]

For me it is. I would get a rimfire scope for a 10/22.

The size of a scope doesn't have anything to do with it being "rimfire". Hell, the OP is using a 4-16x40, which isn't going to be much different than a 3-9x40. There are lots of people who even go as far as using something like a weaver T36 or T24 on a rimfire rifle, both of which also have 40mm objectives so the front end of the scope would be a similar size(even though they have much higher magnification). Use of the rifle can make a difference, and being rimfire can matter for some aspects of a scope, but not "size".

I know conventional wisdom says to mount the scope as low as possible, but in my opinion, you really need to take into account the comb height of your stock. If you shoulder your weapon and put your cheek on the comb, you should naturally be looking straight through the scope. Otherwise it will never feel right when shooting, and make it difficult to have a consistent hold. I think the low mounting may be more important with flatter shooting rounds, not 22LR.
I know when I eventually move my action to the silhouette stock that I'm finishing, I'm already anticipating having to spend money on new rings.

Right, but building up the comb of a stock isn't difficult to do and since it's only a .22lr the position of the butt against the shoulder isn't quite as critical. But since the OP mentioned replacing the barrel later on anyway, it's safe to assume he might also swap the stock(rather than attempting to modify the existing stock, which might be doable but... meh) and get something with less of an angle in the comb and likely fit bitter in general(but he still shouldn't be surprised if new rings become part of the equation again as well).

[Citadelgrad87]

IMHO that scope is nowhere near too big.




Here's mine, 50mm objective. Super bright, easier to see what I need to see.

[JTROKS]

I had an 8-32x44mm on my 10/22 a few years back. I switched to a 6-24x40 for range informal target practice just to be in the same power range on my AR Varmint rifle.