I note there’s a trend toward getting the rifle higher these days, taller optics, etc. I assume this advice is is part of that trend? I thinking that with more people wearing armor and such, pulling an M4 or similar into the pocket is being altered in favor of bring the rifle up to closer to eye level? I’ll stay with old school route of shoulder placement myself as it works well for me until otherwise required, but:
My opinion is that “they” have to come up with new nonsense to get butts in the seats of their classes.
“Scorpion!”
I get that there can be legit reasons for people running night vision and such to run a taller set up. But to me, getting your head up higher, even slightly, when there’s a chance that there’s incoming fire, is dumb.
The gun fads that come and go are silly. We’ve been running carbines for decades, and just now we all of the sudden need snorkle optic mounts and to keep our heads up high?
I enjoy higher mounts for running and gunning, but hate shooting prone with them. High mounts also enable the stock to clear earpro better, which matters depending on your headset. I think there’s a lot of good advice out there that was shaped by the situation it was developed in, but it certainly not applicable to all other shooting disciplines.
Everyone wants to be a more efficient rifleman. But everyone thinks that we all have the same case uses for it. The high mounts came from actual assaulters who do night vision assaulting things. We’re not these same assaulters but we’re all rifleman for the de facto namesake.
I know who I am and whom I am not, I am no assaulter. I honestly don’t care if I emit inside of my home wearing night vision if there’s a real threat because passive isn’t necessary for me. Plate carriers maybe because they most likely have stolen it from their last B&E and haven’t hocked it by now, but night vision, lol, nope, not the true narrative with methbillies and street thugs.
So with the above being said, my case use is different and I want a do all for my needs here 1.65 to 1.70 are the ideal heights for me. My headset doesn’t need a tall height to stay sealed, by the way. I need to be able to comfortably use prone, kneeling, and standing. So 1.93 and above is a solid caps lock NOPE.
But my argument is for me. My butt will stay where it’s supposed to be in my shoulder so it’s not pivoting and a cheek riser defeats the point of not having a too tall height over bore. I don’t want to do major holds until the distance reaches where I first zeroed the optic at. Keeping it stupid simple. Plus some schools of training have timed drills that are pass or fail and I have seen the instructor AAR’s on the too high not passing at 3 to 25 yards, lol. YMMV.
It’s not new, sudden, or a fad. You’re just seeing more taller mounts now because social media is a thing. We’ve been doing it for two decades.
As for getting the buttstock higher in the shoulder, that’s what dudes shooting upright were doing, largely subconciously, when absolute cowitness was the only option, and dudes were doing more dry practice than live.
Bringing the stock lower brought more recoil control, but also brought the optic lower. This gave us the hunched over turtle stance where we were sucking our skulls into our armor.
Taller mounts gave us the best of both worlds, when shooting from standing and kneeling is more important than prone. Speaking of which, lower third isn’t a noticeable negative change in the prone, and 1.9” to like 2.1” is just fine for most people, and will make BDCs work better on SBRs.
You’re only giving up the prone with really tall mounts like the GBRS Hydra. I use 1.93” Scalarworks or Unity VCOG mounts on all my personally owned guns, and my Mk18 is issued with a lower third mount for the Comp M5, and I’m happy enough with that. I hated it with absolute cowitness when switching shoulders to weak side.
One caveat with my OP, I do think things like a CQB hold like Eotech’s new EXPS DCR using a chevron for it to distinguish it as the CQB hold only and the dot for 50 plus is the way forward for those liking their assaulter high mounts. Not a bottom dot and the regular dot though, as it’s confusing for a good amount of us. But a chevron for the heads up and dot for precision past the CQB limits. Smarter, not harder.
I haven’t really messed with BDC’s, but this gets my attention.
Alters the angle at which the bore line intersects the optical line.
The thing that puzzles me is why so many people run their optics so high that they can’t possibly get a cheek weld.
Either they’re doing it because that’s what they are seeing everywhere else, or it’s an actual case use and if paying attention the copycats aren’t shooting past 25 or even 50, not laying down, not kneeling, and not from awkward positions, and a lot happen to be slick meaning no active aiming and not even a light for PID.
Will,
I don’t think I’ve shot with the stock in the shoulder pocket for the last 20 years. At least not when shooting in any “tactical” manner. I shoot an AR15/ M16/ M4 the same way I shoot a sub gun. Stock sits up high and along my jaw line.
What is laughable is the IG clowns who are shooting with their stocks down low in the shoulder pocket and cramming their neck and head down to the weapon. FIX YOUR STOCK PLACEMENT JERKY!!!
High mount optics aren’t expecting to use a traditional cheekweld.
People want to believe they are meal team six flying in on choppers and throwing grenades into tents. They aren’t. Most of them have never even touched a real grenade, never mind thrown one…
People used to shoot pistols with one hand sanding sideways. I am sure they all thought the first person to square up to the target and use two hands was a weirdo as well.
I swapped to 1.93" on my SBR which was setup with IR a few years ago when I got my NODs. I thought it was good. Then I tried an instructor’s rifle running a GBRS mount and realized that it was far more comfortable shooting passively under NODs. Maybe 1.92" isn’t tall enough? I will say, shooting with taller mounts in prone blows, but everything else seems to have no ill effects from it. Just have to re-learn your offsets for height over bore.
I honestly don’t understand what the fuss is all about. The shoot and move crowd does it this way for a reason.
If you don’t like it, don’t do it.
I can’t find anything positive for anything taller than even 1.70, know your holds isn’t a valid argument for CQB.
BTDT, it doesn’t work for me. And parts of my shooting involves prone. I need something that works in all positions, AGAIN, a very small percentage of us are actual operators who do this for a living and live at the ranges. And AGAIN, the shoot & move “crowd” is nothing more than enthusiastic persons that still isn’t an actual capability.
I don’t know what the fuss is with those upset that people are talking about it in any negative limelight, at least those talking about it are being honest with us and themselves.
[quote=“SBRlife, post:15, topic:484942”]
know your holds isn’t a valid argument for CQB.
[/quote]I disagree. We’re talking about like .2” on what, 2.7”? for 1.9” vs lower third. After some practice, you don’t think about it in CQB, at all.
I disagree as well. We’re talking a significant POI change. After some realization no matter how much you practice, it’s still slower in splits than a proper 1/3.
I’ve seen it in person at classes for timed drills. They go from whatever stance low or high, they level, they raise up to compensate, maybe get a shot off, time is over. Meanwhile I am two to the chest and one to the head and already done before the buzzer.
You do you though, I know what is in my best interests rifleman and again, there are zero positives at your height preference for me.
Running the stock high is all negative IMO. I run it down in the shoulder, bare, with armor, with NVD, doesnt matter. I do run a slightly higher optic because 1.5 caused nvd to hit the rifle in recoil, and i had to crunch down a bit more.
I get lower cheek/chin weld and it still enhances control.
If I wasnt using nvd Id not use an elevated mount.