M14 Forum

CircleT

I have a SA Scout it came with the forward of the action rail. I am wondering what the advantages or disadvantages are of using the forward rail as opossed to mounting a reciever scope mount. Any info is good I am clueless here. I was also wondering if the scout mount being clamped to the barrel and therefore disrupting the harmonics of the barrel might disturb accuracy. I am not an experienced target and or bolt and or scoped rifle shooter so I have much to learn but I am familiar with the major impact harmonics have when cutting metals in a lathe and I have to believe that they must play an important role in accuracy of a rifle. Hope to learn something more today.

David Sinko

This is a good question and I have been wondering the same thing. My original plan was to buy a Sadlak mount and I came very close to getting one but I was very concerned about my inability to put together any accurate loads using 150 gr. bullets for my SOCOM 16. I can usually shoot aperture sights rather well but it just wasn't happening with my SOCOM and my handloads. Is it the gun or is it me? Do I want to invest in a good scope if the gun isn't accurate? How do I find out? Turns out my brother had an inexpensive Bushnell 2-6x EER pistol scope that came installed on a nice Contender he had bought used numerous years ago. He never used that scope and said he'd loan it to me along with a set of cheap aluminum rings, I believe Cabela's brand. I'm no fan of cheap equipment but I didn't pay for this stuff and I felt I had nothing to lose by trying it out. I figured it would be a good opportunity to evaluate the scout scope concept as well.

So, I installed the scope as far forward as possible. There is a bit too much eye relief for it to be perfect, but the results were satisfactory. There is just enough clearance with these rings to make it work, and I'd say the ring height is just perfect. Yesterday at the range I was able to sight in and reach some conclusions.

First, my gun does not shoot the 150 gr. Core-Lokt or Hot Cor well with or without a scope. I tried some lighter bullets (90 gr. Hornady XTP and 110 gr. V-Max) and accuracy improved dramatically. Finally, I had four rounds of Federal 168 gr. Gold Medal Match that were given to me with a bunch of once fired brass and are the only factory loaded rounds I have. I loaded them into the magazine and put a different round on top to compensate for the manually chambered first shot, which I shot at a different target. Then I carefully shot the four rounds of match ammo at 100 yards. To my astonishment, it was a one hole group! I am happy to report that my SOCOM is indeed very accurate with the right loads, and for some reason I can't shoot my open sighted M1A as well as I do my other open sighted rifles.

The scout scope concept works for me. On 2x I was able to quickly and accurately shoot targets at very close range. Obviously, 6x will dramatically increase the versatility of this rifle. I am happy with the performance of this setup.

One critical question for me remains. How good is Springfield Armory's scout scope base on the SOCOM 16? Do they shoot loose over time? Is it really a good, solid platform for scope mounting or just a cheap selling point? I really need to know. At this point I'm considering either a good variable scout type scope in a good set of throw rings or a 1x4 conventional scope in a Sadlak mount. The only unknown variable here is the scout scope base. Can somebody tell me what to expect with this if I decide to go this route? I'll do some more shooting with the borrowed scope and rings and see how well the whole thing holds up, but I'm looking for long term durability.

Dave Sinko

CircleT

Thanks Dave I like lots of info and hearing other peoples testing results. I was also wondering if the scout mount being clamped to the barrel and therefore disrupting the harmonics of the barrel might disturb accuracy. I am not an experienced target and or bolt and or scoped rifle shooter so I have much to learn but I am familiar with the major impact harmonics have when cutting metals in a lathe and I have to believe that they must play an important role in accuracy of a rifle. Hope to learn something more today.

M14sRock

I have several rifle with the SAI or Rooster33 forward mounts. They hold tight just fine. I use Aimpoints with these mounts, but if a low power scope is desired, they work well.

I like having the action open (not blocked by a full receiver mount), and the full peripheral vision granted by forward mounts.

Bimmer

I think that this is backwards. The long eye-relief scopes typically have horribly narrow fields of view compared to normal scopes at the same magnification.
This is THE major problem with a "scout scope," AFAIK.

Another advantage of receiver mounting is the ability to use the iron sights with the scope still in place.

I just got a receiver mount (a Bassett), and I think it's great.

YMMV,

Bimmer

CircleT

Bimmer... Do most reciever mounts allow use of iron sights with scope attached? I was led to beleive that scout mounts allowed for use of iron sights and reciever mounts did not. Any info would be great as this is my largest concern on this topic. I really want to have my irons available without having to remove my scope. Thank you for your time and knowledge...

FormerDWCollector

Most receiver mounts have a channel for using the iron sights and cowitnessing with the scope.

Even my cheapie $25 receiver mount has the channel for iron sights.

My SAI Scout mount has a relief in it, but you can't cowitness with the iron sights- at least not with the ACOG or EOTECH I tried.

Take care and let us know how you decide to go.

RightHand

With the Sadlak mount, you can use your iron sights with the mount attached. We usually recommend Medium high rings which allow the best unobstructed view. Sometimes, a cheekpad also helps.

Bimmer

I think you've got this backwards...

Most receiver mounts allow use of the iron sights, as long as the scope bell isn't in the way (I think this is why Sadlack recommends medium rings instead of low rings, so the scope sits high enough to not be in the way of the iron sights).

I have no problems using the iron sights with my scope mounted. I've got a 40mm outside diameter scope bell (32mm lens), low rings, and Bassett's rail mount.

My understanding is that most "scout" mounts put the scope so low that the iron sights are useless. Part of the appeal is that the scope sits low, but the downside is that it's then in the way of the irons.

Bimmer

edward5759

The scout mount was meant to be used with both eyes open.
Its a quick pick up in the scope.
The people I know who use this type of system are very good at it, rapid work, It does well out to six hundred yards and beyond. I don't like the scout scope set up but the guys I know
love them and have used them in combat.
I am in the 60 age group. the guys are in there 60s so it not new one was a PJ and the others were spooks and stuff.
That’s my 2 Cents worth
ed

Bimmer

I understand this, and I know that this is why "scout" scopes are usually relatively low magnification.

I don't understand why the same couldn't be done with a low-powered receiver-mounted scope.
It would seem natural that the shooter would keep both eyes open when using a 1x or 1.5x or even 2x or 2.5x scope.

Learning learning learning,

Bimmer

w6zip

I have been looking at various posts related to the scout scope vs receiver mount and see that most have their pros and cons to each configuration. But I still have not found definitive answers based on the question of how the mount affecting accuracy or to how specifically the harmonics in the barrel change due to the mount with a scope and rings installed-- I have a (Springfield) M1A scout with a Burris scout scope on low mount Burris tac rings. It is doing well at the 100 yard range, but I am considering the jump to a Sadlak Ind. Airborne model steel mount and variable power scope installed to take advantage of the iron sight capability as well as increased accuracy. Springfield Armory has the handguard cover in Mossy Oak to replace the cover with the cut out for the rail mount and clamp. Just wondering if others have done the same based on better experiences- Thanks for any comments from the knowledge base willing to chime in-
John

winki

What kind of scope rings or mounts do you use on your aimpoint? What gives you the best results? I was looking into a Leopold QRW ring to hold that sucker on there.

RAMMAC

I've posted pictures of my setup many times, but for the sake of ensuring that the newer members understand what I'm talking about, here it is once again (I apologize to those who have seen this a thousand times).


I use an Ultimak M8 rail in place of the hand guard and a Nikon Encore 2.5-8x28mm BDC scope.

As far as the peripheral vision issue is concerned; they aren't referring to the field of view within the scope's view, they are talking about being able to see outside the scope to the right and left. Having the scope forward allows you to see what is going on around you better than a scope that is closer to your eye. This gives you a chance to be aware of threats quicker. When the scope is closer to your eye you are only aware of what's going on within the field of view of the scope.

My SOCOM is my "GO-To" rifle, the scope has a Bullet Drop Compensator (BDC) that has two circles spaced under the reticle's cross hairs. The cross hairs are zeroed for 100 yards, the circle under the crosshairs is zeroed for 200 yards and then the second circle is zeroed for 300 yards. With this setup I can hit out to 400 yards very easily and still get on targets that are under 100 yards quickly. My normal 100 yard groups are 1 MOA plus or minus about quarter inch depending on me and the weather.

I got rid of the original factory rail without ever testing it so I can't tell you how it performed but I can tell you that a scout style scope setup is faster and far more versatile that any rear mounted scope.