I can't disagree more with the LOP issue, I am 6'1" and find that most 13.5 lop rifles are too small for me. even with a 14" LOP I find scopes like leupolds and conquests to have too much eyerelief almost, I have to run them as far forward as they will go. I think rifles are actually stocked too short in most cases.
as for rifles and heirlooms I totally agree with that, I have a couple guns my dad gave me and have been tempted to trade them but never will because it was something my dad bought for me. I am a big tikka fan however in 100years I wonder if that plastic could get old and brittle, if you are worried about that, its tuff to beat a ruger or winchester. but if you want an out of the box rifle to shoot and don't wanna dink with it, tikka is your unit. I have been shooting standard stocked rifles since I was 12 or so.
............Your LOP comfort zone is simply different. In my view, it doesn`t matter if a scope is moved more or fully forward towards the muzzle or not. It boils down to where one`s best comfort zone is. Sometimes the scope is fully forward and in other times depending on the person, it is not.
I had a 1.5-5x20 VX111 on my compact Ruger. That scope had quite a bit of eye relief. But nevertheless for my particular comfort zone, mounting it fully forward still wasn`t needed. Now it wears a 2.5-10x32 Sightron with shorter eye relief. The mounting tube still has 1/4" of mounting space remaining before it could be considered in the fully forward position towards the muzzle.
Where my Ruger compact is concerned, even with my size and longer arms using either scope, the 12.5" LOP without the slip-on pad or the 13.5" LOP with it on, there is enough mounting tube length flexibility to still have a good balance of comfort for eye relief.
It all depends on the individuals.
