At what range does the requirement of an other than regular scope ring base make a difference? Is it correct to assume that the normal mounting systems are good to 3-400 yards and then beyond that is a long range system required or is it scope dependent? Educate me!
Not all chamberings or boolits are the same. Nor are all scopes or mounting systems. Hint.
Here's a ballpark extrapolation of what will be yielded,under the courteous assumption of a rifle that is of sound bridge height geometry. You will effectively NET half of total erector travel,after attaining a sane zero.
So while contemplating mounting solutions is in fact,one facet of the criteria to evaluate,the scope itself is far more important. Tube diameter does not correlate in lineal fashion,to erector travel. As magnification goes up,erector travel tends to go down. Folks who open with a tube diameter,cetainly wouldn't know a MOA from a Mil...and would certainly prove it. Laffin'!
Further,few scopes ACTUALLY track/repeat with their erector systems and most glass that folks swoon,are amongst the schittiest "performers" in the mechanics of that which is MOST required.
Your best opening move is to shop scope MECHANICS and keep erector travel,the reticle and turret graduation scale(s) in mind. Glass that doesn't/can't/won't track will negate anything nearing effectiveness. Same goes minimal erector travel(even if it is spot on reliable) and a turret erector graduated in lineal dimensioning different from the reticle. Schit only gets worse,when talking second focal plane reticles,BDC's and CDS fhuqking bullschit. Though many Makers and Users "flaunt" same,which is never not funny. Hint.
The fast track to instant and longterm gratifications,is either 6x or 10x fixed glass,wearing a MilQuad reticle and MilScale erector turret. Everything jives and holdoffs in both elevation and windage,align lineally with the erector's values,so the combinations of arranging a solution,are boundless in versatility.
Of course,there are those who are reliably stumped in Mils,because 1/10 values are "tricky". Laffin'!
For those with an IQ of 17 or better,it is more than intuitive and nothing is faster or more precise. Hint.
While the 400yd line is a very modest distance with even a 22LR,there are scopes that will happily compensate those corrections with a "flat" base and others that simply cannot,no matter the mounting system. That due both integrity of the tracking/repeat and the volume of same,that is available.
In a nutshell,EVERYTHING beneath your zero range in regards to erector travel,is 100% fhuqking useless. The ONLY way to turn that tide,is with inclination and that can be done a number of different ways. Most important and THE most often overlooked,is making certain that windage is mechanically centered,in relation to the bore. If your windage isn't centered and you chase it via internal scope adjustment,elevation erector travel is stolen on the spot. Hint.
"Long Range" means different things,to different folks. I'd not assign a broad brushstrokes yardage determination to denote the happenstance,but would state simply that it is any/all distances beyond your zero range,where POA/POI intersections mandate correction to intersect. So it is different,for all boolits/chamberings/BC's/velocities. Hint.
I shoot a plethora of platforms and "Long Range" starts at 31yds with my FWB 300,due it's 30yd zero. My 22LR's start at 51yds,due their 50yd zero. My 17 Hummers start at 126yds,due their 125yd zero. Yada,yada,yada...all up/down the relative scale of velocity and BC. Hint.
27 MOA unitized rail here.
Now obviously a 51yd 22LR correction from a 50yd zero,is rather modest,but the start is always the fhuqking start. The bullet has crossed line of sight twice at said distance and is forever dropping beyond that range. Hint.
Using the 22LR chambering as an example,I'm happiest when they're sighted with one of the above cited optics(6x or 10x Fixed MQ),because of their parallax adjustment capability(rear focus) and incredible amount of erector travel (40+ Mils each). In conjunction with same,they have 10 more Mils on the reticle. So I strive to eek as much of the mechanical adjustment that I can. Why? EVERYTHING below the 50yd zero is 100% fhuqking USELESS. Hint.
So I had a batcha 75MOA 1913 extended rails made for Anschutz 54's,to grant that very thing and typically enjoy 38-40 Mils of erector travel with a 50yd zero and "flat" rings,with said inclination. Add the reticle's 10 Mils to the equation and it's easy to brandish a 700yd ++ capable 22LR.
Were you to state the chambering of interest,the projectile of interest and the platform being used...it'd be very easy to pinpoint both mounting and optics selection(s) and extrapolate their relative abilities,in regards to what said meldings would realize in POA/POI correction volume and their effective range of compensation,as applied to both distance and adjustment capabilities. Hint.
So rather than get hung up on mounting systems,you'd be wise to think sound optical mechanics first,second and last.
You've been led to water.
Hint.