Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Sportsmatch Rings for Picatinny/Weaver

I've had fantastic experiences with the Sportsmatch TO84 on Tikkas and rimfires. The rings place the scope nice and low for good cheek weld, are lightweight, exceedingly rugged, and I haven't had trouble with the screws and or the ring material stretching and loosening over time as I used to experience with Talley LW's years back. (And, yes, I torque to spec, and I thread lock the heads of ring screws, so I know they weren't turning loose from vibration, recoil, or general knocking around) Additionally, and far less consequential, I find them aesthetically pleasing on a hunting rig and they tend to not mar up the scope finish.

So, upgrading the scopes on a couple lightweight rigs, and wondering if anyone has experience with the Sportsmatch TO78's that affix to Weaver/Picatinny mounts?

How does height work out for 40-42mm objectives? Does the scope end up much higher than need be? They list the scope bottom to base height at 15mm.

Are they worth giving a shot, or is a guy just as well staying with any number of more widely available, heavyish duty aluminum scope rings I've used before such as Leupold Back Country, Warne Mountain Tech, NF X Treme, etc, etc?

Thanks for your time.

Bottom to base height of 15 mm (0.59”) would make them super low on the pic ring spectrum - if that measurement is correct.
Poster Kingston has an outstanding thread detailing pic ring heights. I’ll link it below.

The way I'm reading the dimension, 15 mm would be quite a bit higher than many in the thread you linked. IIRC, the height from the top of the base to the bottom of the scope tube is about 3 mm less than what Sportsmatch lists for dimension A below. So it would be about 1/2" from top of base to bottom of scope tube. Many in kingston's thread run 1/4". Am I seeing something wrong?

Whitetail,
You are absolutely correct. Bottom of base to ocular center, not bottom of ring.

AK- thanks for reference material. WT in MT - thanks for looking closely at the details.

So, the .59" actually puts them higher than comparable "lows" from other brands. I like getting the scope as low as possible, so I guess that about settles it. They'll be for dovetails only until they offer a low for pic/Weaver bases.

Sometimes I get the feeling that there's not too many people looking to mount scopes with objectives less than 50mm.