Does anyone use a 50mm obj.scope on there AR15 rifle?
What rings/bases do you recommend?

I HATE 50mm scopes on a bolt gun (too high) but there is no reason not to use one on a AR if you choose. I like scopes lower than most and can use Burris XTR 1/2in rings and get a good cheek weld. One inch high rings co-witness with AR irons so that is a half in lower than the standard.

The scope issue with AR's isn't height so much as getting it mounted forward enough (there often isn't enough room on the reciever for the forward ring and have proper eye relief). That is why most choose some sort of cantilever mount like a Burris PEPR or one from Larue Tactical.

I use 50 MM scopes on several of my AR's. The high rings take care of the bell interference and the addition of a tactical style charging handle helps on the ergometric issues.

Greg

I have a cheap RRA mount holding a nice Kahles 3.5 x 10 x 50 American! Go for it, you will enjoy using it.

I like the Burris XTRs as well though I went with the 3/4". Personally I think it is a good compromise, plenty of room for a 50mm.

Started with a Leupold mark cantilever base w/ separate low rings, nice set up but didn't need the offset so went with straight rings instead.

Good scope, no need for a 50mm but thats just my opinion. I own one, I dont' like it at all, my Zeiss conquests at 40-44mm gather more than enough light, even a 36 mm one, to be able to shoot at night with half a moon if need be.... or even just bright stars.

See no need for the big bells.

YMMV

I just put a Nightforce on my AR10. I found it needed 1.375" high rings, and then my eyes lined up just fine with it. I'm using a standard A2 stock.

A picatinny riser with some medium rings should work with most rifles. I have a 10 MOA MEGA riser with TPS lows for 2.5-16X50mm Bushnell 6500. A one piece mount like LaRue, ADM, Bobro, etc... is the way to go for AR's.

This goes for pretty much any scope in my experience. I'm running a 3.5-15x50 in a LaRue mount, a 2.5-10x24 NXS in a LaRue, and a 1.25-4x20 Leupold in JP Enterprises mount. All three do the job as they get the scope forward enough and high enough.

No downside to the 50mm on the AR an a lot of up side.

The larger exit pupil means you will be seeing through the scope sooner and will be faster up close.

When you are trying to hit with 10 shots in less than 2.5 seconds at 5 yds every little bit helps.



Of course this also translates into the field if you ever use your AR for more than a range toy.

I had a 3.5-10x50MM once and hated it. Throwed the balance off with the added weight and gave me nothing in return. 40MM for me.

I had the Leupold 4.5x14x50 on one of my calling AR's but replaced it with a lighter one , just didn't need all that weight for calling yotes.

Leupold vx-III 3.5-10x50 heavy duplex is my favorite scope, it sits in a Larue on my favorite AR.

With just star light, I can kill hogs all night.

sure don't need the 50mm and stars to kill hogs all night, a nice handy conquest will do that without all the fancy 50mm hoopla.

BUT if it floats yer boat, get after it!

Just that like many things, things are pushed to the public that are not needed, just to sell more things and make more money.

Hoopla? whatever.

I have a 3x9x40 Zeiss Conquest. The Leupold 50mm picks up more light at night than the Zeiss. I do not have a 40mm VX-III to compare my 50mm against, to say for sure the 50mm makes that much difference, or if the glass on the Leupold is better than the Zeiss.

But I will take my 50mm Leupold over a 40mm Conquest every day of the week, and twice on Sunday.

Yea the 50mm floats my boat, and has killed many more hogs at night because I see them better at night with it.

my next AR will have a Duralyt 2x12 x 50 on it. I agree with John Burns and like the big exit pupil a 50 gives you when set at low power. I also like what appears to my eyes to be a tad better low light performance. A cool idea would be that 5.5 pound DD rifle with a LaRue lt104 and the duralyt.

You may be right, all I can say is the conquest is more than clear enough to shoot with startlight only. Once you get to that point what more do you need? If I felt the need for more it certainly would be night vision, not hop "up" to a 50 mm L scope that peforms the same or according to you slightly better than a conquest.

Maximum usable exit pupil is 7 IIRC...40 mm divided by 3.5 = 11.43....4.43 more than the human eye can accommodate. I don't like the extra height afforded by the 50...I'll stick with a 40 mm obj.

A properly mounted scope on an AR is so high that 50mm objective is no issue.

Warne makes special steel/aluminum fixed/QD rings extra high just for ARs, required for proper cheek weld. (shown on pics below)

Question is why, unless you have some long range model like a DPMS LR in 300 SAUM. Mine wore a 4-16x50 Schmidt and Bender. 13 pounds locked and loaded.

Here's a carbon fiber AR with a Zeiss 44mm objective (for load testing) and in "normal dress" with Weaver K 1 w/12" dot, tactical light and laser.







This is a "bad people" rifle, so the latter setup makes a lot more sense.

Common sense answers don't belong in the AR thread... grins...

Common sense? Here is the answer to not being able to shoot those CAR's very far!!



Greg

I see Larry the Tool is posting again.....

"I don't like the extra height afforded by the 50...I'll stick with a 40 mm obj. " There is NO extra height IF the correct rings are used. But, I agree that unless your AR is a varmint or "sniper" rifle, big scopes and high "Xs" don't make a lot of sense.

Insofar as objective size goes....scopes are not all the same.
I can "see" a lot later with my NF 2.5-10x32 than some chi-com crap with a 56mm obj.

Insofar as a hunting rifle goes, there are a better choices than an AR in a semi-auto when you look at weight, power and handling.
Hardly the ideal platform for snap shots in thick cover or trying to persuade Mr Brownie he wants to die before you do.
As with "scout rifles", the "cool factor" counts for more than any real superiority.

Their assigned duty is killing people like the M14 and M-1 before them. All three do well at that, but very few ever went hunting.

Just as short, far faster on target, as light as 16" AR 10 and a lot more thump (9.3x62).



Faster on target, lighter than AR of same power (300 WinMag) and sub MOA accuracy.



In both, note low (aka fast) scope setups vs briefcase handle on any AR.

Looks like oldman42 is back talking about things he knows nothing about again.

My answer to 1000 yard shooting is no scope at all... grins.. works for me for years too...

El douche bag just is a gift that keeps on giving....

Where is that jpg of the douchebag just blabbing away when you need it....

Nothing wrong with irons. I've done a bit of that over the years to. Not the best thing though for whacking 300 + yard PD's or really getting the ammo from 1 1/2 MOA down to 1/2 MOA for load development for match shooting.

Greg

Please impress us with your awesome accomplishments. We wait with baited breath. You don't own any of those rifles, have never hunted any of them for real big game ..... but I know nothing ?
Uh Huh, when pigs fly.

Yep, PDs and clay targets are rough with irons at 1000... grins.. and I do use a scope for load testing FWIW.. just shoot in service rifle matches where its irons only...

I'm getting old so I'll be doing the scoped F-class thing. I hope I don't shake too bad on my belly!!

Greg

F is on my bucket list... may never get there though....still want to shoot a 200 at 1000 with my AR service rifle, and that will take some time, aware of 1 or 2 only ever fired... one with ammo that I donated to the AMU so they could work on making better 1000 yard ammo with heavy bullets... that one seemed to work out pretty well for them...

I figured it would be a way for me to use my M/O precision rifle skills and I know I am a bit old to start the HP sport at 61 going on 62.

Greg

Larry "the tool" Root that has to be the dumbest, most ignorant statement to date....you really aren't very intelligent are you.

All you have to do is post and it is evident....

Look here stupid

and here dipstick


here too dumbass


here also you moron

and again because you are so stupid

When you're insulted by a waanabe like EH, you have made the grade.

When are we going hunting to together ? LAFFIN !

I doubt EH is stupid enough to go into the woods with an idiot with mult. personalities and a firearm.

That and the whole azzhole thing.....

George

Oldman coming back up is proof that some turds float.

Oh you hurt my feelers dumbass........


dedicated to you Lying Larry!




I'm pretty sure everyone here knows who the "wannabe" is .

"I'm pretty sure everyone here knows who the "wannabe" is ."



Without a doubt!