Nightforce ring height for 56mm scope?

Discussion in 'Long Range Scopes and Other Optics' started by adamb390, Jan 20, 2011.

  1. adamb390

    adamb390 Member

    Messages:
    6
    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2010
    Hey everyone, well im slowly but surely getting all the info i need to set up my new Sendero SF 2 in 7mm rem mag, a few days ago i ordered a jewell trigger set at 1lb. for it, and the proper torque t handle to reinstall my h.s. precision stock to 65 in/lbs., after i get the trigger in. I have decided to go ahead and spend the money and get a 3.5-15 nightforce scope, but when i talked to the tech. at NF he said i should go with a 56mm objective instead of the 50mm i had planned on. He told me that i should mount it with the shortest ring height they have which is .885.....which he said should be enough clearance for the 56mm objective. I was reading through some posts last night, and it seems like i read where someone had a sendero with the exact same setup-the low rings and 56mm objective, they said it cleared but they had to cut out the bottom of the objective dust cover that slides over it. I dont mind going with the 56mm, but i dont want my scope that close to the barrel, where i have to cut on whatever objective cover i get. Im just needing a second opinion about what objective, or what ring height i should go with on the 50 or 56mm NF. This is the first long range rifle ive ever set up so i want it to be right, and i know u guys proly have seen this setup or have advice about what i need. Thanks!
     
  2. SBruce

    SBruce Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,786
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Personally, I would go with the 1" high rings. The OD of the 56 is actually 60something, don't remember exactly. Granted, the 30 mm tube helps lift it a little, and a 0 minute one piece rail will lift it above the barrel a little too.

    Kirby recommended the 1" lift in my case. I'd rather have a tad too much lift then have to cut stuff or not be able to put on a lense cover.

    If we do the math, Let's say the objective diameter is 69 mm. 1/2 of that is below the centerline of the scope...........so we're looking at 1.358" of scope below the centerline. The one piece mounts I've seen are about 3/8" above the top of the action. So in theory, a 1" ring is minumum assuming a heavy straight contour barrel.
     

  3. Bill Maylor

    Bill Maylor Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    234
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008
    I agree with Bruce! I have a 300RUM Sendero/wNF 56 0 MOA base low Talley 1 piece ring-base, and there is just enough room for a scope cover my wife made for me! Which I love:rolleyes:. Bill Maylor..
     
  4. CRNA

    CRNA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    508
    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2010
    I have a Savage 7mm Rem Mag with a McGowen stainless steel match barrel in varmint contour. The muzzle is .800". I have the 56mm 5.5-22 Nightforce with a 20 MOA base. I went with the 1.125" rings. I MAY have been able to squeeze a 1.00" set of rings on mine, but it would be close to the barrel. It all depends on your barrel contour and your base. If you have a flat base, and a sporter barrel, then you would probably be ok. I just dont want my scope barely clearing the barrel.
     
  5. adamb390

    adamb390 Member

    Messages:
    6
    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2010
    I appreciate the help, and i know yall r explaining it correctly, i just dont understand everything like minute of angle, and i dont really know what the contour of my barrel is exactly. It is a stock sendero sf 2 barrel, and i plan on going with the 20 m.o.a. nf one piece base, i shoulda said that on my first post, i know:D. So if i go with the 3.5-15x56mm scope with the one piece nf base, i should go with the 1.00 or 1.125 rings...or higher to be on the safe side? Thanks again!
     
  6. CRNA

    CRNA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    508
    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2010
    I think 1.125" would be max. You should be fine with that. You could even probably get by with the 1 inch. I do believe that anything shorter would be getting it very close though. Just my .02.
     
  7. adamb390

    adamb390 Member

    Messages:
    6
    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2010
    Alright, gotcha. Thanks for the help! :)
     
  8. SBruce

    SBruce Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,786
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Better go with the 1.125". I just discovered that the 1" are not quite tall enough for my 56mm on Kirby's Raptor. Mounted up ok, but when torqued down I couldn't even get a piece of paper between the barrel and scope.

    I am even a little confused now, Kirby told me a 1" would fit, and NF is telling you that .885 will fit?

    There is no way a .885 would fit a 56mm scope on the Raptor.
     
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2011
  9. adamb390

    adamb390 Member

    Messages:
    6
    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2010
    Thanks for the reply SBruce, i haven't ordered my scope yet, but did get my jewell 1 lb. trigger installed, just kinda takn my time before ordering a scope, thats a big chunk out of the old bank account! I have been thinking of going with the 50mm objective the more i think about it so i can mount my scope lower, just not really sure yet if the 56mm is gona be a really BIG difference. I wonder if i could go with the .885 rings with the 50mm objective and still have enough clearance to get lense covers like butler creek flip up caps on the scope?
     
  10. SBruce

    SBruce Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,786
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Possibly, apparently it really depends on the action and barrel contour.

    I've got this Nesika action with very heavy straight taper barrel and .885 rings with a 50mm scope.....plenty of room for flip up caps and then some. On the other hand, the Raptor action and barrel would need the 1" high rings to put covers on the same 50mm scope, and still would be really really close IMO.

    I prefer 50mm, but I was able to get a 56 without a wait, so I bought it. Doubt you'll see much difference, except maybe last couple minutes of shooting light and then, probably only when on max power.
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2011
  11. texan79

    texan79 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    353
    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2010
    I have the sendero SF II, 20 MOA NF base and .885 (low) NF Rings. No cuttong required, and fits great.
     
  12. MontanaRifleman

    MontanaRifleman Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,068
    Joined:
    May 21, 2008
    I have the 5.5-22x50 mounted on a Sendero with the low rings and there is at least .25" clearance, which means I could mount he 56mm with the same rings.

    If you want the best answer, call NF. They will help you out and might point out things you have't considered, which was the case for me when I wanted to know which rings to use and the best configuration for my angle indicator and level. They're the experts.

    Keep your scope as low as practically possible and don't forget your objective cover.
     
  13. adamb390

    adamb390 Member

    Messages:
    6
    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2010
    Texan79, do u have the 50 or 56mm objective?
     
  14. texan79

    texan79 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    353
    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2010

    56. I had the same question, but talked to Ken and NF and sure enough, fits great.