[Sebastian777]

I just put on an ATI Strikeforce stock on my mini. Love the stock so far, but am having a couple optics mounting issues. Hopefully someone here can give me some help/guidance.

I was originally hoping to put a 3-9x40 scope on the ruger mounts, and XS 45* sights on the top 7" inch rail. I ran into two issues. 1st being that the 40mm scope won't fit on the rifle because the top 7" ATI rail interferes. 2nd, while I could put higher rings to lift the scope above the rail or get a 3-9x32 scope, there is still no way it would clear the 45* rear sight that I plan on mounting on the rear of the ATI rail.

I have two possible solutions, but I'm not sure if either would work.

The first would be to find a compact scope that's short enough not to hang over the top ATI rail. I know there are pistol scopes, but I need a scope with a rifle eye relief length. Does such a scope exist? I want a magnified scope that is NOT battery dependent.

The 2nd idea MIGHT be an awesome solution if it will work. I'm thinking of getting a picatinny rail that mounts on the ruger scope ring mounts. Something like this:

With something like this, I could mount the rear 45* sight on the back of it, and the front one on the front of the ATI rail, thus giving me plenty of space between the front and rear sight for greater accuracy. I would also be mounting the scope further up on this newly added rail.
The Only issue I see with this is if the new rail and the ATI rail are at different heights. If there is any significant difference in the heights, I would think it would be impossible to zero the 45* sights. Windage and elevation adjustments can only go so far.

Has anyone else tried something like this with any success?
Is there a rail that would match the height of the ATI rail?
Does anyone else have any other ideas? Like I mentioned before, I want a magnified scope that isn't battery dependent. I also don't want to put a scout scope on the front of the rifle as the rifle is already unbalanced towards the front.

 

[justasking]

I have the GG&g rail. It is higher than the ATI rail. I keep a red dot mounted on it and use a 3-9x32 scope on ruger rings most of the time. When i want the red dot, I just switch them. I don't use the ATI rail at the moment, but it might be useful for offset sights someday...probably won't.

God bless!

Ron

 

[Sebastian777]

I have the GG&g rail. It is higher than the ATI rail. I keep a red dot mounted on it and use a 3-9x32 scope on ruger rings most of the time. When i want the red dot, I just switch them. I don't use the ATI rail at the moment, but it might be useful for offset sights someday...probably won't.

God bless!

Ron

How big a difference in height is there? A mm or more like a 1/4 inch? Do you think it would be possible to zero sights with one mounted on each rail?

 

[hottarod]

XS as in ghost ring iron sights?

I did not mount the top rail on my ATI stock. I put a Weigland rail on the Ruger mounts because the Ruger rings would not hold tight. With a 3 x 9-44 scope I have enough room below the front bell of the scope to pull the top fore guard cover(screwed on) without removing the scope so I can clean the gun and I don't have to remove the scope. No re-zero issues which is good because I loctited the heck out of my rail. There is 1/2 to 3/4 inch of clearance there. I don't use irons because I can't see with them any more.

 

[Sebastian777]

XS as in ghost ring iron sights?

I did not mount the top rail on my ATI stock. I put a Weigland rail on the Ruger mounts because the Ruger rings would not hold tight. With a 3 x 9-44 scope I have enough room below the front bell of the scope to pull the top fore guard cover(screwed on) without removing the scope so I can clean the gun and I don't have to remove the scope. No re-zero issues which is good because I loctited the heck out of my rail. There is 1/2 to 3/4 inch of clearance there. I don't use irons because I can't see with them any more.

Any idea if the Weigland rail height would match up with the ATI rail?
I'm using these 45* sights from XS:

 

[justasking]

How big a difference in height is there? A mm or more like a 1/4 inch? Do you think it would be possible to zero sights with one mounted on each rail?

I don't have it mounted, but from memory I would say more like 1/4" at least...i could be wrong, but it's way more than a mm.

God Bless!

Ron

 

[hottarod]

The ATI rail, including those rectangular sockets on the bottom is about the same thickness as my Weigland rail. Since those are designed to facet into the fore stock that is about how much difference in height there is. It is a lot to try and compensate for. Maybe mixing different height rings would get it close but then you'd have to shim the difference.

Even the Burris signature rings won't compensate for more than a .02 back to front difference so those wouldn't fix this.

 

[justasking]

Any idea if the Weigland rail height would match up with the ATI rail?
I'm using these 45* sights from XS:

I would say no to the height matching, but if you use offset sights it won't matter except cosmetically and possible interfering with a 40mm objective. That's one of the reasons i use a 32...i decided that some time ago on an old 22 that had a sight ramp interfering with a 40 mm objective. For me, 32 is big enough on a carbine. The other issue will be short sight radius on the 7 inch ATI rail. Sorry, I see Hottarod beat me to the answer.

God Bless!

Ron

 

[Wil]

Well, I've got the ATI with the Weigand rail on my M30. The only mod I made to it was to trim it off at the forward end of the receiver so I could remove the ATI top cover easily.
Using that rail and with a Burris scope (32mm objective) and Burris QD medium rings, I have ample clearance.

I have not mounted the top rail, so I can't give you an opinion there.

I do have an opinion on the rails, though. Buy the metal ones and chunk the plastic ones. Way too much flex, especially if you are using a front grip.

Wil