FX Impact, will UTG low profile rings work with a Hawke 8x32x56 scope?

[RAMJET66]

I have Ernest"s impact, & have been looking for a more powerful scope, well Friday I purchased the Hawke on the yellow for I think a pretty good deal , BNIB for $ 339 pay paled &shipped, but I need rings , there is a set on ebay for $ 22 shipped , they are quick connect, I would buy if they will work BTW they are 30mm weaver & the scope is 30 mm , I just don't know if the scope will have enough clearance on the impact, & will probably also try it on my colibri h/bird, thanks for any help I can get , roger

 

[Tominco]

I think it’s going to be really tight. The 56 bell is pretty darn big and you’ll be using low height rings. If you mount the scope forward enough, the bell should clear the front of the picatinny rail. But, if you need it further back, it might cause you issues. I think that’s what it might come down to – scope positioning.
You should be able to find an image of the scope rings with measurements. From there, it’s adding and subtracting measurements to see where you’ll end up.
Good luck! 
Tom

 

[Scott_MCT]

Tried that on my RAW and I think it would have cleared by a few thousands but it was simply too close. For a 56 mil I think high rings is the only way to go.

 

[RAMJET66]

thanks Tom, much appreciated, roger

 

[RAMJET66]

thanks Scott, much appreciated, I was hoping to be able to at least use medium if not low, I need to make up my mind today & buy it now with 3 day shipping , the scope is arriving thurs, roger

 

[Scott_MCT]

After looking at the rail on the Impact it seems pretty high already compared to the barel. I honestly think you might want to look at medium rings but you will need dimential data for your scope, rings, and Impact. After looking at the Impact I know I would want medium rings if they would work with a 56 mil scope. I say do some more digging, because high rings look like they might put the scope pretty high. Need some Impact owners with 56 mil scopes to chime in.

 

[Motive410]

When I mounted a Hawke 8X32X56 on my Impact, I used FX No-Limit Mounts (1 inch +/-). The scope fit the Impact, but was too low to see through. Remembering Ted's winter time review of the Impact, I viewed the video again and noticed picatinny risers. 1/2" picatinny risers should arrive Thursday.

My Marauder has No-Limit mounts...Sidewinder is optically centered...rear mount is adjusted .036" with feeler gauge....it's zeroed! I measured scope to cheek weld to determine that 1/2" riser was needed for the Impact.

Thursday, I will have had an Impact for two weeks.....haven't shot it yet. Kind of like waiting till you're married.

 

[RAMJET66]

"Scott_MCT"After looking at the rail on the Impact it seems pretty high already compared to the barel. I honestly think you might want to look at medium rings but you will need dimential data for your scope, rings, and Impact. After looking at the Impact I know I would want medium rings if they would work with a 56 mil scope. I say do some more digging, because high rings look like they might put the scope pretty high. Need some Impact owners with 56 mil scopes to chime in. Thanks again Scott, as soon as I read your response , I hit buy it now on the MEDIUM rings, I guese I will know Monday when they arrive, so much for 3 day shipping , they are coming from Michigan to illinois seems like a loooong time, roger

 

[RAMJET66]

"Motive410"motive , now ya got me worried, oh well , thanks for reply, roger

 

[Ziabeam]

Before you commit to "LOW" rings with an FX Impact, make sure your eye will center up with the scope regardless of objective size.
Everyone's cheekbone/stockweld is different, but I found;

• .535" saddle-height to be a tad low (GGG steel rings), 
• 1" saddle-height a tad high (Burris P.E.P.R. cantilever mount).
• Wound up going with a set of Burris XTR rings that had a saddle-height of 3/4" which puts the center of 30mm rings at 1.35"... far from low and still getting a firm stockweld.
• Low rings might mean having to mash your face to find center... YMMV

Edit:
Looked up UTG "low" ring spec's...
UTG 30mm rings have a 25mm ring center vs 34.3mm ring center I found optimal for my cheek-weld.
Unless you have very high cheekbones that 3/8" difference might be too low for comfortable scope view.
The "Medium" height rings you went with... if UTG... will put you a hair higher than the GGG rings that were slightly low for me. In other words you should have decent eye position PLUS the extra room for your objective bell.
Win-Win !!!