My vote, which is worth what you paid for it is, use high rings, and buy a stock pack that you can add comb height without modifying anything.

Please enlighten us as to why that is.

A scope sitting in high rings is not problem provided the rifle/ reticle is kept level with the world. Say a scope is sitting a full 3" above the bore, center to center, and zeroed at 100 yards. The holds are the same out as far as one wants to shoot as a scope sitting 1 1/2" above the bore, center to center. That is, beyond the zeroing distance.

The trick comes in when trying to hit inside 1 MOA inside 100 yards. The higher the scope is above the bore, the more correction is needed, due to sight offset. But no matter how high the scope is, precision at any distance is still achievable.

I think hunters wanted the scope closer to the bore because they weren't shooting level. And the closer it is, the less cant error was introduced.

I've shot 1 MOA from 7 yards (.07") to 77 yards, in 10 yard increments. 7 yard correction is the same as 875 yard correction on my rig. Have to hold it level, and have to hold it still, same as any shot.

Proper cheek weld, and natural point of aim are more important than keeping the scope close to the barrel. A scoped rifle should be set up to gain a sight picture almost as fast as gaining a bead on a shotgun.

In other words, you cannot come up with a single reason why it is a good idea to have the scope way up high above the bore, but you can come up with a bunch of "if this and if that" that explain how somebody could (maybe) overcome the handicap.

Then you disparage hunters for "not shooting level" because they have sought to keep their scopes down low for as long as scopes have been around.

I hate to break it to you, but there's a bit more to it than that. A lot of it has to do with a natural sight picture that one doesn't have to strain or crane - to obtain.

My rule of thumb on this is to close my eyes, then mount the rifle to my shoulder and get a good cheek weld as if to shoot. Then I pop open my eye - and if a good sight through the scope is not apparent, then I know that it is too high, or (more often) too far forward or back.

After doing this hundreds of times with hundreds of hunting rifles, I have yet to encounter a condition where the scope was too low... I cannot really say that this surprises me, though. Anybody with common sense should be able to figure out why hunters have always assayed to get a scope as low as they possibly can.

He never one time said it was better to have a scope high, but that it wasn't an insurmountable issue. Maybe you have the reading comprehension issue you so like to point out in others.

For instance, high rings+a cheek riser over come basically every issue you listed. Still provide a natural head position, and proper sight picture.

Once again its mostly personal preference. People are built differently. I like scopes low and don't care for stock risers.

There's a reason why shooters do not want the scope way up high above the bore.

I mean, besides the way it looks.

In other words, you cannot come up with a single reason why it is a good idea to have the scope way up high above the bore

I can.

Elevation.

I run one of my scopes very high to get the elevation needed for long range shots. 60 MOA base and moving to a 120 MOA base.

But charles probably doesn't want those facts.