Optic Height Over Bore: is HIGHER actually better? Green Beret breaks down positives vs. negatives.

Love your content!
I’d love to hear you go more into depth about NG SF if possible. Thanks for the time you put into making this content for us all!

I hip fire my gun only, no aiming is needed.

Are you saying only combat proven SF are essentially the only people that should be using the high risers?

If you aren’t SF, how many rounds would be practical to get to the point of having serious confidence making that 4-5” calculation be subconsciously made? Let’s say the training was taken very seriously and the individual trained hard. Would a person still need to prove their training in combat before having a riser would be practical for them?

Remember that having your head up also helps you see that something is about to cross behind your target, too. Tall height over bore is the way to go imo. Being able to shoot with a hold is a basic entry requirement to being able to shoot practically at all. I don’t think people need hundred thousand plus round training AND real gunfights to learn to hold over under stress. You just excluded most SWAT team members. I agree with almost all of this and really enjoyed your vid. Subscribed

I'm far from an expert but my opinion is that higher setups make sense only at short distances ("cqb" if you will) where their advantages really shine compared to lower height over bore, problem is that you can't really choose distance of engagement in real life. That's why I think that a piggypback reddot on top of an acog or lpvo gives the best of both worlds, a magnified optic closer to the barrel for longer shots and a taller reddot for close up. As this kind of setups are expensive, better practice with irons and learn the fundamentals before buying fancy glass.

I got a 3 foot riser so I don't gotta waist time aiming all the way😈

I think an important conversation/demonstration needs to be had. Most guys that run these mounts are just blasting cardboard inside of 25 where holdover doesn’t matter at all. I think the real trick is getting guys to take very low percentage shots on obscure targets such as a dude peaking over the hood of a car at a random distance not just 7yds. Or a target holding a hostage, hell even a target barely peaking from behind a wall.

I run a Unity and I love it. The benefits from this mount are awesome but after I ran it through these more realistic tests I realized lower 1/3 is perfectly fine. You just choke up on the gun if you need to keep a super heads up posture. Personally 1.93 is my prefered height. It’s high enough that your holds are extreamly consistent up close but you still get enough cheek on the gun to shoot at distance. But no one makes and eotech mount for 1.93 so lower 1/3 it is

Cant you just zero at 25 yards?

Shooting prone? Seems like its harder with higher setups

Shooting prone at anything at a sustained rate over 100m but still under 300m is shitty with these high optics. Learn your OE, understand what you are setting up your system for and build as needed. All these are great key points of the Urban environment… wouldn’t want it this way on a mountain patrol . Or a patrol that leads me down to a village . Either way, I believe he said it clearly , train train train.

No one talks about height over bore head over bore.

Larger target when returning fire/engaging from behind cover than tactical turtle

What age were you when you enlisted as an 18x?

I built a short AR yrs ago and intended for close home defense distances. I put my red dot on a riser for that reason. To be able to get it in my line of sight faster.
This was way before GBRS group or anyone was talking about it. When I saw them come out with and start talking about it, I was like Holy shit. I didn't know anything about CQB. I just thought it it made sense to do it.
The only difference is that I zeroed my red dot at 21ft or 7yrds. My reason was that anything in the house would be that distance or less.
That platform is dedicated for CQB in my home.

Practice instinctive shooting from 3-25 yds. Both rifle, pistol and shotgun. Good video Semper Fidelis

Simple, just use a nuke for home defense 😂just kidding

ive heard the 1.93 height is best more or less cause its higher than 1/3 co witness but lower than the gbrs 2.+ height.

Tryna soak up all this knowledge before ww3 😂

I have a Burris P.E.P.R. Mount with pic rail caps, a scope mounted down low with a red dot mounted up top & yeah, the center of bore to the center of the red dot reticle is 5 inches… pretty high.
The solution to this problem, for me anyway, is to zero the dot parallel to bullet trajectory & consistently aim over your target the same distance as your offset. Obviously not ideal, but everything has its trade off.
I’ll finish with this: I think Red Dots are over rated. For CQB, I really think open sights, a laser & a mounted light are best. Anything more complicated & cumbersome will just reduce your situational awareness & give you more points for failure.
Just my .02.

FOG just said they threw their unitys in the trash because of this.

Running a Unity riser.. great working with NV..👍

Wound up really liking 1.93 as a middle ground between standard 1.5-1.7 height and the higher unity 2.26 or taller mounts (top mounted dots on LPVO's are usually around 3" height). Can still have a bit of a heads up display vs the turtle stance but not lose out on cheek weld for prone shooting and the holds arent as extreme

Special Forces dudes use an elevated red dot, if they do it you should too they know what gear works best

Handgun hunting a tall optic is the norm. My rifle is big enough. Actually would like my sights and red dot lower on rifle.

Am I missing something here? Why are people thinking they should have to move their head down to the gun? I always raise my shoulder to raise the gun up to my eye-level. I understand that a higher optic helps with night vision, and it could potentially be fatigue inducing over time by raising the shoulder for extended periods which is fine. Or perhaps heavy bodyarmor and gear prevent your shoulder being raised high enough, but I have never understood when people mention bending their neck 45 degrees downwards to get their head near the gun. You raise your shoulder up with the stock fully seated and the gun lines up with your head at a normal stance with your head straight upwards as normal and does not affect anything else. Am I a mutant? I can also get a perfect sight picture with an aimpoint T1/T2 style optic with a low profile mount on an AR. Maybe its high cheekbones and better shoulder flexibility, but I have never understood the need to have such a high opitic other than NV or fatigue. Plus, on a 5.56 rifle there is so little recoil you could literally just cheek weld only almost like the "cheek pistol" method and still have all the available abilities mentioned without a huge mount. I don't move my head position when raising or lowering a gun. Even if the optic is on its lowest mount.

Wow. This is one of the few vids I've seen a GB talk about a riser for an Eotech other than Mat Glover. The other operators I've seen talk about it is ofcourse DJ Shipley and GBRS. I was a little old-school with mine at first and mounted my eotech directly on the rail, just like I was taught how back in the day. Then I switched my thinking on that. I'm more in the middle. I don't have my eotech on a super high riser, but it is raised up. When you said; "Tactical turtle" it brought back a lot of memories of having to crunch down to get good sight picture. In the open desert that's ok, but then doing that going into rooms was uncomfortable. This new information has helped me out a lot. I'm comfortable right in that sweet spot of 'not too high and not too low'. The stuff you SF guys are doing for our 2a and veteran community is much appreciated. Thanks for sharing your knowledge.

huh? So impacts will be ~4" low. Assuming you're aiming center of mass or eyeballs, ~4" low seems fine in my non expert opinion. Referring to the aiming adjustment as "Doing the mathematical equation" is a bit of an exaggeration. Aim a couple inches high at close range, end of equation.

Being a taller guy I really just like the way I don’t have to duck my head down so much to find my dot.

The vortex holo I run has a 7 yd cqb reticle that makes it easy. Prone is a bit more cumbersome with 2.26 . I rarely shoot prone outside of zeroing. Earpro never gets in my way anymore when larping in my lane on Saturday. Training with any gear will close most gaps for the average joe. Good points to consider from you though

Summary: Higher optic = More Training Required.

Fan of lower thirds. Especially prone shooting. Much more comfortable than 1.93+

Good one. No more head down and looking up at target. Not comfortable

John McPhee, talking about how he cut the shirts off of bodies to inspect his team’s shot placement: “that height over bore sh*t doesn’t matter, it’s like 2 f***ing inches.”

This high rise bull shit 💩 is that !! Do whatever makes u comfortable!! I shoot without riser n its not different!!! We’re civilians not navy seals

I got different spots in my house where my height overboard is adjusted so when I come up practicing dry firing I have two dots and my top is where I need to put it that way I build muscle memory I make one red and one black. You have to make muscle memory happen or you're going to be out of hell in a stressful situation. First few times I went out shooting and was up close moving I realized I had to practice on that hide overboard a lot because exactly like he was said I was wanting to put the dot where I was wanting to shoot and was hitting the hostage in the face. Cuz I kept forgetting yeah put your dot at the top of the bad guys head😂. I haven't done the GPRS mounts I've got a higher scalar works Mount I like them because you ain't got a lot tight nothing in and they have a good return to zero for my experience. They also have iron sights that will match up and co-witness with your higher amounts they're pretty sweet. That's how I got my lwrc setup. It just comes down to guys you got to train with this stuff every day. even if its dry runs. Sorry about my spelling I was voice texting and I'm Appalachia as fugg.

Well, the only time I’d see where it would be crucial to make that mathematical adjustment would be in a hostage situation where the suspect would be using a human shield. Other than that 90% of situations against a human sized target all you’d really need to be doing is aiming center mass (or slightly above) and you’d be effective. So yeah overall with good practice.. the higher optic would probably be more ideal based on all the pros that come with it.

I run a 2.93 mount for both my prism optics. That’s 2.93 about be the rail I’m assuming, so it’s more like 3-3.10 inches and it feels so comfortable not having to hunch my neck. Also allows me to swivel my gun while still maintaining a sight picture within a high field of view from any given posturing. Feels almost like aiming under nods