I don't have a problem with advice, or removing the sight. I did that already. At first I wanted to avoid it until the link provided above showed how easy it was, and wouldn't hurt anything. The problem I have now is, where the scope is, is where my eye rests comfortably. I can make my scope look like the ones above, but I have to move it foreward before I can lower it that far. Then, when I held the scope there to test it, I had to crane my neck to get lined up with it, and the scope is too far away to work. My question is, is having the scope that high above the bore axis gonna cause me to have to make stupid adjustments to compensate? Basically, if its aesthetic, and it just looks stupid, I could care less, its where my eye naturally sits. If its a functional issue, then I will have to change it and just be uncomfortable when shooting it. The eye relief on this scope is stupid short, my forehead has to be like an inch away from the scope. The Bushnell scope that came on my other rifle is like 5"
Alright. I'll pick up some normal height rings tomorrow. We'll see how it works. I guess what feels comfortable to me, might not be the correct way of doing it. Saddle heights for normal 30mm weaver rings is .32 and high is .49. I really don't see how .17 makes that much difference but I don't know anything about it. The distance from the point of contact with the base and the point of contact with the scope on my rings is 19/32" that's .59". .32 is around 21/64", so about half the height of my rings. We'll see.
A side note question. Why does everyone recommend high rings on an AR, if they're such a bad idea? The bore axis is already pretty high on an AR.