Yet another scope Mount Height Question

[BumbleShot]

I just received a Leapers Bug Buster for my R7.  It's the short 3-9x32AO will illuminated reticle which requires 2 piece mounts.

While I purchased this scope, I also (thought I) bought medium 2 part rings with 8 bolts to each ring.  Well, the mount is the high variety.The scope now looks a little high on the rifle, with about 1cm of clearance under the objective.  It seems my alignment with the eyepiece is a stitch better on the little R7 with the high mounts.

I put the new scope height offset into chairgun2 and the second zero after sighting in at 10 yards is now about 35 yards with about 2/3" over the Line of Sight at 22 yards.  Previously, with medium mounts and the regular Leapers 3-9x32AO scope the second zero was 27 yards with a .5" high arc at 18 yards.  It seems to me the high mounts are just fine.  Better than fine, actually.  The scope cheeks nicely, and I get a second zero at an excellent range of 35 yards.

Last weekend my cousin and I were hitting a pop can at 52 yards with the R7 with the previous scope set-up (Regular Leapers TS 3-9x32AO with medium mount) with about a 5 inch holder-over, a little shy of the second lower mil-dot.  With this new config, that hold-over would be about 4 inches.

I've read on here, that you should want the lowest mount that will fit your scope/rifle configuration while "Giving good cheek" on the comb.

Would it be more desirable to find a medium height mount, or should this high mount work just fine or better than the last one?  How important is it to get the scope as low as possible?  A lower mount seems like more of a disadvantage since it brings your 2 zeroes closer together.  Are folks who advocate the lowest mount possible, just tying to straighten the arc to the sight line?  If so why would they want to do that with a good range finding scope???

Does anyone have any info or links that can shed light on scope height and this situation?  What is the disadvantage/advantage of higher or lower scope heights, if in both situations, you can cheek the rifle just as well in both situations?  

Thanks!

[leftcoast1]

Scope really depends on the range you are shooting but in airguns and especially a low powered on like the R-7 it really doesn't effect much. You really notice a big difference in long range shooting 500+ the higher mount gets you zeroed at long reange but you wouldn't have enough clicks to bring it down to shoot close in. You already see the differance it made you picked up 8 yards by going up a couple mills in height on the rings. I have found that at normal airgun ranges it makes little to no difference. You can also tell this by looking at must FT guns and that are all mounted on high to extra high rings. I guess being that a good cheek weld is not required or desired in springers the high rings give you a better heads up shooting posistion. Just my opinion.

[BumbleShot]

500 yards???  Man.  That's a dangerous range for game! (Wound vs clean kill.)

Cheeking the comb, I figured is about consitency, regardless of rifle type or power.  Actually, I try to use the blackout circle to align a shot more than my cheek on the comb.

Thanks.  You are helping me mitigate this moment of buyers remorse!  From what I can gather, the higher mount will actually help more than harm in this situation.

[leftcoast1]

Bumbleshot check this out. With the right equipment anything is possible  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VX4aqmbaGIo