I have been looking at several scopes to put on my S&W 629 Stealth Hunter and noticed the eye relief listed were all less than the measured eye relief, I have long arms. What would I be giving up by trying to use a short eye relief scope?

You'd be giving up getting the gun out at arms length or being able to see the full field of view.

So if you have very long arms you might want to consider using a different mounting option for the 629. If you have the gun I'm thinking of it has a rail segment that puts the scope out forward but Warne makes a base that fits into the channel where the rear sight is. Yes, you would be giving up taking the scope off/on and having the iron sight option but it will move the scope a few inches closer to your eye. Leupold's have good eye relief and it can be adjusted by screwing the eye piece in/out. The Bushnell Elite 3200 has a constant 20" eye relief at all powers and the Leupold 2.5x8 is also pretty forgiving as you turn up the power. Burris is probably the worst for shortening the eye relief as the power goes up.

Here is the Warne mount on top of a model 57 which is an N-frame gun.

I agree about the Burris. I have one and will never own another. The eye relief sucks as you increase power. Same with their rifle scopes.

I've had good luck with Leopold and Weaver in regards to eye relief. No experience with Bushnell.

I also have long arms and I suggest you try the Bushnell 3200 2-6 scope. It works well for me. You might also consider a dot sight as most of them have unlimited eye relief.

X2

X3

I have Bushnell 2-6x scopes on my SRH, and T/C Contenders (.223, .22 Hornet and 7-30 Waters).

Red dots, as mentioned above are also an option.

I usually stick with Leupold's on my revolvers because they are lighter. I do have one Bushnell Elite 3200 on my SBH Hunter. About as low in power as I go is a 4x Leupold that I have on a couple different guns. I also have several Burris scopes in 3x12, one 3x9 and one 2.5x7 but all of them are on single shots. I really do prefer the variables. As with all hunting I keep the power turned down to the lowest setting in case something fast and close presents itself. If I see a deer, for example, out at 75 or 100 yards I immediately crank up to 5 or 6x. If it's much farther then I'll usually go to the max pretty quickly.

Nice groups Gary! I agree with your Leupold assessment. I have short arms, but the scopes allow so much flexibility with different field positions. I will say though, my old Burris 2X is pretty forgiving as well.

The fixed power scopes are not the issue it's the variables when you crank up the power.

Has anyone had any experience with Nikon Force XR 2.5-8x28 in regurads to long eye relief? It is claimed to have a EER of 9-30". I assume the 30" is at the lowest power setting which is what I would use most of the time. It has the longest EER that I can find. Leupold dosen't lilst the EER on the scopes I would be interested in.

You might find this article of interest.
scope specifications

I have to ask, how long are your arms? I wear a 35" shirt sleve and I don't have too many troubles except for the Burris at high power.

Agreed.
We had a couple of scope base manufacturers make extended pic rails for the 3-12 LER back in the day when Steve and I were using LER scopes as our primary LR optic.
Steve really had a hard time with the eye relief issue (Vertically challenged)

Yeah XP's are really hard to shoot prone without some sort of extension.

I've got a Force XR variable on my 460. At it's lowest power, it's got a decent eye relief. Crank it up to 8x, though, and you need to lean in quite a bit to see the view properly.

Bushnell Elite Handgun 2-6X on my SRH 454. I like it so much I'm going to put one on my ny new SBHH .41