Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Single Shots what scope on a Ruger #1?

I started to reply to a thread addressing a similar issue, but I did not want to hijack that thread so here goes...

I have 3 #1's and a #3.

Currently my #1A .243 has a Burris compact scope and Ruger dual extended rings-I have No problem seeing the entire FOV at all powers with ease.

My #1a 7x57 I have open sites on and am debating on what to do with it--dual rings and another Burris compact scope, or just leave it open sites--Sure is nice, light and handy with just open sites, but I wonder if I am putting my self at a disadvantage with a 7x57 and open sites-I am sure I will eventually scope it as my eye sight gets worse.

On my #3 .223 I have and older Redfield 2-7 scope mounted as far back as possible on regular rings and still have issues seeing the whole FOV at higher magnification.

I have a #1B 25 06 on the way and I think I would like a 4-14 or 6-20 power scope, maybe a Weaver for long range shooting.

Anyway, my questions are...
1. What scope can I put on the 7x57 with regular rings and still see the entire FOV at all magnifications without it looking goofy or me having to strain/crane my neck forward?

2. Same question for the Ruger #3...

3. Will a high power Weaver Grand Slam or Classic V series offer enough eye relief on a #1B to be accomidating and not look silly?

My #3 is somewhat functional with the redfield, but I have it mounted so far back that the scope kind of gets in the way of loading the thing...

Thanks

Dave <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/help.gif" alt="" />

Ive got #1rsi 243 mini 6X leupo on it. Been thinken bout a Holosight for it. There is new model XPL that is lower and 6" long 12oz. As I understand you can change out different rectials at will without loosing zero. $199 hard to beat. charlie in TX

When you say "regular" rings I know you mean "not extended" but do you want low or mediums?

I found that most any variable power scope in medium rings will position the ocular lens back far enough to get the full FOV at most all magnificaitons, and do so without removing the rear sight. Reason is the power adjusting ring moves the ocular back another inch or so over a fixed power scope.

If you remove the rear sight you can use low rings and use a scope with at least a 33 mm objective, medium rings will allow use of a 40 or 42 mm objective.

I solved this on my #1A 7X57 with a Leupold VX-1 2-7X33 in Leupold low rings. Optically its not as good as the newer VX-2's but it's the exact same scope as the older Vari-X II and certainly is no slouch. At $179 from Midway the price was really right as well. One thing I really like is that you can position this scope midway between the two rings so it looks very balanced. With many variables you have to move the scope back so far that the entire rear half just hangs out there and looks very awkward to me.


With the 2-7 at 7 power and standing offhand you have to move your head just a teensy bit forward, but at 1 through 4 powers a normal hold gets the full FOV. Kneeling, sitting or prone you can get the full FOV at all magnifications. A Leupold 2.5-8X36 works just as well in the Ruger medium rings, and a 1.5-5 or 1-4 Leupold works find in the low rings as well.

See attachment for a picture of mine with the 2-7 and the rear sight removed.

Dave,
I've got a 1B in 22 hornet with a 6X18 Loupie attached, with factory rings.
Eye relief seems OK to me...Don't recall exactly where the scope is mounted as far as center to center.
Virgil B.

After lots of shifting around, my 15 #1s have settled into something of a pattern in scoping.

Most of the smaller calibers -- a Hornet*, 2 25 Bobs (a K1A and a B) , a 7x57*, and a 7mm-08 -- wear Leupold 2-7s ( a mix of Vari X and VX IIs but only the latter from now on). In regular Ruger rings.

The fine-and-far shooters -- in .223, 6mm Rem, .25-06. and .308 -- wear a mix of higher magnification glass -- mostly Leupold, some tactical. Regular rings of different heights depending on objective size.

The deer/+ rifles -- in .280 Rem, 7mm Rem, 300 H&H, and .338-06* -- all wear Leupold 6X glass and most with 4a reticles. Regular rings.

The medium bores -- .45-70 and 375 H&H* -- all have fixed Leuoplds or low power Leupold variables. Most have 4a reticles. They need dual extension rings to keep me from leaning into the scope and getting clipped by it.

The asterisks denote duplicate caliber bolt guns with identical scopes to the Ruger 1 in question.

1B

On my 45-70 Govt Ruger #3 with Weaver bases, I mounted a Sightron SII fixed 4X in Burris medium Zee rings. The scope has a generous 4+ inches of eye relief so if mounted as far back as possible in the rings, there is just enough eye relief for me so that I do not have to crawl forward on the stock. The medium height rings allow a little more room for the quick reload. Not perfect but the best set up I have found so far.

On my 45-70 Govt Ruger #3 with Weaver bases, I mounted a Sightron SII fixed 4X in Burris medium Zee rings. The scope has a generous 4+ inches of eye relief so if mounted as far back as possible in the rings, there is just enough eye relief so that I do not have to extend my head forward on the stock for a full FOV. Although the low rings have sufficient clearance for the scope bells, the medium height rings allow a bit more room for loading. Not perfect but the best set up I have found so far.

220 #1v 6-18x40 leo, short rings . scope is mounted as far back ass possible without comeing in cointact with the adjustment knobs.

its not possible to do this on the B model in low rings. the 40mm objective hits the scope rail.

ive found on all the number ones ive looked through with scopes mounted, that there wasnt a single scope that didnt need to come back more.

i see alot of offset rings to acomplish this on the #1s but the rings are not needed on the b model, theyre a waste of money because you only go till the objective gets close to the rail