To Mount a Match Dot to a Bisley Hunter .44 Mag with Pics :)

Okay here we go this is a pic of the base gun or what it started as.


Next is the Mount and mounting screws. This shows the Top.


And the bottom where it has the locating pins.


Top of the Ruger Barrel where you can see the indentions in the top of the barrel where the locating pins will fit and on the side with the half moon cuts the screws and shaped washers fit to secure the mount.


Match Dot with all parts that came with it. The sun screen is mounted as well as the shade part. Sorry do not know the exact names lol.


And here is the Mount put on the Ruger both sides and top.




All mounted up with stock Grips.



And while I was at it I got some Hogue Gunfighter Grips made of Black Ebony and mounted them.



Sorry if the photo's are not great but it should get things across.

Hope you like it.

I made a Boo Boo though the sun shield and the filter are reversed in these pictures lol. It is corrected now but no pics of it corrected but I am sure everyone gets the idea.

Nice scope mounting job. Who makes the mount with those fancy cut-out screws?

...Jimbo

It is a Weigand base from Brownells 957-000-045 RRHNGS SILVER REDHAWK HANDGUN MOUNT. They are $49.95 from them.

Nice rig, Jester. It is very much like the one I HAD on my SBHH. I hope that yours works out better than mine, though.

As I'm sure you found out, for a RD sight, one almost HAS to use a 'secondary' rail, as the cut-outs on the top of the SBHH barrel are not spaced properly to make a RD fit.

I used the "B-Square" rail, and mounted it very much like you have done. My Red Dot sight withstood the recoil very well. The mount did not. No matter what I tried, the soft aluminum mounts chewed up and it simply would not stay in one place. Sadly, since I really liked the RD on that gun, I finally had to take it off, and mount a conventional 2x scope, using Ruger's STEEL rings. No problems since.

As I said, I sure hope your mount survives better than mine did. I'd be interested to know how it works out for you. (I shot mine for several years until I found out during one hunting trip just WHY I suddenly couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. That's when I had to change things.)

Good luck with it, anyway. A RD sight is IMHO the best way to go with a hunting revolver, unless you intend to shoot some pretty long shots.

P.S. The 44 shown in my avatar is with that RD sight arrangement; haven't taken a pic yet with the new set-up.

The Weigand base is much better than the B-Square rail. I talked with many people that shoot the rather large Pistols up to the S&W 500 in the BFR with no problems with the weigand base.

I did take it out put 42 Rounds through it and the only problem I ran across was me lol. I did not tighten down the Match Dot rings enough so it moved well not moved I think it was trying to go on a trip lol.

But the Weigand Base is still solid as a rock.

The load is a 300Gr HP GC with 21.OGr of H-110 and a CCI-300 primer in a Remington Case. So they are not light loads.

JesterGrin_1":2swbs4he said:

The Weigand base is much better than the B-Square rail. I talked with many people that shoot the rather large Pistols up to the S&W 500 in the BFR with no problems with the weigand base.

I did take it out put 42 Rounds through it and the only problem I ran across was me lol. I did not tighten down the Match Dot rings enough so it moved well not moved I think it was trying to go on a trip lol.

But the Weigand Base is still solid as a rock.

The load is a 300Gr HP GC with 21.OGr of H-110 and a CCI-300 primer in a Remington Case. So they are not light loads.

Click to expand...

OK, roger that. Good! Now I'm wishing that I had used that base. I might still have the RD on my SBHH! But the B-Square also cost me around $45 IIRC, and I don't think I want to do it again. We'll see. If the scope doesn't work well for hunting, perhaps.....

My hunting load leans toward the 'light and fast' concept. 200 grain JHP over 28 gr of H-110. My son uses a 180 gr XTP over 32 or 33 gr of H-110. I get right at 1500 fps with mine; he gets just under 1700. For deer-sized, (and small pigs), the shock and tissue destruction is extreme, and effective. (Don't want to start the "light and fast vs. slow and heavy" argument all over again, though! "Diffrnt strokes for diffrnt folks" is my theory!)

One question though: Why a NON-magnum primer with H-110???? The tech I talked to at Hodgdon told me to NEVER do that! I use only 350's with H-110.

As for the Primer. I have found that the Mag primers are not needed unless you are in a cold climate such as say 32F or less. Where as I am in South TEXAS lol. So yes for consistent ignition you need a Mag primer when the temps start to get low. But I have found that with H-110 and W-296 down here will shoot better and more accurate than with a Mag primer. Heck last year we only got down to 32F one time lol. Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. And this year we had 59 Days over 100F up to 107F so it has been a HOT year.

I just picked up an old Ideal 431244 255Gr SWC GC that I am also going to try.

shoot 44,
I am a heavy and slow bullet guy myself, but back in the early 70's my bil and I use to load everything to find out what we liked and didn't. We shot both the 180 and the 200 as you described and found both loads to be EXTREEMLY accurate and comfortable to shoot. I'm with you on the "to each his own" school of thought. So this old slow and heavy bullet guy says if you haven't tried these loads you have been missing a very satisfying experience.

Well, we also have found the light bullets to be extremely accurate. As far as 'comfortable', well we find that the lighter bullets at extreme speeds are actually sharper in recoil than the heavier ones. The latter seem to have a bigger 'push', but much less jarring. Again, a very subjective issue, to be sure.
But we like the flatter shooting of the light ones, and the higher muzzle energy levels they provide as well.
I'm curious though; if you found the light ones accurate and comfortable, why do you use the heavier ones? I wonder what about them you liked more than the light ones.

I do intend to try some heavier ones; (have already shot some 270 grainers and have some 300's here as well). I want to shoot them in my Marlin levergun, though. It seems a more appropriate matchup to me.

"Whatever floats your boat", eh?

The Millet red dot fits just fine using the standard Rugar rings that come with the Hunter:

I have since replaced the red dot with a 2-6 Bushnell Elite but the Millet red dot worked just fine, even ewith the heaviest hand loads.

Nice step by step pictures of your installation. Thanks

You are correct the UltraDot 20 and 30 will both fit fine with the facotry Ruger Scope mounts. But the Ultradot 4 and MatchDot are too wide thus the need to go with another way to mount.

You are very welcome I posted this to maybe help other people with the same problem I had before I did this.

I just bought that base direct from Jack Weigand, $49.95 shipped.
Got it in 2 days.

Coach

Hey, that is interesting that you found a RD that would fit! SUPER! I had a PDP-3 on mine, and it was definitely too long in the body to fit the Ruger cut-outs on the barrel.
I will say that the recoil did NOT seem to bother the sight at all; just the aluminum fittings on that B-Square 'rail'.

As a P.S., I just put the PDP-3 on my MK III, and it is a joy to shoot the RD once again. I really, REALLY like them!