I got a deal on a 30-06 #1B, scope choice?

[Don Lovel]

I have an opportunity to get a really good trade deal towards a 30-06 Ruger #1 B, decent plain stock wood, no scope.
I am kind of leaning towards something with a 50 mm adjustable objective so I can have some range finding help from it as we have some pretty wide open spaces around here. Any help with my 62yr old, welding abused eyes with reading distance is always a good thing.
So many new scope brands. I have always like Burris for the money over Leupold. I have had excellent luck with a Simmons AETEC on a Ruger #1A .243 as the scope contour really fit the shape of the receiver/barrel profile on the rifle good. And the low light capability was pretty good. Always had excellent accuracy with that rig for the money. I would like to keep my scope cost to under $300
right now from what I have seen on the internet, Vortex and some others I have never heard of on Optics Planet have 50mm AO and 4-16 power type scopes.
Some sale priced Leupold and Redfield offerings are attractive but none had bigger than fixed 40mm objective. most were fixed power or 3-9 variables
I can get a Leatherwood ART computer model for $399, for shooting 30 cal those are nice, Dad has one on his M1A he has had for some time in his gunsafe long before he ever bought the M1A.

 

[700xcr]

Only thing that I don't like about a 50mm objective is that it set the scope too high and I don't get a good cheek weld to the stock. Here is another option to that solution:http://www.midwayusa.com/product/1362119260/leupold-vx-3l-rifle-scope-35-10x-50mm-matte?cm_vc=ProductFinding

 

[Don Lovel]

Only thing that I don't like about a 50mm objective is that it set the scope too high and I don't get a good cheek weld to the stock. Here is another option to that solution:http://www.midwayusa.com/product/1362119260/leupold-vx-3l-rifle-scope-35-10x-50mm-matte?cm_vc=ProductFinding

Buddy of mine has that same scope on his Savage 116 in 300 Win Mag, nice glass, his has the side focus which is a nice feature, but I do not think I can really afford a new Leupold, but will certainly watch pawnshops and gun shops for one of those used at a decent price.

So many new scope brands I have never seen before, anyone here got good info on which brands are better construction. I have seen Leapers cheap scopes but have actually fired a AR with one that was real clear and accurate, so who knows?

 

[rugnelli]

I am a Leupold guy. My nephew works at Cabelas and sells/uses Vortex. Really likes them. I shy away from 50mm scopes.

My opinion...

 

[Don Lovel]

The reason I am leaning towards 50mm, out here, late winter season prime time elk hunting is right at dusk where the pinions thin out into the grasslands and the open ground between the mountains and the irrigation pivots in the valley. Shots are long and the shadows really make it tough, so the more light your scope gives your eye, the better. My Bushnell on my 750 Rem 243 is a 45mm objective. I bought that rifle cheap in a KC pawnshop, clean and decent accurate for a Rem auto. I thought about keeping that scope and use it on the #1 until I find what I want. Also the guy I am getting the #1 from might have a scope for it I will have to talk with him

 

[wunbe]

IMO you may be trying to square a circle.

Big eye Scopes? Some experts -- like John Barsnness -- say a 50 mm scope delivers more light than your eye can efficiently manage so the low light benefits are limited at best and the extra weight and bulk become issues.

Affordability? Everything else being equal, reliable long range shooting requires more magnification and adjustable objectives in very good -- usually read, expensive -- glass.

Platform? Ruger #1s are great. I collect them. 30.06s also are reliable killers. I would not, however, choose a #1 30-06 for a truly long range elk caliber. I'd want a a lot more velocity and flat shooting capability down range for 'wind cheating' and surer clean kills. I'd also opt for an absolutely trustworthy long range rifle as a bullet launcher. Your odds on finding a Ruger 1 out of the box that fills the later requirement are in the 'crap shoot' category.

wunbe

 

[rugerjunkie]

Don,
There is a 4-16x44 Burris listed right here in the classifieds that would more than suit your needs. It also has the daylight/twiglight aperture. If you've never seen one , they are pretty slick and you open up the aperture in lower light to brighten up the picture. I dont believe they are made anymore.

Im also another one in the camp that thinks there isnt much need for a 50mm. Most of mine are 40-42mm and they are fine in low light. I have one 50mm and its an illuminated #4 reticle and I dont notice a big difference in the picture compared to the others. Focus instead on a good peice of glass and you will be able to see through it as well as a 50mm and like was said , wont be mounted so high to be uncomfortable to shoot.

In your area , head up to Ft Collins when you have some time and check out Colorado Optics. He has damn near every scope in stock made by Burris,Nikon,Zeiss,Swarovski,Leica,etc. and he really knows his stuff. You can actually put your hands on them and look through them all to help you decide what you like or dont like. http://www.coloradooptics.com/about.html

Jeff

 

[Don Lovel]

RUGERJUNKIE ! thank you for the link to Colorado Optic. I will just wait. We are going to go up and do a New Belgium brewery tour this spring, I will go to their shop and see what I can find that really fits the barrel profile of the rifle

Man they do have great prices on some expensive Swarovski & Zeiss glass, hell of a deal when even on sale price is a thousand over what you can possibly afford for a rifle scope

 

[luvs2hunt62]

a 50 mm objective on a 1" tube is way useless. ! 42mm is optimum on a 1" tube, 56mm is optimum for a 30mm tube.
think of a funnel--it doesn't matter how big the top of the funnel is, it won't allow any more water to flow through than the diameter of the bottom tube will handle

 

[rugnelli]

Really it's personal preference... Pick one you like and will have confidence in and you will do fine. My "go to" rifle/scope combination is an M77 flat bolt in .25-06 topped with an old 3-9 Weaver, post and crosshair reticle. The scope is old and a little dark but when it is lined up on an animal I have the utmost confidence that I will hit what I am looking at.

Listen to all the input and get what you feel is best and good luck.

 

[Don Lovel]

a 50 mm objective on a 1" tube is way useless. ! 42mm is optimum on a 1" tube, 56mm is optimum for a 30mm tube.
think of a funnel--it doesn't matter how big the top of the funnel is, it won't allow any more water to flow through than the diameter of the bottom tube will handle

that is a piece of useful information to ponder

 

[rugerjunkie]

Talk to the guy in Ft Collins. He's a great guy even if all you do is end up BS'ing he has good info on scopes. It gets complicated and the funnel comparison is pretty good. Two scopes with the same exit pupil will only let so much light through no matter the objective diameter...or something like that! Lol

 

[Don Lovel]

I have a degree in environmental microscopy, used Nikon products at work and really loved them. Pricey to get up out of the low end consumer line but their good stuff is really clear.
I never have shot a Zeiss scope, I did not like the mechanicals of their microscopes.
Smidt & Bender, Hensoldt, I have shot on nice collectible rifles, shot a big illuminated reticle night force on a 300 mag sniper rifle. Bushnell's Elite series is nice stuff.
But I really need to not spend over $400 on glass, blasphemy on a $1000 #1 Ruger which deserves a scope worth as much as it is. But that aint happening.
My last #1 did real good with a Simmons AETEK, I would not hesitate to get another one as good as the last one was for the price

 

[rugerjunkie]

Try looking at Weaver Grand Slams and Super Slams if you want a great scope for the money. I literally have a dozen or more rifles wearing them. $400 or so will get you a pretty nice scope there. I have 1.5-5's , 4x , 3-10's , 4.5-14's , and went with all 6-20's on my varmint rifles and love them! Ive only sent one back to the factory and it was a 3-10 I snagged at a gun show for $100 that looked new except the numbers were wore off of the variable ring. They replaced it , cleaned and inspected , checked calibration on the crosshairs , and nitrogen purged with new seals all for $15 shipping. Pretty hard to beat service like that.

 

[Lloyd Smale]

I agree that you don't need a objective bigger then 40mm. My choise for #1b's is hands down the leupold 3x9 vx2. Good in low light and has enough eye relief to work on a #1 which has the scope mounts a bit farther forward then most bolt guns so needs a bit more eye relief.

 

[308longdistance]

The reason I am leaning towards 50mm, out here, late winter season prime time elk hunting is right at dusk where the pinions thin out into the grasslands and the open ground between the mountains and the irrigation pivots in the valley. Shots are long and the shadows really make it tough, so the more light your scope gives your eye, the better.


Should match up with the No.1 in medium rings, maybe even lows. They are heavy, but should be OK on the No.1.

Very good reviews for the 6 & 10X42 30MM tube.

http://swfa.com/SWFA-SS-Classic-Riflescopes--C12502.aspx

I like the old discontinued Zeiss 3-9X40 Conquest on the No.1, works in low light, and fits nicely into low rings. Can be found for about $300-350. Top Ruger is a 1B with the 3-9 Zeiss.

 

[6mm Remington]

I have a 1B in 30-06 and I have a fixed 4x Leupold on it which I love. Now that being said, the 6x42mm fixed power Leupold with either the duplex crosshairs or the duplex with the long range holder-over lines would be fantastic. I have a 6x42mm on my 6mm Remington, same rifle and love it. I understand your wanting a bit more magnification and the VX3 Leupold 3.5-10x40mm or 4.5-14x40mm would work very well also. I personally would stay away from the 50mm objective but that is just me.

Another great scope would be the Zeiss Conquest HD5 2-10x44mm or the 3-15x44mm with the Z600 reticle. Fantastic scopes also. Congratulations on your new rifle. Look through several scopes and see what looks right for you. These are all suggestions of course.

165 gr. Accubond or Partition over 57.4 grs. of IMR4350 work great in my own 30-06. Of course work up from below.
David

 

[Heliman]

I agree that you don't need a objective bigger then 40mm. My choise for #1b's is hands down the leupold 3x9 vx2. Good in low light and has enough eye relief to work on a #1 which has the scope mounts a bit farther forward then most bolt guns so needs a bit more eye relief.

+1

Dave

 

[picketpin]

50s and 56s have to be used with HIGH rings to clear the rib and still give you the correct eye relief. One of the guys even spent the $700 plus for the VXIV with the notch out of it. Only problem is the notch is meant to clear a round barrel not the square edges of the top of the rib of a #1 so it couldn't be mounted any further back than the regular one.

First is the issue of just how much light any scope can transmit. Alleady covered. Second is cheek weld and having to hold your head high. Already covered.

Third is most are relatively short tubed scopes and don't work well with the Ruger rib. You end up using one if not two offset rings.

Four they look like Hell on a #1. I own a BUNCH of #1s. It's at least as wide open out here as CO. I have exactly two with anything bigger than a 44mm objective bell. My 6-284 and my 17 Remington have the last El Paso Weavers made for a few years in 8x-56mm with Redfield bases and rings. Their my coyote rifles BUT they both have the THICK German Post and cross hair reticle. Which frankly has a lot more to do with low light hits as anything.

Most USA Burris scopes work well on #1s. The "Signature" with the camera style light shutter works well but frankly the shutter works better to reduce glare and TOO much light in bright sunny days up here at 7000 ft than if opened wide at morning or evening. Heck then it's just another scope with a 44mm Objective. But they are long enough you can put them in standard Ruger low rings and still clear the rib and have one playing card width from the barrel AND get the eye relief correct. I have them in 3x-9x, 4x-12x and a couple in 8x-32x on my PPCs.

My go to scopes on my it "might be a long shot" are Leupold VX III 3.5x-10 - 44s in standard medium rings with the AO feature and retro fitted with the Boone & Crocket reticle. I have them on everything from 6mm Rem up and including my 300 Win Mag.

Other issue of course is field of view at max magnification. When I was a kid in Wyoming I essentially hunted antelope with a varmint rife with a 12x or so scope and shot them at 400 yards. Easy, Peasy. Came home to Idaho and spent a couple of weeks sneaking up on antelope in our rough county and getting within 100 yards and throwing the rifle up and seeing TAN, or WHITE just in case I wanted to gut shoot one. Went home switched rifled and managed to kill one with a Bob with a 6x Leupold.

There is a thing and that's TOO MUCH scope.

I just bought Leupold 40x BR boosted to 60X. For my 6mm BR I think the eye relief is about 1 inch as is the field of view. BUT you sure can see the X ring at 100 yards.

Ross


.