Ruger #1 scope predicament

[RJ556]

I know this has been hashed and rehashed and I know all of the "options" available to a person wanting to scope a #1. I own a K1A and a 1A, one of which has a Nikon Omega, 5" of eye relief and mounted in offset rings. Well, this works fine. But, the scope is a little too modern looking for the classic looks of the #1 and offset rings are butt ugly. The other one has a 2.75x Burris scout scope in low Ruger rings. This one gets top ratings in the looks department. However, my old eyes could use a little more magnification and field of view. As far as different bases are concerned, I think the 2 piece Moulds bases are ugly and don't really get the scope back that much farther and neither do the Burris Ruger to Weaver adapter mounts, which look like a Leggo add-on.
Now for the solutions. 1) Probably more #1 owners use Leupold scopes than any other scope. If Leupold would make a "Limited" run of scopes, fixed power and/or variable, with a reasonably classic appearance, that had 8" of tube between the adjustment turret and the eye piece, I believe, even in this niche market, they would sell enough to be profitable. If not Leupold, any good scope manufacturer. 2) Ruger should make a different scope base/rib for the #1 and offer it as an accessory or available part that comes back over the receiver, and places the front ring where the rear one is now. The front part of the rib in front of the front ring should be much lower than the present rib to allow a larger scope objective to clear, and ofcourse keep the whole mount as low as possible. If Ruger won't do this, a small company like Moulds should.
Ruger has just created too beautiful of a rifle to put ugly scope solutions on. And for those of you that get good eye relief using modern Leupolds in non-offset rings, God Bless You! I, unfortunately, am not one of them.

 

[ddixon]

This will perhaps offend some Leupold lovers but I gave up on using Leupold scopes on a #1 35 years ago. At that time you had Leupolds with 2.8-3.0 inch eye relief. and no way to get the scope far enough to the rear to get a full FOV. Leupold has greatly improved their eye relief since then but I simply went to Redfield, B&L/Bushnell, and more recently Burris, Nikon, and Pentax and never looked back. Ruger has a proven and elegant design scope ring and base solution and there are other optical sight manufacturers then Leupold many arguably as good some arguably better. A rib which extends back over the breach block will at times probably cause major problems with case ejection and loading.

 

[picketpin]

I essentualy use 3 different scopes. I use the last h=generation Od Weaver Micro Traks, I Use Burris scopes, Fullfield Is with steel tubes that are much longer than the latest generation or Mini scopes from Burris on light #1s, "A", "AH"s and "AB"s, I still use leupolds but I do NOT use newer more modern scopes with very short tubes and HUGE oculars,

Out of 47 #1s not a single one has an offset ring on it. THe "B"s tend to wear something in the 2x7 or 3x9 range. Lots of hunting #1s wear 2x7 Leupolds. You can get the correct eye relief AND monut then in low rings and get the very low in relation to the bore.

If You go to higgh magnification your better off with a long tube Burris, Signaturem Black Duiamond etc that a short tubed Leupold, Many of my #1s from the 67-69 period wear age appropriate Weavers, Anythin from the K 2.5 up to the KV4x12 work fine in medium rings,

I have five #1s that wear something other than the factory rib. In two cases it was getting the correct hiught, My 6-284 "B" and one of the 22=250AIs wear Redfield bases and Redfield rings. That's because the wear 8x-56 MIcro Trak. with the Redfield base and a set of LOW redfield rings the eye releif is set perfectly AND the ocular is exactly the thickness of 2 playing cards off the barrel. You can't mount the big 56 any lower.

Three others, target rifles #1s, 22BR, 22PPC and 6mmBR wear the same redfield bases with either 8x32-40 Burris Signatures or 8x32-44 Burris Bl;ack Diaminds. Eye relief and ocular clearance weren't the isse. Instead it was adjustments. Factory Ruger bases, be it the rib or the blocks and Ruger rings simlpy didn't allow enough windage adjustment to get them zeroed and centered on the target at 100 yards. If the scope has 32 clicks, and those are 1/16 clicks, It doesn't give you much to play with. I find the Redfield bases with the ability to preform all the course windage adjustment a God Send when shooting really big scopes.

THere are some scopes that work just fine as is. There are some that work well if you modify the bases or rings and there are some more modern scopes that just work without several modifications.

I always figured that when I got to that point it was time to try a different scope.

Ross

 

[gewehrfreund]

I understand the the dilema rj556, but I have to say, I think your suggestion of a Leupold with 8" from the turrets to the back of the ocular is not the answer. This sounds a lot uglier than any of the "ugly" options you mentioned above, and just would not look right in my opinion. It sounds to me like you would be best served by one of the following scopes:
Leupold VXII 1-4X
Leupold VXIII 1.5-5
Burris 2-7 Mini
Burris 3-9 Mini
Leupold M8 3X (if you can fins one)
and, probably the best of all possible solutions.....a Burris 4X mini, my all time favorite scope for a #1 with a 22" barrel.

 

[picketpin]

gewehr: Add Leupold M8 Compact 6x
Leupold VXII 2x7
and yeas the BUrris Mini 4x and the Mini 6X all of whick look great on any "A" configuration AND also look fine on "S" rifles.

LOt's of things out there that work, look great allow proper eye relief and do not require any alteration to the bases or rings.

I also like the older Burris HB 6x with target turrets for a walk around varmint rifle, "AB" in 223 etc.

Ross

 

[gewehrfreund]

You're right Ross, they're all good ones too. I have a 6X HBR that I sent back to Burris and had the target knobs replaced with their Hunter knobs: same click values and finger adjustable, but the scope looks a lot nicer without those turrets sticking out into space in two directions. Maybe you can tell I'm not much of a fan for target turrets ;-)
Lance

 

[RJ556]

I hear what you're saying guys, but I have tried several of the scopes that you've mentioned, but I just cannot get them back enough for a full "sight picture". With a few of the variables, the lower powers were ok, but at the higher powers, I had to crane my neck to a very uncomfortable position to get a good "sight picture". I even ordered a brand new Leupold 1.5x5 from Midway last year and when installing it on a new 1A, as far back as it would go, it was fine up to about 3x. Any higher and the black closed in from the edges. I really can't understand how the scopes you mention, especially Burris Mini scopes, work so well for you, eye relief wise and they don't for me. I am an average built guy and weigh about 160 pounds and no, my eyes are not on the side of my head, they are conventionally positioned. I suppose I'll just have to be happy with the scout scope on my 1A and the Nikon Omega and offset rings on my K1A. Thanks for your inputs.

 

[83mvp]

Interesting post since I have just completed installing 2 scopes on each of my #1's. I have a #1A in .22 Hornet and a #1V in 22-250. The Hornet is now wearing a recently refurbished El Paso Weaver K8 with the long tube. It stands to become my go-to turkey gun here in Texas.

The 22-250 is also topped with a really long tubed refurb El Paso Weaver K12 with 60A reticle. Both are classy, appropriate for the calibers and lend a sense of "old school" taste to a couple of my favorite rifles. A substantial plus is that I didn't have to drop substantial coin on a pair of "modern" scopes and didn't give up quality on glass, IMO.

Eye relief is fine and fit is great. YMMV. By the way, the scope refurbs were done by Iron Sight in Tulsa, OK.

 

[RJ556]

83mvp, thanks for your post. I think that at least someone agrees with me on this matter. If I can find a K-3 or K-4 in excellent condition, I will buy it. Does anyone out there have one they want to sell?. Is the Weaver refurb shop still in business?

 

[83mvp]

RJ556 -

Iron Sight is very much in business and they occasionally sell refurb'ed Weavers. Go here: www.ironsightinc.com

One word of info: They have about a 6-9 month wait for repair work. Good luck.

 

[RJ556]

Thanks for the info 83mvp, I'll get in touch with them.

 

[ddixon]

You might also try the ususal places Ebay and GunBroker

 

[picketpin]

I put K2.5s and K3, Micro Tracs on a lot of "S" #1s. My 338 "S" wears a K3 with post and cross hair. The advantage to the "K" series Micro Traks is that the top of the post is dead on at 100 yards and the cross hair is dead on at 200. I makes a very fast Elk rifle and the slim scope with no forward ocular looks great on an "S".

WEaver per se: doesn't have a repair sight for the older scopes. There is however an outfit that includes several forrmer El Paso Weaver people that work on them. I sent a V12 down to then and had it re-furbished and the reticle change. I have several varmint caliber #1s that wear K10s and K12s. The first varmint #1 I built in 1970 still wears its era correct KT12.

Ross

Here's what I have for repair of El Paso Weavers. They do not handle the newer Japanese Weaver scopes.

Weaver Scope Repair Service, 1121 Larry Mahan DR, Suitre B, El Paso, TX
79925 tele 1-915-593-1005.

 

[gewehrfreund]

Ross,
As of a year or more, the El Paso repair service is no longer in business. Or do you know something that we don't?
Lance

 

[picketpin]

Nope: Sad to hear, that is the last reciept that I have for sending one in. They probably got old, stuff happens. BUMMER.

Might try Parsons. I don't know for a fact if they would work on the older Weavers but they did repair/purge a Unertle Vulture in the last year. Worth a try.

Ross

 

[gewehrfreund]

The El Paso folks will be missed. They got stuff back in a timely fashion and their prices were reasonable, but everyone deserves to retire at some point.
Iron Sight in Tulsa is the next best option apparently; it looks like they are somewhat pricier and from reports not nearly as quick with the turnaround. Just like everything else in life it seems..............
LC

 

[MMichaelAK]

Ross, like you I agree on the Leupold VX1 or VX2 2-7x33.
In nearly the exact same dimensions are Leupolds VX3 1.75-6x33 and VX3 2.5-8x33.
and they all look great on the 1A or 1H to me and have enough eye relief, even for .375 H&H.

 

[Lloyd Smale]

ive tried all kinds on #1s and found what works best is a straight tubed leupold or a v2 2x7 or 3x9

 

[MMichaelAK]

ive tried all kinds on #1s and found what works best is a straight tubed leupold or a v2 2x7 or 3x9

Lloyd, both my 1B 30-06s wear Leupold 3-9x40s. One is a Vari X II, the other is a VX1.

I agree its a good combo. No problems with mounting or placement.