Ruger No. 1B and 1A Rings

[aqbill]

Have a Leupold VX-II 3-9X40 scope on my 1B .243. Bought one B40 (medium) offset ring for the rear and that still didn't give me enough eye relief when the scope is cranked up to 9. So a second offset ring is on the way which should give me another .25 inch or so. Is this problem endemic to No. 1s? Just seems like this shouldn't be happening with a high quality scope and rifle. I could, of course, cut down the stock but that doesn't seem right either. I'm 5'9" so I'm average height. Any thoughts or wisdom would be appreciated. Oh yeah, and a 1A (7x57) is on the way so I hope I don't have to go through this again! :?

 

[four70nitro]

I've personally never needed the offset rings on a No. 1, but I do know several people that seem to like (or have) to use them.

Dave

 

[mcknight77]

I have 3x9 Leupolds on most of my No.1s without offset rings. But, if you need them, use them.

 

[RJ556]

aqbill, I had to use 2 offset rings on one of my #1's to get proper eye positioning and this was with a scope (Nikon Omega) that has 5" of eye relief.

 

[picketpin]

Mostly it's newer generation short tube scopes.

I own quite a few #1s and NONE wear a single offset ring. However, I have been at this long enough to know which scvopes work without offset rings. Nearly all older Burris Fullfields and Leupold Is and IIs work just fine.

Where you run into problems is when you try to use a modern scope designed around short actions. Most won't fit/focus with out one or sometimes two offset rings. You have to remember the #1 was designed and introduced in 1967 and the stock dementions etc are partly based on what was on the market and available THEN. Most the #1s I bought in the 60s and early 70s still wear Micro Trac Weavers. ;-)

However, if you need them, you need them and they are a better choice than cutting off the stock and probably cheaper.

RWT

 

[luvs2hunt62]

I had the same problem, so I designed the mount below. It gives me almost 2 inches rear offset, which makes the eye relief right for me. I have it on all my #1's with scopes, from 22-250 to 375 H&H, with no problem.

 

[308longdistance]

I have the same problem with No.1s. I agree with picketpin on the older scopes. I don't like the medium offset, they are to tall for my liking, but I do have one with them for a Leupold scope. If I can get the eye bell back over the safety I am pretty good to go.

Offsets for a Leupold 4-12.

Lows for a 3-9 Burris FF. (not FF II)

luvs2hunt62.........interesting setup on the No.1s, do you think that would work on a Winchester 88?

 

[luvs2hunt62]

It could be made to work on anything, but these have a shallow tunnel cut in the bottom to fit exactly over the quarter rib, which Keeps the mount perfectly aligned with the screw holes in the quarter rib. If I get any interest here, I can get an order of 10 or so made for about $75 shipped. They are well worth the money, because you can use any WEAVER TYPE RINGS.