Ruger No. 1 - 45-70

[osteodoc08]

You stole that. Sounds like a nice one to be in the safe. Time to break out the elephant stomper loads and give it a whirl.

[Crusty Deary Ol'Coot]

Good morning all !

Here is how I play the eye relief game with the 2X7 Leupold scope. Read carefully so you fully understand how I approach the situation.

One of the recent posts suggests that if I were to slide the scope to the rear beyond where it is, the scope would touch the read sight. THAT IS TRUE!

Then, if I felt more flush and if the 2X7 didn't work well for me I'd buy one of the Leupold variables with lower power ranges, but HIGHER prices. I believe there are two such scopes in their line up.

I do not have a full field of view at the higher powers!

But, and this important to understand in this situation, I consider the 45/70 to be a relatively short range hunting rifle when compared to the many other typical high velocity rounds available. So I carry the scope mostly on the 2X setting, which considering the places I hunt, I feel to be a good match.

However, even without a full field of view, I have taken a growing pile of deer and two elk and many including the elk were taken at 7X.

The elk were taken at about 100yds as were a number of the deer including the bang flop last Fall

I carry on 2X, then depending on the situation and given the time, I MAY switch to the higher powers.

I like the 7X for load development on the bench!!!!!!!!!!!

I have had 2 - 2X7 Leupold scopes on this rifle. The first got moved to another rifle so I replaced it with a new Leupold 2X7 CDS (Custom Dial System) scope.

The CDS scope with the custom dial made for my 465gr Wide Flat Nose cast bullet at a velocity of 1650fps goes to 275yds. Been some years since I have taken a critter at a distance even close to that 275yd distance.

Because any critter that requires a fast reactive shot will be close in, the lower power settings work just fine and as noted, I have no problems with taking a shot if time and conditions allow at the higher powers.

Would setting up my .243, 30/06 or 300win mag in this way work? Not for me. I want those rifles to all have a full field of view at all power settings simply due to the fact that I could possible have a shot at an extended range. Something which hasn't happened for years.

So, lesson learned years back because I was carrying a 4X12 scope at the higher power - 12X - and missed a bull due to my mistake, I attempt to carry all my rifles with the variable at a lower power settings.

Hope this helps in understanding how and why this 2X7 works for me.

Crusty Deary Ol'Coot

[Clay M]

My Ruger #1's in .45/70 and .405 win have the Leupold VX-3 1.5X5 scope with the heavy duplex.
I also use Ruger's extension rings to get a full field of view.
I have the Leupold VX-3 2.5X8 with the Boone and Crockett reticle on my #1 .30/06
I removed the rear sight and used a sight blank in order to get the scope as far back as possible.

I am very pleased with these scopes.

[KnotRight]

Someone gave me a CHEAP scope that is 4x32 and it had the Ruger mounts. Stuck it on the rifle today just to see how it fit. The eye relief is about 5". Do you think that is enough with a 45-70? The end of the scope is over the safety. Hoping to try it out this weekend.

[Crusty Deary Ol'Coot]

The 5" sounds like plenty.

Ooooops sorry, forgot to reply to the question about ring height.

As far as I know, the rings are the standard height #1 rings.

Some folk have problems mounting scopes on the Number 1, and I have never had an issue.

Scopes always went on and worked fine!

The Leupold 1X5 is one of the good ones I was referring to. Just a bit higher priced then I was willing to pay out at that time. Especially since the 2X7 works just fine.

CDOC

[Clay M]

Someone gave me a CHEAP scope that is 4x32 and it had the Ruger mounts. Stuck it on the rifle today just to see how it fit. The eye relief is about 5". Do you think that is enough with a 45-70? The end of the scope is over the safety. Hoping to try it out this weekend.

Just be aware that the cheap scope may not hold up well to the recoil of that rifle ,depending on how hot you load it.

My standard load is a 360 cast bullet with 43 grains of Rel 7, which shoots great in my rifle.

It is not a very hot load , just a good medium load with tolerable recoil.

[Geezer in NH]

What blue book 20 years old?????

[KnotRight]

I was looking through my junk pile and found a cheap Tasco 4X32 scope (yes I know Tasco) but the good thing is that it had a set of Ruger mount on it. The scope is very clear and could focus the cross hairs. Stuck it on the gun and hoping to take it to the range this weekend.

Going to reload some Missouri 405 grn coated bullets tonight. Maybe with some RL7. My Marlin likes about 1600 f/sec so I will start with that load.

[country gent]

I have a number 1a in 300win mag i use for deer on up when I was hunting. Great shooting rifle. I also have a Number 1V in 220 swift that is a very accurate varmint rifle for shooting off the barn roof at the farm, We used to climb up there and gun the farm for woodchucks in the early evenings. Was a ball and if you read range and wind right the rifle did its job. Mounting a scope may also restrict the area for loading a cartridge into the chamber. Both of mine the ejector just pops the empty out to stop at the saftey button leaving it there to be picked up. For awhile the swift wore a unertal return to battery scope. This really looked good and accented the original style lines of the rifle.

[Potsy]

I lucked up and found a Leupy M8 straight 2.5x.
It's not very bright, but it has ample eye relief, looks great on the rifle, and I do believe I could drive horseshoe nails with it and it would retain zero.

[EDG]

On high velocity #1s I like long tubed scopes like the older Burris 2X7. Those scopes are pretty long from the turret back and work really well on a #1.
On a 45-70 I prefer a straight tube fixed power scope like the Weaver K2.5 or K3 micro trac with the steel tubes built in the late 1970s.
The Leupold M8 fixed 3X with the straight tube is even better.

If you have time find a soft .460 ball, sinker or cast bullet and push it through the bore from the breech.
You may find that there is a tight spot at the front swivel band and at the front sight band. If the tight spots cause your groups to be poor Ruger will replace the barrel.

[Clay M]

I don't like crawling the stock to get a full field of view,and I don't like scopes that are mounted so high that I can't get a consistent cheek weld on the stock.
For me the Ruger extention rings are a must, and there are very few scope that will work out well on the #1.

Each person is different, so you will have to find what works for you.
Leupold has some of the better eye relief.

[Crusty Deary Ol'Coot]

Clay,

It must be the type of scope in use, as I indicated earlier I have NEVER had an issue with getting a scope to work on a #1.

I use the lowest rings I can, which seems to be the standard rings supplied with the rifles.

MY first #1 had an old Redfield 4X12 mounted - 7mm Mag, then an old Lyman 10X on a 22/250, then a .223 with a 10X Weaver which because of not being clear on closer targets was replaced by a 10X Leupold, then a 6X Leupold on a .270, then a 3.5X10 Leupold on a 300Win Mag followed by a couple of Leupold 2X7s on my 45/70.

I can see if a person thinks they need a 50mm objective they may need to set the scope far forward or use a higher ring, but I have not been inflected with that "need" and again, have never had a scope mount issue.

Same can be said for my son to which the .270 and .300 passed. No problems.

So, I guess I like to see/watch a person who has such an issue to see their body build and how they mount the firearm to try and understand their problem.

Crusty Deary Ol'Coot

[Clay M]

The problems I have always had on the #1's is getting to scopes far enough back to get a full field of view. That is why I use the extension, or as Ruger incorrectly calls them Offset rings.

I have never been cut by a scope and I have shot .458 win's and the .416 rem.

I do find that the Leupold 1.5X5 is perfect for most of the #1's that I have owned.

Except for the varmint calibers.

I have owned ten different #1's over the years if I count correctly.

I would still probably buy another .375H&H someday, but the older I get the less I like shooting the heavier recoiling rifles.

[Potsy]

If you've a short neck and thick build, extensions may not be a terrible idea. I've got long arms, long neck, and narrow shoulders, so it doesn't bother me to bad and I've never been "bumped", but I have an older 2-7 Monarch on my 1A 7x57 and on 7x, I have to crawl just a little.
With the M8 on the .45-70, I have to crane forward juuust enough to realize I'm doing it, I don't like getting the scope turrets crammed up against the rings, and I'm not wild about the way extensions look, so I tolerate it.

[Biggs300]

Most all of my rifles are used for hunting and have scopes of one brand or another…mostly Leupold's or Burris. The only exception are my two 45-70's. On my Ruger #1 I installed Skinner (ghost ring type) sights which have worked well for "hunting" distances past 125 yards. I recently acquired a Lyman 1878 (repro of 1877) Pedersoli Sharps 45-70 that now sports long range tange Kelly Soule sights. The Kelly sights are good for target distances of 1,000 yards (maybe more) which is way further than I am capable of shooting accurately at my age. In my humble opinion, I think a 45-70 excels with iron sights, especially for hunting distances. Oh, I think you got a pretty good deal on the Ruger. The older Ruger's had much prettier wood than the newer stock. I bought mine in 2011 and the wood has straight grain but, does not have much "character". Have fun with a great "little" rifle!

[KnotRight]

Biggs300, I do like the wood! I put a cheap scope on it but thinking that I am going to shoot it first with iron sights starting out at 25 yards, then 50 and 75. I do not want to waste many rounds trying to sight it in. Tonight I am planning on reloading about 30 rounds for the weekend.

This is interesting: Using the Lyman Lead manual, the max load with RL-7 in a trap door is 39.0 gns (1598 f/sec). Then looked at the lever action and there is no load listed for RL-7 powder. Then look at the falling block and RL-7 powder starts at 46.0 gns. Wonder why they do not list a load for the lever action. I loaded 10 rounds with the max in the trap door.

Wind is blowing to hard to try to go fishing so the range he we come.

[Clay M]

I grew up somewhat poor,and never had any good scopes. I remember my first deer rifle was a Marlin .30/30 with a $20 Westpoint 4X scope.

Nowdays I enjoy having a good scope every bit as much as I enjoy the rifle.

I have had good luck with Leupolds and they are the best I can afford.
Their customer service is also first rate.

[Lloyd Smale]

You did well!!! To me the proper scope for a #1 is a vx 1 or vx2 1x4 or a vx3 1.5x5. they have plenty of power for anything a 4570 will be used for. Real big fields of view on low power and lots of eye relief which is nessisary on a #1. Other then those 3 scopes I also would consider a 1x3 weaver which can be had for a few bucks less and is as good as a vx1 optically.

[Fishman]

Knotright, congrats on a fine deal on a fine rifle. I'm glad my previous post didn't dampen your enthusiasm. I like mine a lot, and harvested three deer with it last season, using trapdoor equivalent loads under a lee 340 gr plain base. I think my next plan for fun is loading blackpowder.

Mine carries a leupold vx2 1x4, so obviously I agree with Lloyd's post. My dad does too, because he gifted me the scope. I don't know what I did to deserve it, but I like it a lot.