Ruger 1 picatinny

[whelenshooter]

I have a 243 Ruger 1B. Problem, as many seem to have, is the eye relief of my scope isn't enough for the mounts. I looked at offset Ruger rings but right now they're scarce as hen's teeth. So I came across this:

Ruger Number One Scope Mount - Slip Over Weaver Picatinny Style

http://www.eabco.com/store/ruger-number-one/ruger-number-one-scope-mount-slip-over-weaver-picatinny-style/

Anybody have an experience with this? How stable is it? Pros/cons?

Thanks,
David

[Tatume]

Hi David,

There's also these: http://www.grafs.com/retail/catalog/product/productId/1982

but I don't have any experience with either the EABCO or the Weaver products. My choice on my Ruger No. 1 rifles is to get scopes with more eye relief. I'm leery of the adaptors.

Good luck, Tom

[whelenshooter]

Thank you Tom. Those are certainly cheaper. Anybody with experience with either?

Thanks,

[Frank46]

Don't waste your money on the ruger extension rings. If you're like me they won't give you enough set back so you get a good sight picture on my #1 in 45/70. You might want to google steve earl who make a picatinny rail system for the #1. I'm getting one when I get the money. That and the ruger buttstock in my experience is really set up for iron sights. Can't get a good cheek weld. Frank

[whelenshooter]

Thanks Frank, another option.

David

[Idahojoe]

Been looking at that same mount, using a scope with a lot of eye relief now. Had good luck with EABCO in the past, good company. Joe

[Clay M]

On my .405 and .45/70 I use a Leupold VX-3 1.5X5 .With the Ruger offset rings it has plenty of eye relief.The Leupold scopes tend to have better eye relief than some.

[Tatume]

I'm a big fan of Leupold scopes, and the VX-3 1.5-5x and VX-3 2.5-8x are the best variable power big game scopes out there. However, if the OP is using his 243 for a varmint rifle, they won't have enough magnification for him.

BTW, I've gravitated away from all variable scopes, as my guns eventually shoot them to pieces. Leupold fixes them, but the failures never seem to occur at convenient times.

Take care, Tom

[felix]

Scopes use multiple lens stacks to minimize transmission error. Each stack is considered a lens group in the literature. This movement can never be perfect in terms of transmitting red&green&blue light simultaneously, and that is why "sweet spots" appear at various lens settings where the distortion is almost zero. For this reason, target scopes typically only allow focusing the cross hairs only at a fixed power, and some also allow focusing on the target as well. Newer designs are switching this whole attribute gradually from the scope's front plane (input) toward it's back plane (output). The very best scope to date that I have used is the Nikon fixed 3 power, where the focus is fixed at 100 yards and the transmission is modified at the rear plane. This scope transmits 98 percent light and the clarity is exceptional. Prolly making exquisite use of plastic lens because the price is so cheap. Have no idea how long the scope will last when constantly moving the crosshairs. ... felix

[whelenshooter]

However, if the OP is using his 243 for a varmint rifle, they won't have enough magnification for him.


Varmint and target is correct. I have a 6-24 scope. I have to climb the stock a bit to get a good sight picture. I haven't tried it prone or sitting on the ground but it's probably good for that as is. Bench and standing? Not so much.

Right now I'm leaning toward the offset Ruger rings though I doubt they'd completely fix the problem. It would be some what better. I think.

David

[slam45]

I talked to the folks at EGW (Evolution Gun Works in PA) They will have new rails available for the no. 1 shortly, and will have them with a + 20MOA option as well. they make rails for most bolt guns and semi-autos, have been at it for sometime and do great work...

[JackQuest]

I talked to the folks at EGW (Evolution Gun Works in PA) They will have new rails available for the no. 1 shortly, and will have them with a + 20MOA option as well. they make rails for most bolt guns and semi-autos, have been at it for sometime and do great work...

slam45: did EGW quote a lead time for production? Nothing showing on their website yet. I carved my own out of a picatinny blank (aluminum) but initial shooting on my "#2" indicates it needs more drop at the front end. The other approach would be to find a slightly taller set of offset rings. And we will see if the AIM scope is up to the pounding of the 45-70. I am also going to run a test run with a zero power red dot holographic sight.

95534

[slam45]

re EGW rails

the email i got from them said 2 to 3 weeks from first week of February... they had sent the first production run out for finish coating... will list on their site when they have them back

[JackQuest]

BUMP - 5 months later, nothing on eabco's website.

[Nobade]

I have a couple of the new EGW rails on my bench at work. They are currently available and look very nice.

-Nobade

[kitsap]

I have a couple of the new EGW rails on my bench at work. They are currently available and look very nice.

-Nobade

Any chance you could share a couple of pictures, maybe before and after?

DougF

[Nobade]

Any chance you could share a couple of pictures, maybe before and after?

DougF

Sure, once the barrel for the #1 comes back from being rebored. I talked to them today and they said about two more weeks, then I will need to get it chambered and installed. So if I can remember to do it, I'll shoot a couple of pics.

-Nobade

[sleeper1428]

I put up with this same problem on my Ruger #1 in 45/70 for several years before I finally got tired of climbing the stock in order to get a decent sight picture through the 4X Weaver that was mounted with standard Ruger rings. The solution I settled on was a new Bushnell Banner 3X9X40 scope with 6" eye relief mounted using a standard Ruger rear ring and an offset Ruger front ring. This setup works perfectly and allows me to have a clear, full view through the scope without any 'climbing' up the stock. Considering the fact that the Bushnell was not an expensive scope (less than $80 from Optics Planet) I had my doubts about how well it would hold up under the recoil from heavy 45/70 loads in the relatively light Ruger #1. But after running over 250 rounds through the rifle since mounting that scope, I've seen no change in the scope whatsoever so I'm hoping that this is a fair indication that it's going to keep working for the foreseeable future. I understand that Leupold has scopes with similar specs so if you'd prefer a scope with a far longer and more illustrious history of being able to stand up under severe recoil, I suspect you'd prefer to purchase one of those. But as I'm sure you're aware, you'll pay a much higher price for such as scope. In my case, at age 76, actually I was around 73 when I got the scope, I'm well satisfied with my purchase and I'm looking forward to it lasting me for whatever number of years I've got left to shoot paper when my arthritis allows me to get out to the range.

sleeper1428

[021]

A picatinny rail on a No.1? Sorry, all I can think of is "yuck".

[bigted]

i have a #1 45-70 and it is scoped. i do not see the problem with the scope where it is as it {the scope ... leo 2.5 - 7 X } has plenty of eye relief and when i desire to need the higher magnification ... i do choke up on the stock ... but i have plenty of time in those instances to move my mug up a bit to get a god full scope picture at the higher magnification.

also i do not agree with the premis that the buttstock is designed for the open sights ... rather my rifle shoots way better for me with the scope in place ... i have the open sights regulated and ready if something should happen to the scope but ... it sure shoots a ton better in the fit and recoil dept when shooting thru a scope sight.

[doorgunner]

I have to agree with 021. A picatinny rail on a clasic rifle like the No1 would be and is an abomination.

[Nobade]

Yep, this is why I don't make them. Years ago I considered the idea, and polled a bunch of Ruger fans for their opinion. Universally I got the "yeah, it will solve lots of problems but it's ugly so I wouldn't buy one." so I never made any. I am glad EGW decided to, so I don't have to.

-Nobade

[Chief]

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b281/thought101/DSCF0392_zps59566208.jpg (http://s21.photobucket.com/user/thought101/media/DSCF0392_zps59566208.jpg.html)
the offset rings work on this #1. Simple and effective.

[Nobade]

A while back somebody wanted a picture of a #1 with a picatinny rail on it. I finally got my barrel back from Delta Gun Shop and put the #1 back together. Here's a shot of it on my bench.117238

It's not very pretty but the scope is in the right place, dead nuts lined up with the bore, and doesn't have any stress in it from being bent by the crooked factory rings. The 20 MOA cant is a bonus as well, lets this little pipsqueak rifle (30 Badger) shoot further.

-Nobade

[pietro]

Been looking at that same mount, using a scope with a lot of eye relief now.



BINGO ! ! It's not the Ruger #1 mounts (on which I've never had an eye relief issue over 7 rifles), it's the fact that many of the modern, whizz-bang/beat-all scopes are compacts, which have a much shorter tube (and eye relief) than the older style scope that were common when the Ruger #1 was designed (ca.1968).

.

[EDG]

Not only are they short but the turret is in the middle or a little toward the read on some scopes.
I have an old Burris with the forward turret and long rear tube. It works fine on a # 1.


BINGO ! ! It's not the Ruger #1 mounts (on which I've never had an eye relief issue over 7 rifles), it's the fact that many of the modern, whizz-bang/beat-all scopes are compacts, which have a much shorter tube (and eye relief) than the older style scope that were common when the Ruger #1 was designed (ca.1968).

.

[kitsap]

Nobade,

I am the one that asked. Thank you.

Sometimes function and form are the primary considerations. I do not think it looks that bad.

DougF

[Nobade]

You are welcome.

Looks aside, it sure shoots well and lets me use that nice little Vortex scope that otherwise wouldn't work.

-Nobade

[triggerhappy243]

Nobade. do you run a gunsmith shop?

[Nobade]

Nobade. do you run a gunsmith shop?

Don't own it but work there. www.scorehi.com

-Nobade

[triggerhappy243]

ah, say hello to charlie for me. have known him since 78'

[Nobade]

I will. Who are you? We should meet! Come by some time, I am Andy.

-Nobade

[triggerhappy243]

Name is Sean, out in rio rancho. I shoot out at del norte gun club

[EDG]

>>>"yeah, it will solve lots of problems but it's ugly so I wouldn't buy one."<<<

I think those guys are in the minority. If you are so concerned about the appearance you should not put a scope on a #1.
A scope does little for any rifle's appearance or handling. However the #1 was never set up for a reciever sight or a tang sight. So it is sort of crippled from the sighting standpoint. You either use the factory open sight or a scope.

[triggerhappy243]

talk about a special scope mount for the Ruger #1, I had read somewhere that a 1 piece scope base does not maintain 0 as the rifle heats up. My particular rifle has a custom heavy contour SS barrel. it has 2 piece base that were custom made. not 100 % thrilled with the tolerances, but for what I have, I shoot a 4 inch group at 600 yards all day long if I do my part. the rifle has issues.... but I live with them. want to see how well it groups out past 600 as this primarily is used on prairie dogs.

[Nobade]

Yep, any time a modern scope is mounted on a barrel you are going to have issues with stress being generated as the barrel gets hot and gets longer. There's just no way around it besides using a Unertl type scope that allows the mounts to slide on the scope tube. It doesn't seem to be a big deal for most shooters, but using a #1 on prairie dogs in the summer would possibly put a bit of stretch on your scope. Most likely the rings will slip a hair and come back when it cools and you would never notice it, but it will always be there no matter if it is a 1 or 2 piece base. BTW, that's a impressive and unusual #1 you have there. Hang on to that one! What cartridge does it fire?

-Nobade

[triggerhappy243]

this is one unique piece. it has a krieger S.S. bull barrel slightly tapered down to 7/8 of an inch with a muzzle break. 28 inches long... I think. Air gauged and cryo treated. chambered in what is supposed to be 22-250 ackley improved. but it is more like a 22-250 cheetah MK 3.5. I shoot this one exclusively off a bench while on my p-dog hunts. it is too heavy to pack around. Now I am not naming any names but the person that cut this chamber cut with the wrong reamer and cut too much. the parent round does not even headspace at all. I have a 50% case head failure rate when I tried fireforming the parent cartridge in this rifle with factory ammo. I have to make all my own brass... it is a bit of a b*%@#. but once i get that done I neck size all the fired brass. I currently am shooting Sierra 60 gr. Varminter Hollow Point bullets on 38.3 gr. H-380 powder. I do not load for speed, but rather for group size.

[Nobade]

Hmmm, there are a few #1s running around Albuquerque with "improved" chambers like that. Somebody out there doesn't know how Ackley chambers are supposed to work. I am glad yours works so well once you get cases made for it! Neck up, false shoulder, crush fit and fireform with cream 'o' wheat I imagine? I got to help a guy with a 6mm AR last weekend who had the same problem. It would be handy if gunsmiths understood how this stuff is supposed to work.

-Nobade

[triggerhappy243]

I actually have the guys at Sierra to thank for all the help. they really went out of their way. I tried the cream of wheat blanks thing. I now start with new virgin brass and expand the neck to 6MM, and neck size back down w/ 22 neck sizer creating a false shoulder to headspace on and do a medium load with a cheap bullet to fireform. so far the brass is lasting a long long time. (15 reloads) Now I need to start annealing some of the older brass because getting the expander ball out while neck sizing is getting difficult.

I should point out that I did not hire the gunsmith to do this barrel. I traded a car for the rifle. It is a long story How much of what really happened(what I was told) is true or not.

One of my hobbies is to make rifles that previous owners give up on, to get them to shoot well.