Author Topic: Ruger #1 scope choice (Read 764 times)

Mark · « **on:** December 14, 2004, 06:52:14 AM »

I am in the process of acquiring a #1V in 25-06. I plan on using this rifle for target and possibly varmits(groundhogs). For a scope choice I was considering a Bushnell Elite 4200 4X16X40. Does anyone have experience with this combination. I was concerned about eye relief. Thanks

Omaha-BeenGlockin · « **Reply #1 on:** December 14, 2004, 08:19:49 AM »

Eye relief won't be that critical with that rifle/cartridge combo---heavy rifle and small bore makes for little recoil.

Never have really been sold on Bushnell---and prefer Burris----Zeiss----Kahles and the higher end Leupolds for my scope needs.

redawg · « **Reply #2 on:** December 14, 2004, 03:30:57 PM »

I have had that exact combination. A No. 1V .25-06 w/ 4-16x40 Elite 4200. I was shooting 75gr vmaxs and hps and eye relief was not a problem. I don't really think you'd have a problem even with 120gr bullets, as far as eye relief is concerned. I ended up moving the scope to a different rifle though and haven't put anything back on the No. 1 yet. When I can afford it, I'll probably end up buying another 4-16 Elite for it. For what you're gonna use it for, I think it would be a perfect combination.

Mark · « **Reply #3 on:** December 15, 2004, 02:41:21 AM »

Excuse my choice of terms. Eye versus scope position is more of my concern than eye relief from a recoil perspective. Can the Elite 4200 be positioned using the standard Ruger rings so that a full sight picture is possible without an ancomfortable body position? This will be my first #1 and I have heard that the #1s have some peculiar scope mounting issues. I am hoping that the 4200 is long enough to allow the scope to be positioned to fit the gun and allow a natural shootng position. Thanks in advance for your replies.

redawg · « **Reply #4 on:** December 15, 2004, 10:11:29 AM »

Mark, I don't remember having to get in any uncomfortable shooting positions for this rifle/scope combination. I did buy my rifle used though. The rings that came on it looked like Ruger rings, but the barrel was stamped "Made In The 200th Year Of American Liberty", so even if they are Ruger rings, they may not be the same height rings that are being shipped with rifles of recent manufacture.

This Elite is a little on the longer side. Originally I was going to put mine on a sporter weight .243, but after getting the scope, I decided it was a little large for that rifle. I do remember that when it was mounted on the No. 1, that I had the windage/elevation turret almost against the rear (buttstock) ring. But as I said previously, it wasn't uncomfortable for me. Hope this helps!

Mark · « **Reply #5 on:** December 16, 2004, 03:28:03 AM »

Thanks Redawg. I will give it a try.

RT8 · « **Reply #6 on:** December 21, 2004, 08:45:41 AM »

we (my dad and I) fought with his No1 (converted to 22lr...sweeeeet) and scopes for years. Just couldn't get the scope to come back far enough. Heard somewhere that Ruger would trade rings with you. I called them and got them to swap me a set of double offset rings for the existing ones. Gives ~5/8" or so more rearward movement. Was enough to allow the VXII 3-9X40 to be mounted easily.