Need a scope for my new Ruger No1 in 6.5x55

What do you intend to do with the gun? Hunt, target off the bench? I put a fixed 6x scope on my #1 25-06 but I just use it for hunting. Had a 4.5-14 on it at first but found it was too much for hunting. Got a different gun for bench and target shooting. Whatever route you go you need a long eye relief scope.
 
What chamber is that ? The European 6.5x55 or the smaller case [.473" dia American case ] ? Your chamber , case , and reloading dies should all match. Reloads can easily match the original velocities rather than the wimped out newer ones !! 140 gr @ 2750 or a bit more .Get that all set up and you'll have a very accurate rifle.
 
I put Zeiss Conquest 3-9X40's on two Ruger No. 1's.

This scope has an honest 4" of eye relief, which eliminated the need for offset scope rings for me.

I believe the Zeiss Conquest is similar in quality to the Leupold VXIII's, so this isn't an inexpensive scope. (Fair warning... :) )
 
Scope for Ruger 1

I normally woudn't consider a Bushnell scope, but I came across this:

Bushnell 6500 2.5-16x42 Mod. # 652164M

Best price I found is from Optics Planet

Check out the specs- 2.5-16? WOW! 30mm tube. They claim better than 95% light transmission. 3.9" eye clearance. Push/pull turrets. 50 mm objective also available. Three different reticles.

Price is about $675 depending on reticle.
 
OK, fair enough, I didn't say what I'd be doing with the rifle. The short answer is both hunting and bench. I want to take advantage of the Swede's ability to reach out. And can someone tell me the diff. btwn the American and European 6.5x55? I wasn't aware there was a difference. I have two Swedes now, and have never heard this before.
 
I put a Nikon Monarch African with the 1 inch tube on my #1 in 7x57. Looks awsome and plenty of eye relief. Can pick one up for about $275. It is 1-4 power which is plenty for a #1a configuration. (I am assumimng it is the 1-A configuration as that is the only one I recall Ruger releasing in that caliber). As far as bench, not the best scope for that, but then, if you want a bench rifle, I would not be looking for a #1 for that job. While not inaccurate, the 1-A with short Alexander Henry fore end will not be the best for getting a steady rest at the bench.
 
I would say the same scope I have been recommending to my friends and family lately. If you go to Natchez and look under Weaver scopes, you will actually find a few Nitrex scopes. The Nitrex scopes were made in the same factory to the same specs as the Weaver Grand Slam scopes. The parent company finally realized this was kind of a silly strategy so they discontinued the Nitrex line. Now Natchez is selling these $350 scopes for about $140.

I was skeptical as always when I saw them advertised but I bought a TR One 3-10X 50 mm. Many times I have taken that rifle to the range and alternated between shooting with that scope and a couple other rifles with a Leuopold VariX III and a Nikon Buckmaster. That Nitrex is a bit better than the Nikon and at least equal to the Leuopold. Those are $300-400 scopes but the Nitrex is at least as good if not better.

After shooting with the Nitrex, I ordered another one identical to the first one this week. Finally my .243 will have a scope worthy of the accuracy it has shown with the cheapo Bushnell it has now.
 
Thanks for the input. I'll check out that Weaver scope, as well as some others.

I have a No.1 Int'l in 7x57 that is making its second trip back to Ruger for some issues that have not been corrected: Iron sights not aligned. When it gets back, fixed, hopefully, I'll look into something for it as well.
 
The best bang for the buck right now is either the Ziess Conquest 3X9X40 or the Bushnell Elite 4200 series which are heavily discounted at places like Natchez and OP. I replaced a VXIII last night with another 4200 2.5X10X50 4A Ill Reticle on my Precision Carbine because its heads and tails above the VXIII in low light conditions.
 
For "reaching out", I wouldn't use less than a 15x or so up to 500- and more beyond that for punching paper.

You can bang big steel with less, but if you want itty bitty holes at 600- 100 yards, you need as much magnification as you can get.
 
Thanks again, guys. Some good recommendations here. I'm going to check out the Bushnell scopes. And the Burris, too. I hear they make a really good scope for the money as well. I like illuminated reticles, and have several.
 
OK, now I'm having trouble getting proper eye relief on the No.1. I was going to put a scope I have on it, a Nikon 3-9x40, at least temporarily, but it is too far forward on the Ruger base. Is there any sort of extension for this rifle, so that I can mount the scope far enough back to get good eye relief?
 
As mentioned, depends on what you want to do with the rifle, personally I like a fixed 4X for hunting, to each his own.

As to the rifle, I like the Ruger #1 and the 6.5X55 is an excellent cal. both for hunting and target. The two would be a heck of a combination. Looks like you got you a real shooter there.

Let us know how it shoots. I think that would be a great hunting rifle.
 
OK, now I'm having trouble getting proper eye relief on the No.1.
Click to expand...

Due to the position of the quarter rib, this is a common problem with the No. 1.

I had Leupold 3-9X40's on two Ruger No. 1's, with offset rings that moved the scope approximately 0.5" to the rear.

When I had them rebarreled, I needed new rings with adjustable windage in the ring, and I couldn't find them in an offset pattern. But, I did find that the Zeiss scope had 4.0" of eye relief, where the Leupold had only 3.5".

While offset rings are cheaper than buying a new scope (if you have one at hand), selecting a new scope with sufficient eye relief may be a better solution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top