I'm thinking about putting a Leaupold VIII 6X on my Ruger #1 300 H&H.What do you guys think about this scope/gun combanation?Thank you

I have a Leupold 6x on a Browning 78 single shot in 6mm. Works great for deer and varmits. What do you plan to use the No1 for?

An old Weaver steel tubed K-6 was the only scope I had for many years.....It was on my .225 Winchester for prairie dogs and on my Rem 760 in .270 for deer hunting and again on my .375 H&H...

I used that scope on many guns with total satisfaction on every one of them. Woods and prairie and varminting.....It might not have been best for any of these tasks but served well at all of them.

There's nothing wrong with a straight 6X scope!

Today almost every scope I have is a Leopold variable....either 2-7 or 3-9.....and almost all the time they are set on 6X..... It's a good setting for me!

Have a Leupold 6x on my Model 70 7x57. Works great.

Joe A.

One of my favorite scopes is the swarovski 1-6X scope. My 300 H&H wears one. Shot 3 pronghorn antelope and one elk with it last year. Longest shot was 385 yards and did not think I was underscoped at all.....
Mac

Six power was traditionally the go-to magnification for "open country" scopes before the days of dependable varibles came along. Most people used to consider it a little too much magnification for woods hunting or where shots might be jump shots or running shots.

But in my experience, if the gun's stock fits you well and the scope is mounted properly for your physiology, you'll have no trouble on fairly close shots with a 6x scope, particularly using the Leupold which has a rather non-critical eye placement. For longer shots, anything you would shoot with a .300 H&H looks plenty large enough at any distance you would care to shoot it when magnified six times. You'll be shooting at something between the size of deer and moose with an H&H, not ground squirrels, you know.

There are enough advantages with a fixed power scope to make it well worth considering: Lower price, less weight, tougher and less complex, fewer lenses, and never set at the wrong power when game presents itself. If you like it, go for it!

To add to my above post: once while hunting with above rifle and scope, I had held back the call of nature as long as I could indure. I stood up on my stand and commenced to rattle and water the leaves good. I looked off the end of my stand straight down and there stood a buck looking up at me. I tried to cut it off and couldn't. Then I eased around peeing on everything including the deer, I settled the crosshairs on the deer and all I could see was hair. I quickly raised the rifle up and back down to ascertain I has on the shoulder and fired, killing the buck. What can I say?

Joe A.

Great choice.

I have a leopould M8 6x on my 300 H&H number one at the present time. Works great with offset rings.

On a rifle with long range potential like the .300 H&H I prefer a variable with more power at the top end. I find more power to enable me to shoot more accurately. I like, at the least, a 3-9. On my .270, and a few other field rifles, I use a 4-14. Personally, I like to shoot a few varmints every year with my elk rifle. I guarantee if you can bust a ground hog at 3 or 400 yards with your .300, it won't be hard to connect on any big game.

I have one. Stuck it on my walk around varmint rifle, a Ruger 77-22H. Great even at 200 yds.

Rich

I've switched over from having variables on hunting rifles to fixed 4x and 6x scopes.
I have an older Weaver K-6 on my Rem 722 in 222 mag, and it makes a perfect period set up for an old rifle. Nothing at all wrong with the K-6, and the one I got in a trade has no ring marks and looks just like it did when delivered new.

quote:

Originally posted by mojave:
I'm thinking about putting a Leaupold VIII 6X on my Ruger #1 300 H&H.What do you guys think about this scope/gun combanation?Thank you

The 6x42 will easily get the 300H&H to the 1000yd line.

larrys been drinking again...

I'd greedily take drinking,over being you...but who wouldn't?!!?

I'm taking a Weaver straight 6x as my backup scope to Alaska for my 300 RUM (Zeiss 3.5x10)

Have a 1.75x5 on my 375 H&H and it's good for a long way - 400 yards. Buddy of mine took a shot a baboon with it at 550 yards, elevation dead on, windage off (windy outside), that baboon moved really, really fast when that round plinked the rock next to him.

I've zero qualm with 6x glass on Critters to 800+.

+(grin)

I have a VXII 3-9x40mm on my M70 .300 H&H. It has the LR Duplex. I absolutely love it. With 200grn NP's it is dead on.

I have gravitated to higher magnifications as the years pass (and my eyes are still good).

In my youth I hunted with the 2.5-8, then moved to the 3.5-10. Now I think the 4.5-14 is the best scope for general (Western) hunting.

My 1957 M70 300 H&H has a 3.5-10 on it, but that is only because I do not have an extra 4.5-14 to replace it with.

I have found that on hunting rifles a good variable with the option for low power is best ( at least for me ) I keep on lowest setting and will be raedy for any close encounter or moving animal close in. If the game is out far
you have time to move to a higher setting. I would go for a 1.5 0r 1.75 to 6 and all options will be covered.

I like it...perfecto!

When in open country, 6x is as good as is gets.
I myself, prefer a variable for big game. Even in open country one will find areas where a lower power can be a benefit. Seems there is always some compromise when hunting. I find myself at 5x most of the time with my Zeiss 3x9.
When I first started hunting in the 50´s the Weaver K6 was the standard for open country.
Worked well then as it will today.

quote:

Originally posted by JLHeard:
It has the LR Duplex