Rifle is a Ruger #1 in 300H&H. 26" tube.

It's been accurized and shoots great. Some years back my gunsmith also installed the Mould's 2-pc base for mounting.

It's currently topped w/ a Leupy 1-4x (1-inch tube). Farthest shooting envisioned would be 300yds.

I was thinking of moving up to either a 1-6x24 (30mm, w/ illuminated reticle; not sure on reticle type) or a 2-7x-33 (also 30mm tube w/ illum reticle).

Comments or other recommendations welcome, especially if you have a similar 300 mag.

quote:

I was thinking of moving up to either a 1-6x24 (30mm, w/ illuminated reticle; not sure on reticle type) or a 2-7x-33 (also 30mm tube w/ illum reticle).

With a 300 H&H on board I'd look at something like a Leupold VX6 2-12x42 with an Ill. LR dot reticle. The .300 H&H can really stretch its legs if needed. I, for one, have a lot of fun banging 500 yard steel just for giggles. The power is nice at those ranges.

If there truly is no intention to reach out to those distances, then perhaps the Zeiss Duralyt 2-8 would work. I'd be cautious on eye relief though. I'm 5'8" and found that I needed a lot more eye relief on a #1 than I had originally thought just due to LOP.

A Swarovski Z3 3-10x would look really great on that rifle

M

I think I would opt for a Leupold M8-6X. I can't think of anything that you couldn't do with that scope at reasonable range for the H&H, and it would be nice and trim on the #1.

I just bought a #1 300 H&H from another member and found eye relief can be a problem. The only scope I had that would work well was a Zeiss Conquest 3x9. The scope needs to be rearward in the rings and the windage/elevation adjustment knobs hit the rear ring before it was good for use. I tried several Leupolds and Swarovskis but only the Zeiss worked for me. Extension rings are certainly an option but I hate their appearance. I have a 9.3x74 and also had the same problem till I mounted a Leupold 2.5 compact. The Leupold 1.5x5 was far enough back to work but the front ring was right on the front scope lens. I did not have a Leupold 3.5x10 but that might work also. It has a long useable tube section.

VX3 3.5x10x40 with offset ring set

Our nation is brain washed with the idea that the more powerful a scope is the better one can shoot..Not so,even with a 2.5X scope you can see an elk at 1500 yards well enough to shoot him, if you were so inclined, so unless your counting ticks you don't need a big clumsey scope on any rifle..Big scopes interfer with balance, they create heat waves, and magnify your natural body rythem (wiggle) by the power of the scope and that lends to poor shooting...but its hard to get that across to most folks these days..

I have hunted all over the world with my favorite scope the 3 and 4 power Leupolds. Made some damn long shots and some mighty fast snap shots with them also..Field of view is important to me, but then I still shoot iron sights a good deal.

And thats the rest of the story!!

For a whole lot of years, my go-to elk rifles have worn a 1.5x5 and a 2x7.

Leupold 3-9 or 3.5-10, perfect medicine for my elk rifles and the distances and terrain I hunt elk in.
My shots vary from 30 yards to 450 yards. Average shot 208 yards.

Nick: All a 30mm tube gets you is more bulk and weight. Why mess with them?

I largely agree with Ray that higher magnification is rarely advantageous in hunting. However, higher magnification can be useful at the bench in sighting, which is the real advantage of variables on hunting rifles (otherwise a fixed 3x, 4x, or 6x would do just fine.) A variable with a low end somewhere around 3X and a high end no greater than 9x to 10x is extremely versatile. My .300 H&H (Sako) happens to wear a Leupold VX-III 3.5-10X with the B&C reticle (very helpful if you have opportunities at extended yardages). But I doubt that I would take any less game if it had a plain old Leupold M-8 4X on it.

Agree with Ray's comments on iron sights on DGRs generally. FWIW, I grew up shooting peep-sighted .22s and later shot in competitive high-power matches (M1Gs, M1As, ARs), including a few times at Camp Perry.

On the scope itself, 2-7x for shots on big game at 300yds and in would be sufficient for most species I'd hunt with it here, although I'd take it over to Africa for soft-skinned plains game, along with my 404J for buff. And the 2x setting provides an acceptable low-end magnification - for a 300H&H anyway.

I guess I can see where a 30mm tube adds weight and might detract from the lines of the #1, but if I could find a 1-inch 2-7x with great glass and an illuminated reticle, I might call it good.

quote:

Originally posted by Nick Adams:

I guess I can see where a 30mm tube adds weight and might detract from the lines of the #1, but if I could find a 1-inch 2-7x with great glass and an illuminated reticle, I might call it good.

And that's the whole issue: the need for a 1" tubed IL scope. I think the Trijicon Accupoint 3-9 is the only 1" out there.

All good suggestions but keep in mind the #1 ring spacing creates lots of problems. Many scopes suggested just will not fit on that rifle. Don't buy a scope till you are sure it will give you a proper sight picture.

I also have a #1 in .300 H&H. I put a Leupold VX3 2.5-8X on mine, and it is fine with the standard Ruger rings. This scope is also just about the same size as the Leupold 4X.

I agree with Ray Atkinson's post 100%. If you can't humanely and regularly kill elk at 300 yards with the scope you already have on the rifle, I honestly don't think you should be throwing lead at the noble beasts at all.

An elk at 300 yards only appears to be 75 yards away viewed at 4-X setting.

If you just really want a new scope, there is no point in going beyond any good 2-7X variable which will fit on the rifle with proper eye-relief, and a plain old 6X would be as high as I would ever go in a fixed power scope. It will make an elk 500 yards away only appear to be 83.33 yards away. 7 power on a 2-7 variable will make him look only 71.42 yards away.

But personally, I'd be loath to lose the great 100 yard and below advantage your current scope gives you

As far as scope "fit" goes, the goofy Ruger quarter-rib was replaced by a Moulds 2pc mount, and the number of weaver slots available on the Moulds for setting up a scope eliminated the eye-relief issue. Height of the scope above bore is, of course, a function of the height of the rings. Neither are an issue on my #1.

It's really an issue of getting slightly more magnification on the low & high ends and much better glass.

I'm looking hard at the Leupy 2-7x33 with illumin #4 fire dot reticle (#110685) or, possibly, the same scope w/ the illum ballistic circle f.d. (#111233), although that ballistic circle makes the reticle look busier than I'd like, especially if a quick shot was needed in low-light/dusk conditions. The #4 reticle seems "cleaner."

A friend who has the ballistic circle f.d. scope (# 111233) claims it's sort of a "tactical crossover" optic for guys who hunt deer and hogs with the same ARs they're using in 3-gun or for tactical training.

I did mention in discussing these reticles that my rifle was a Ruger #1, which is about as nontactical as a rifle gets, but the point sorta got lost somewhere ...

The 2-7x33 Firedot is an awesome scope and the Firedot 4 is my favorite option. I don't think you can find a better scope for the money, or maybe for any amount of money. The only scope I may prefer would be the Zeiss 1.5-6x42 or Leupold LPS in 1.5-6x42. They are tied for my all time favorite. Both are hard to find for reasonable $$ though.

If you just have the itch for a new scope, go buy whatever you would like to try. I would look at demo models for sale at http://cameralandny.com/ and http://swfa.com/Riflescopes-C1443.aspx You could save some money and they are both great companies to deal with. Mention AR and Camera Land NY normally offers a discount for AR members. I love the red dot scopes for some purposes and have examples from Kahles, Swarovski, Leupold and Trijicon. However, I would not put one on a precision rifle such as your #1 in 300 H&H. I see the biggest advantage for the dots in close cover, short range and limited visibility. You can always keep it turned off when not needed but it is an expensive option for a "nice to have". I bought all of mine used or as demo models from the above mentioned companies at a considerable savings.

With the exception of varmints and targets, my scope has always been on the lowest power setting on every animal I have shot. I do all of my looking with binos or a spotting scope so when its time to shoot I am not messing with a scope. Also, I don't need the scope to magnify my stability anymore than necessary!

Go shoot your rifle out to 300+ yards and see how you do with the scope you have. I like to use a paper plate as it is the size of the heart/lung kill zone on most game animals. I bought a pair of Zeiss Conquest 3x9 scopes awhile back. It is a lot of scope for the money and has a lot of eye relief. I put one on my M70 375 H&H and really like it.

Whatever you decide to do, hang on to your 1x4. It is one of the handiest and most practical scopes out there for a hunting rifle.

Instead of blathering on with a bunch of mumbo jumbo, I recommend that one simply go to: http://www.natchezss.com/brand...=WE&mfgSubGroup=8954 and see if any of these will meet your needs. I'm on my third or forth one (every time I see them on sale at Natchez I order one), with a 6.5-24x that arrived today. You'll not find any 30mm main tube scope that is any better for the price and they will do anything that needs doing.

To me a Ruger no. 1 is by design a compact rifle and even with a 26 inch tube its about what a 22" barreled bolt gun is in OA length..Its flat and lean and mean...I have used the Ruger no.1 for saddle carry on horseback hunts on many ocassions checking fence and whatever. I used them back then they were popular and the Weavers and Leupold 3x, or 4x were the only thing around and they worked then and still do...It often makes me shudder to see someone packing a 10 pound rifle and a 3 ft. long scope on a horse tilting the saddle and rubbing sores on the withers all day long, and the outfitter constantly checking and changing the saddle for the dude....

I understand not everyone hunts horseback as much as some of us, but most good pack in hunts require the horse these days..but even packing into the wilderness on foot sure makes a happy hunter at the end of a day. A fwt. rifle deserves a small scope..

I have a few 2x7x28s or 33s, so they are a viable option for me, but mostly lower power has been my choice.

I also believe that fixed power scoped have less moving parts to go wrong, and several top manufactures have admitted this to me at shows and SCI..My hunting docs tell me the 30MM is a gimmick, the human eye can only gather so much light and a one inch tube is just as good??

But todays craze for bigger and better scopes is the rage and so be it, its just not my cup of tea, make that coffee with a shot in it..

Mmmm coffe a little sugar and vodka

For me i use a 1,5-6*42 for most of my hunts it work well for driven game and stalking situations. I dont go near horses.
A big 50-56mm with reddot is made for evening and night time low light conditions its a specialised tool for what kind of hunt. You cant come with a fixed 4*33 on a wildboar foodstand.

2.5-8 Leopold, good for whatever you need.

quote:

Originally posted by drm-hp:
2.5-8 Leopold, good for whatever you need.

That being said,,my 300's spent most of their life in the field on 4X.

My view is that the only blather in this thread is suggesting that shooters take the recommendations of sellers or perambulations of gun writer product-pimps as a source of "truth" about what is best in the field.

I agree again 100% with Mr. Atkinson's latest post. Though I have SOME of my hunting rifles equipped with variables, almost all of the ones I use most commonly are wearing fixed power glass. And although I said 6X would be as high a fixed power as I would ever use, right now most of my go-to rifles have fixed power 2.5X, 3X, or 4X scopes on them regardless which cartridge they are chambered for. I have killed at least 40 elk with them, a few moose, and maybe two dozen deer of other breeds and variations.

The plain fact is, as Ray has been trying to point out, is that one cannot buy accuracy. Accuracy is a skill.
What one CAN buy is better or worse portability, better or worse balance, and positive or negative aesthetics. To get the two "betters" and the "positive", one has to buy a scope appropriate to the needs of the real hunt use(s), the already existing balance of the rifle, and the eye of the beholder(s).

So buy whatever fits your pistol. But don't toss your nice 1-4X. There may well come a time and/or age when you greatly want it back.

I prefer having enough magnification on my longer range rifles. For both the enjoyment of seeing well at the range and sure game identification in the field.

I looked at some of the rifles here and the 264 Westerner has a 4-12 Leupold on it with AO. The 7mm RM a 3-9 and another a 4.5-14. The old M70 300 HH has a 3-9 Leupold.

Of course we can aim well with even irons however I prefer to be prepared and have the best.

I am close to ray,s point of view when it comes to hunting scopes. That being said most of my rifles have leupold scopes.
I like the 2.5x8 or 3.5 X 10. Just cause i like to look through them. But i can't remember ever shooting at an animal
over 6 power.
I think I would go 3.5X10 on the 300 but a VX2 3X9 would save you some money and likly be just as good at crunch time...tj3006

quote:

Originally posted by Dale:
I also have a #1 in .300 H&H. I put a Leupold VX3 2.5-8X on mine, and it is fine with the standard Ruger rings. This scope is also just about the same size as the Leupold 4X.

Leupold 2.5-8X is my favorite for a hunting rifle.

Well do doubt the varibles are the top sellers and fixed powers hardly exist, but no all us curmudgeons are dead yet, so we buy up all the 3X Leupolds we can find..

Right now I am livid for a 2.5X Leupold Alaskan with that wonderful 7/8" tube..I traded mine off in a weak moment right here on AR...

Ray,

I am as old as you and most of my hunting rifles have variables now.

There are half a dozen extra scopes on the cabinet in the basement and most of them are fixed power leftovers.

Sure we got game with 4X's but this is 2014 not 1955.

The 8 extra backup scopes are:

2.5-8 Conquest
2-7 Leu. VX11
3-9 Conquest
10X Lyman Wolverine
K-4 Weaver
4X Lyman All American (2)
6X " " "

Also I bought a couple of used Zeiss 4X Diatal's thinking they would be cool and they are not up to a decent variable in my view. I may switch one for a variable.

So, we've talked a lot about scopes here...but what about the Reticles?

My favorite 7mm hunting rig wears an FX3 6x42 with the LR Duplex. I have come to absolutely LOVE that reticle for its simplicity and repeatability. 300, 400, 500 yard aiming points that work every time.

I'm almost embarrassed at the amount of money I've spent on glass in my safe when I've come to the conclusion that for hunting it's really hard to beat simplicity.

quote:

Originally posted by rnovi:
So, we've talked a lot about scopes here...but what about the Reticles?

My favorite 7mm hunting rig wears an FX3 6x42 with the LR Duplex. I have come to absolutely LOVE that reticle for its simplicity and repeatability. 300, 400, 500 yard aiming points that work every time.

I'm almost embarrassed at the amount of money I've spent on glass in my safe when I've come to the conclusion that for hunting it's really hard to beat simplicity.

Amen to that brother.

quote:

Originally posted by tjroberts:
But I can't remember ever shooting at an animal over 6 power.

+1

quote:

So, we've talked a lot about scopes here...but what about the Reticles?

My favorite 7mm hunting rig wears an FX3 6x42 with the LR Duplex. I have come to absolutely LOVE that reticle for its simplicity and repeatability. 300, 400, 500 yard aiming points that work every time.

Thanks for everyone's input. Going with a Leupy illuminated firedot 2-7x.

Just trying to figure out the reticle choice:

Firedot German #4 (#110685 - very clean reticle w/ thick posts that step down to thin lines) or the Ballistic Firedot (#111233 - busier, but has hashes for quick holdover shots w/o dialing).

I'm among the old farts here.

I like fine reticles and such on the range, but the scope I've seen harvest the most game out in the veld (not culling) is a Weaver K2.5 with a Lee Dot reticle.

it is outstanding on running game. Not too good on far shots, but if the dot covers the whole vital AND others, should you be shooting?

Anyway - I still have that scope and it's on my 9.3x62 ready for a trip to the Top End here in Aus next year.

quote:

* * * the scope I've seen harvest the most game out in the veld (not culling) is a Weaver K2.5 with a Lee Dot reticle.
It is outstanding on running game. * * *

I actually have an old Lyman Alaskan 3x with a simialr reticle, but its crosshairs are thin and they intersect at what is about a 3MOA dot. (Obviously, it's not the illuminated type).

quote:

Not too good on far shots, but if the dot covers the whole vital AND others, should you be shooting?

Depends on the MOA-size of the dot relative to the kill-zone of the animal hunted. There's minute-of-gopher vs. minute-of-water-buff. If the dot subtends all or most of the animal, you're going to have a shot-placement problem.

quote:

Anyway - I still have that scope and it's on my 9.3x62 ready for a trip to the Top End here in Aus next year.

Have fun and good luck!

quote:

Originally posted by Nick Adams:

quote:

So, we've talked a lot about scopes here...but what about the Reticles?

My favorite 7mm hunting rig wears an FX3 6x42 with the LR Duplex. I have come to absolutely LOVE that reticle for its simplicity and repeatability. 300, 400, 500 yard aiming points that work every time.

Thanks for everyone's input. Going with a Leupy illuminated firedot 2-7x.

Just trying to figure out the reticle choice:

Firedot German #4 (#110685 - very clean reticle w/ thick posts that step down to thin lines) or the Ballistic Firedot (#111233 - busier, but has hashes for quick holdover shots w/o dialing).

Tough choice there. I like the normal LR firedot plex but I'm not really happy with the Ballistic firedot. I don't like the circle-dot reticle…just too busy for my tastes.

crap, making me show my age again..Gimme a std. Leupold Duplex, its the perfect big game scope under any conditions..
Confession no. 1, I still like a med. cross hair and a Leupold dot..I prefer a med cross hair on a varment scope like my fixed 6 Lyman permacenter thats on my .222..Out here in the Pacific N. W. we get shots at coyotes and Rockchucks from 10 yards to 1000..I'm a 300 yard shooter on the varmints and big game..I can always get that close!!

Oh I take some 400 to 1000 yard shots at Rockchucks from time to time and by design, but the success rate goes to hell in a handbasket. but hey I don't even care if I miss a varmint..

My favorite varmint hunt is with my Sako L-461 5 lb. 6x45. walking about gun.. Had a 2.5X Leupold Alaskan on it for years, then a same in 4X, then a same in 6X, but sold them all, now has a 3.9 compact varible Leupold. Shooting running jack rabbits at up to whatever range until they roll or go out of sight..I also use my iron sighted guns for those rascals and at some pretty long ranges, now thats fun. Lately the Idaho jacks have gotten pretty thin, used to be in the thousands per hunt..coyotes are more plentiful now and thats great fun..Miss those Texas Javalina however.

Zeiss Conquest HD5

2-10 X 42
1" tube
Z600 reticle
$900.00