No not breeding
I have a Ruger No.1S in 45-70 and I plan on mounting a Leupold VXII 2-7x33 on it.The Rifle came with high rings but they are too high for me.
Has anyone mounted this combo and what height rings did you use?
Rugers catalog says their lows work for 32mm scope I wouldn't think 1mm would make a difference but one never knows until you try it.
I'll have to order rings and don't want to order both low and med. sets and have to return the ones I don't want.Any help on this would be appreciated.Thanks rws2

Buy the medium.

I have been going through the same problem. If you can get the proper eye relief with standard rings I would get the low rings. I bought the offset rings which can only be had in medium height. I'm thinking of getting the low rings and crawling the stock a little. I'm using a Luepold 6x36mm on it now but and thinking of changing to a varII 1-4.

I have low rings on my No.1's and have leupold 1.5-5x's, 1.75-6x, and 2.5-8x's vari-x III's. All have enough eye relief at all power settings for me. I don't think the low rings would work with compact scopes and still retain the rear sight blade though.

I also have a #1 in 45-70. I have a Leupold 2.5-8xx36 on it. I tried low rings, but they wouldn't let the scope come back all the way without removing the rear sight. I switched to medium and they work perfect.

The actual heights are low: .325" medium: .435" high: .565"

Thanks Everyone!!! I will order a set of mediums.I wanted to just use the open sights but my eyes aren't the best anymore and a scope would be a better choice for me.Thanks Again

On my Number 1, 45-70 I have the Leupold Ruger low rings. Very low. I use a refurbished Weaver K2.5 scope. Post reticle. I am lucky with mine as it shoots winchester 300 grain factory under an inch (when I am at an outdoor range with bright light). It weaver is short enough not to hit the front sight. If I was getting a new scope I think the Leupold VXII 1-4 matte might be the one I would want to use. Not shooting long range with 45-70.

Mikethebear,
Do you like the Leupold rings better than the Ruger factory rings?
Leupolds site says the lows will work with there 2-7 scope.

I do like the Leupold rings for Ruger. Only had them on the rifle about a year. Yet to take them hunting or use a heavy handload. So we will see. After I posted I got it out of the safe and looked at the rifle. The tube does go over the front sight, and clears it by what looks like about a milimeter. The eyepiece bell end of the scope is centered over the safety ridge when the safety is off. I have it adjusted as far back as I want, but there is a possible 1/2 inch play either way. One problem is that it doesn't leave a lot of room to insert a cartridge. However I seem to be able to pile the empty brass up fairly quickly at the range with no real feeling of a problem reloading. The measured distance between the scope body and the quarter rib is .210 inches. The front end of the scope is alligned almost exactly with the point where the rib begins to sloop down at the front. The highest point of the folded front sight is 1.2 inches from the front of the front scope ring. This scope is a weaver K2.5-1. Steel made in ElPaso about 1972. If I crawl the stock a bit I can see the whole field of view. A more modern scope would have better eye relief. If you could position the scope so that the front Bell started about 1.5 inches in front of the leupold front ring then it would clear the front sight and it would accomadate about .2 of an inch of increase in radius over the scope tube. Hope this might help.

Mikethebear,
Thanks that does help me alot.I was shopping the other day and found a set of Leupold Lows for the No.1 They didn't have the scope I wanted but could get me one in 4 days at a price that is $10.00 cheaper than anywhere else I've found.I prefer Leupold Rings and Bases on all my other rifles but just wasn't sure how they worked on a Rugers.Thanks rws2