Tweesdad, Good idea about the red dot. I was thinking of maybe a 4x scope. I didnt want to end up with a scope that would cover the action of the rifle. I just think that it would be something in the way that doesnt need to be there. But if all else fails, I would not mind adding a red dot.

DEADEYE343.
I hope I did not imply that the action is covered by the scope or its rear ring. All scopes eye pieces are over the loading port. Only mine is further to the rear and 4/10" lower but with plenty room to load the rifle and eject the empty cases.

The rear ring is not over the port but flush with the front of the action and the back is flush with the loading port or the end of the barrel or the front of the falling block. When I have a chance I will take a picture.

Zermil, o.k. I miss understood you. The way it sounded to me was the scope mount was over the action. When I figure out how to get on your web page I want to see it. Pics would be great!

DEADEYE343

When you click on my handle you get my profile, that is where you find my web site. Go to page two and you find the write up on the Ruger #1. As soo as I get a picture I will put it there.



When you see the present picture just imagine the ring is 0.900" further back and is in line with the curved part that comes up to the top of the action just in front of the falling block and the scope nearl touches the barrel



A more stream lined set of rings would enhance the looks, but the Weaver low rings are about as light and solid a ring you can get.



I used a set of these rings and bases on a 7.5 lbs 300Wby with a low profile 4x Leupold for 25 years and they never ever gave any trouble or came loose. Everything on that rifle was light and designed for sheep hunting on foot.