For myself I found the Ruger 1/4 rib very unsuitable for a good scope location namely a 3-9x42 Sightron with Ruger rings. I even bought the Burris To Weaver conversion to get the scope further back and cut the stock 1/2".

The scope ended up very high at 1.90" and still not far enough back. Substituded a 3-9x40 3200 Bushnell still not perfect at that hight. the 3200 scope has a less critical eye relief

I fitted a Weaver #58 base to overlap the action and fitted a front base. The rear Weaver ring sits on top of the action flush with end of the barrel.This utilizes the rear 1/4 rib screw holes, screws and stud. The scope is now far enough back and the objective bell very close to the barrel a very satisfactory installation with low Weaver Rings.

By removing the 1/4 rib, Burris converion and rings etc I reduced the weight by 10oz and that is another plus for the 25-06 which I find a bit heavy. I have a full "How too" on my web page.

Fred M

Thanks for the info! I have always found that the quarter-rib arrangement puts most scopes a little too far forward for optimum use of eye relief, especailly when wearing heavy cold weather clothing.

Did anybody think of trying one of those "scout scopes"? A scope with extended eye relief? I am working on getting a #1 in the 45/70. I have been thinking of ways to overcome what you guys are saying. Thanks for any help.

Keeping the limited range potential of the 45-70 in mind, I put a red dot scope on my Ruger #3, and have never regretted the choice. More than enough accuracy for anything you would use a 45-70 for, at any reasonable range. The best I have done was a center of mass hit on a woodchuck at a measured 203 yards. More than good enough for me.

I can only speak for myself, but I found in my collection of scopes two that where better suited than others.

One is the Bushnell 3200 3-9x40, the other is a Kahles 3-9x42 both worked well. Like I mentioned above the Bushnell has just a bit mor eye relief and that is the one I choose.