I bought one of the Cabelas run in 300 H & H. It has the high gloss bluing.

I bought it because I wanted a No. 1 and always wanted a 300 H & H.

I want a scope to match the finish and balance the rifle. Aesthetics and practicality for general use.

Suggestions appreciated.

300H&H in a #1, a combination hard to beat IMHO. I have a #1 in .300 Weatherby with a Leupold on it, wouldn't part with it. I understand your dilemma and I considered Weaver / Weatherby / other blued steel scopes but the optics of to-day are hard to beat.Only suggestion I have is don't over power the rifle (as in scope size and gadgets) and it will look fine. ---

I never worried about the balanced look of a No. 1. I always chose a scope that worked will with the forward mounted scope base.

I forgot to explain my choice in scopes. Those are all older style Burris scopes. They have the forward mounted turret box and longer tubes. It's very easy to get proper eye relief with this style of scope.

Is that a 3X9 Burris on the Mannlicher stocked No.1 on the right? Sure looks like the turret housing is properly centered. Nice collection. Thanks for sharing...

Yes, it's a 3x9 Signature series Burris. That is such a sweet little gun/scope combo, I just love it.

The 7mm Remington has a 4x16 along with the 25-06 except with target nobs. The Swift has a 8x32 and the 204 has a 6x24.

I used the Conetrol ring and base system to mount a 2.5X Leupold on 9.3X74R Ruger. It has worked very well.

The Cabelas .300 H&H has fixed sights so I recommend a removable set of rings. Fixed sights are good, especially with a long sighting plain.

For something like .300 H&H I prefer a fixed 6x or 10x. I have a 10x42 on my own .300 H&H single shot.

Some examples of what I think would be nice:

Leupold FX-II Rifle Scope 6x36mm

Leupold FX-3 6x42mm (my second choice)

Sightron SIII 10x42mm

Leupold Mark 4 M3 10x40mm

Schmidt & Bender PM II 10x42mm (my first choice and what my rifle wears)

IMO, the No. 1 is a sleek rifle, best complimented by a compact scope in low mounts.

That said, I'd go with a 2.5x-8x VX3. My No. 1 in 35 Whelen wears a 1.75x-6x VX3, but for Holland's 30 Super, you'd probably want a touch more glass.

I struggle to get a scope with long enough eye relief on a #1. I have a Zeiss Conquest 3x9 on my 300 H&H and a Leupold 2.5 on my 9.3. No way I could position a 2.5x8. I can't get it far enough rearward.

Putting a scope on a No. 1 is not my first rodeo. I owned a few more of them then are in the picture. You want to crawl a stock, then put a little compact scope on it.

Here's one with a Leapold 3x9, killed 1 elk, what a pain in the butt. I spent too much of my time lining my eye up with the scope. Almost lost the shot.

That's the case with just about any falling block or single shot rifle.

Your options end up either living with a short LOP or mounting a scope way back.

Some people will mount a scope on their single shot with the sole aim of making it look good. Then they can't shove the butt far enough into their shoulder to shoot the thing. Some rifles are set up so badly that you nearly have to roll the rifle over and rest the side of the butt on your collar bone. Nevertheless, the owners of those rifles will tell you they set them up right because moving the scope way back doesn't look good.

I prefer the opposite set of priorities. I mount the scope where it is the most useful and I don't care if that means it is slid way back in the rings.

Lower power scopes are more forgiving with longer eye reliefs than higher magnification scopes. You can mount a low power scope further forward and make the rifle look nicer but how useful is a 1.5-5X scope with a 20mm objective on a .300 H&H rifle?

I would look real hard for a Leupold 2.5-8X or a 3-9X.

The H&H can easily make use of more scope, but those two would balance nicely.

Gee I think I could do some pretty good field work with a 1.5-5X scope with a 20mm objective on a .300 H&H rifle. I took this buck at over 200 yards(lasered after the shot) with open sights with my super .30



A long eye relief Noeske on a Fark...works great too!



Different strokes for different folks but I like a small scope.
Steve

I'm not fond of big scopes on sleek slim classy rifles, it seems to bulk up and defeat the purpose IMO...I would stick a fixed 4X on that 300 H&H, I used a 300 H&H for years with a 2.5X Leupold Alaskan, and never a problem and I loved that scope. I later went insane and put a 2.5x8 Leupold on it thinking I needed more x's, but nothing much changed, and I always regretted selling that 2.5X Leupold Alaskan, and those scopes are hard to find these days and fetch a pretty penny. Just my two bits on big game scopes.

I put a Zeiss Conquest 3x9 on my no 1 in 300 H&H.

I am putting a Swaro Z3 3x9 on my future no 1 in either 7x57 or 6.5x55. Have the scope, and now just need the rifle.

Leupold VX3 1.5-5x20mm scope on my 9.3x74R -

I'm partial to the Leupold 2.5-8X scope, but I switched one out for a Leupold 2.5X fixed power on my 257 Roberts.

I put a 6x Leupold on the Boddington 300H&H that I once had. It was the perfect choice for me. When folks start talking about eye relief, scope position etc., one must realize that every person is build different and what works for one person might not work well for someone else. I only mount fixed 2.5x, 4x, or 6x scopes on game rifles anymore. I'm a medium to heavy framed fella standing 6'1", if that helps. I use low mounts on #1s and have not had any eye relief issues with Leupold or Burris fixed power scopes. Good luck!
Matt

I love the Ruger No. 1 but I could never find a smaller scope that wouldn't make me crawl up the stock. The Burris Short Mag in 2-7 (I guess it's the Timberline now) worked for me. The only drawback, the stupid labeling is not discreet enough for my taste.

If you can get the eye piece of the scope over the safety button, you have it made for good eye relief. The Ruger No. 1 is a big chunk of steel, they are heavy, small scopes do not make them mountain rifles. I always wonder about people the worry about the looks vs. the use. All of my rifles are long range shooters, with the exception of the 7mm Mauser (which has not drawn blood) and the 204 (which hasn't been shot that far}, the others have killed out to 400 yards and some. All my No.1s have been "worked over" notice there is no black factory triggers. Short scopes look great on the No. 1 but I like scopes that I can see the whites of their eyes.

For what it's worth I have used both the full size 3x9 Leupold and the compact style scopes on my various #1s without any problems.

Luckyday,
If your having that kind of eye releif problem its not the scope it the LOP of our rifle, you need to circumsize the butt stock a tad.

My favorite all time scope for the No. 1s that I have used for hunting PG and deer size animals, even elk, all wore the 3X Leupold. It has the most eye relief of most any scope that I can think of off hand..The 4X fixed has plenty of eye relief also..If one must have more then a 1x4 or 1-3/4 to 5 Leupolds are great scopes..The Leupold 2x7x28 is a neat scope on any light rifle.