Howdy,

Pulled a .257 Robts and .223 out of the vault today to check measurements on the scope distance to eye.

I remembered that the last time I shot both of them, I was quite a ways back at the bench and could not see the full view as both have 18 power scopes.

The scopes are mounted as far back as the factory fixed ring positions will allow.

Are there optional rear rings with extended bases that would allow the scope to be moved
back an inch, give or take?

If such rear rings are available, kindly advise
the brand, company, price, or where I might find
such.

Many thanks in advance. "Bo"

quote:

Originally posted by BoCash3:
Howdy,

Pulled a .257 Robts and .223 out of the vault today to check measurements on the scope distance to eye.

I remembered that the last time I shot both of them, I was quite a ways back at the bench and could not see the full view as both have 18 power scopes.

The scopes are mounted as far back as the factory fixed ring positions will allow.

Are there optional rear rings with extended bases that would allow the scope to be moved
back an inch, give or take?

If such rear rings are available, kindly advise
the brand, company, price, or where I might find
such.

Many thanks in advance. "Bo"

Yes there are options.

http://www.brownells.com/aspx/NS/store/ProductDetail.as...%7e+%231+SCOPE+BASES

http://www.brownells.com/aspx/NS/store/ProductDetail.as...+ADAPTER&s=6331#6331

Ruger makes extension rings med and high.
Usually one of these in the rear works well.
They are matched higth with the standard rings.
One set of two wil do two rifles.

These will move the scope back one inch or
more.

You will not get a lot of extension out of different rings. You might consider shopping for a long scope. That is a scope that is long from the turret back. I have an older Burris 2X7 on one of mine and it works fine but it is pretty long from the turret back.

My father and I have owned multiple #1's and many larger firearms dealers keep the extension rings in stock. We would simply ask for these instead of the standard rings (no extra const)when buying the rifles. Most larger dealers should have them. It makes a world of difference.

The Ruger catalog # for the offset rings for the #1 is:

S100RMO - medium height offset rings

S100RMOO - medium height double offset rings

I did not see a # for the high rings, but if they make them the "M" in the description above would be replaced with an "H".

Thanks to all.

I am going to solve this problem by ordering a pair of offset rings, one for each of the Rugers in .223 and .257. I figure at least I can set the scopes back a half inch or so, placing the eyepiece at a more reasonable distance.

Have a great day. "Bo"

That worked great for me, Bo.

Leupold also has offset rings for the No 1, also in high configuration.
Not as sturdy as the Ruger rings, it works ok on my No 1 in 270 Win though.

Thanks for sharing, Woodrow, Arild, and Greg.

Ordered a set of double offset rings direct from Ruger last week.

One will be used on a # 1 in .257. The other will go on a # 1 in .223. I think both are medium rings at present so hoping the pair will cure my problem. However, if my .257 turns out to be "high" rings, Arild's suggestion of going to Leupold will take care of it for good. I tried measuring the .257 rings, suspecting they may be "high" rings because that scope is 44 mm at the objective. The .223 is wearing a 40mm objective. My measurements were inconclusive as the present rings appear to be the same size.

Thanks so much to all that replied.

Bo

Bo
I have finally come around to take a picture of my rifle with the Zeiss Conquest 3,5-10x50, and set in Leupold high mounts.
Works ok

I strongly recomend the Burris solution as they are steel and allow the use of QD rings and offer a multitude of opportunities...