tried egw rail on ruger #1 edit June 11

K

Keithjohn

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
117   0   0
Location
Alberta
Found this rail ,looks like you take off the factory rail and mount this to the barrel recoil pins and fits flush with no space under it like the ruger one . Any comments ?

So I bought one and tried it today . Gives me about 1.5 inches more adjustment to the rear , fit OK on the barrel , fits the recoil lugs perfectly but thinking of bedding the clearance varies between the barrel and rail ,
Fits a bill in most places but a few tight spots . Don't know if I want to bed tight or relieve tight spots .
Going to shoot it a bit and decide
 
Last edited:
Keithjohn said:
Found this rail ,looks like you take off the factory rail and mount this to the barrel recoil pins and fits flush with no space under it like the ruger one . Any comments ?
Click to expand...

I bought the Burris Adapters for all my Ruger #1's and they work great

178948.jpg
 
Keithjohn said:
Found this rail ,looks like you take off the factory rail and mount this to the barrel recoil pins and fits flush with no space under it like the ruger one . Any comments ?
Click to expand...

There is no "factory rail" on a No.1... just as with the M77 the scope ring detents are machined into the receiver... I can't think of a good reason to use a rail unless you want to use a very short scope... like a red dot... but if you put a red dot on a No.1 you should be taken behind the shed and switched and the your No.1 taken away and replaced with a Savage Axis...
 
Ok , it's not a rail but the rib that the scope mounts on . OMG
And the purpose is not a red dot but to add flex ability to the scope mounting system ie further back for proper eye relief
 
Nobody tried it ? Got three guys telling me I'm looking at the wrong thing.
By the pic on there web site it looks cleaner than Rutgers " rib "
 
While I strongly disagree about the "looks cleaner" comment, it does look functional. IF it was mine, I would figure out where your rings will sit, and clean up the rest of the rail with the mill.
 
'Boo said:
Sorry but you are wrong. On the #1 the rings mount on the factory rib- which is removable - not the receiver.
Click to expand...

I had a senior moment and was saying No.1 but referring to the M77 both of which I have dozens... but I stand by my "red dot" comment.
 
Hoytcannon - put your mind at ease with the red dot concern . PLEASE . I'm mounting a scope at am wanting more adjustment to help eye relief and flexibility in which scopes will fit .
 
Keithjohn said:
Hoytcannon - put your mind at ease with the red dot concern . PLEASE . I'm mounting a scope at am wanting more adjustment to help eye relief and flexibility in which scopes will fit .
Click to expand...

Have you tried a 4BO ring? Generally one in the rear position will accomodate most scopes... which scope are you mounting?

004%20CGN%202_zpsfhqqd8ck.jpg
 
So after mounting my scope I found out when I mounted the rail it put a bow in it , not straight . So I contacted egw and they will refund everything it cost me to get it here I just pay the return shipping . Good on them ! To bad , I wanted to be able to swap scopes with my NEAR mount which I do on other guns I use periodically with repeatable zero . Egw said it fits most guns but the odd one ( like mine ) somthing in the barrel contour or recoil pins is slightly off .
 
Thats my only issue with my #1V. Can't get the scope back enough for proper eye relief for me. I tried the Ruger offset rings too($92) and could not pull the scope back far enough in them with three different scopes. The space between turrets and eyepiece/bell on modern scopes is much shorter than scopes 30 years ago. My #1V(22-250) has been sitting scopeless for a year now. I actually would like to sell it and the 400+ rounds of factory ammo I have for it.
 
the spank said:
Thats my only issue with my #1V. Can't get the scope back enough for proper eye relief for me. I tried the Ruger offset rings too($92) and could not pull the scope back far enough in them with three different scopes. The space between turrets and eyepiece/bell on modern scopes is much shorter than scopes 30 years ago. My #1V(22-250) has been sitting scopeless for a year now. I actually would like to sell it and the 400+ rounds of factory ammo I have for it.
Click to expand...

I'm south of wainwright 20 miles if you want to try it on yours before I send it back
 
I like my scopes mounted further forward than a lot of folks prefer them, so I've never had this often-mentioned problem with the #1. Standard rings work just fine for me.

Oddly enough, a lot of #1's that I see have scopes mounted using the ugly offset rings...and then the scopes are placed in a position that would have allowed the use of standard rings. All four of the Rugers in your photo show that, Hoyt...standard rings would have allowed the placement of those scopes exactly as you have them.
 
jjohnwm said:
I like my scopes mounted further forward than a lot of folks prefer them, so I've never had this often-mentioned problem with the #1. Standard rings work just fine for me.

Oddly enough, a lot of #1's that I see have scopes mounted using the ugly offset rings...and then the scopes are placed in a position that would have allowed the use of standard rings. All four of the Rugers in your photo show that, Hoyt...standard rings would have allowed the placement of those scopes exactly as you have them.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am aware of that, but then there is so much scope tube cantilevered over the rear ring that damage to the scope is far more likely if it inadvertently gets knocked. AND... that is with these particular scopes... there are other scopes that cannot be feasibly mounted without the use of the offset rings... I prefer the stability of having the scope held with a wider spacing on the tube and I don't find the offset rings in the least bit "ugly." If you like your scopes mounted further forward than "normal" you are either not utilizing the proper eye relief for a full view picture or have an abnormally long neck.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom