How dumb is this - any handgun huntersThoughts or advice

[jimmymac]

Run 24+ grains of a slightly faster burn rate powder like WW296 or H110 or LilGun to acquire more velocity & your Ruger will shake itself to pieces.



One doesn't need tools w/ Ruger rings...they stretch & shake loose all by themselves.

Not my experience. I’ve been satisfied with the rings on more than one revolver whether I was running 296 or AA#9.

Same goes with a M77 .308 and Ruger rings. Never had an issue with the rings and that gun got shot a lot. Never a safe queen.

You are pretty passionate about this though. Maybe I just got lucky.

 

[DirtySteve]

The main thing is how fast can you pick up your target through the scope? That will be key to knowing if it is ok or not. Training will increase your speed/ability to pick up the target in the scope. I always found it better to have the scope as low as possible as it is natural for me to pick up the metallic sights. The closer to the level of the sights the better off I am with it. YMMV of course. Have you considered one of the small red dot scopes like the Burris Fast Fire line?

 

[gravelyctry]

I’ve got some red dots, one is an ultradot on my bullseye gun.

I just think I’d like some magnification and the extra weight for a hunting gun.

That, and I was thinking more about balance of the gun based on my bullseye gun (one handed) but wasn’t really thinking about the fact I’d be shooting two hands or even with a rest.

 

[rr2030]

I use a straight no magnification red dot on my hunting pistols(30-30 and .357 MAX), wide field of view, easy eye relief and plenty suitable for Deer size critters out to 200 yards. I do have a scope on one , a 4X Burris but thats for Varmints (.223). Everything else gets iron sights.

 

[Bojo]

With my load I posted earlier at 50 yards I kneel on he ground and reSt my forearms across the seat of my atv for a rest mine groups around 2.5 inches with the stock iron sights. I think I get some serious eye strain /shift as I notoriously will have 2 separate groups inside of 2.5 "ish
I tried both a red dot and 2 different scopes. I found the scopes to be way to sensitive to aquire sight picture in the woods. Red dot worked extremely well buy I just prefer the plain ole open sights. Still have yet to fire it at a deer in the 7 years I have owned it ,but it kills paper, pop cans and old vegetables without mercy.
I also think for as high as that mount is above the bore it very might well cause shoulder height to eye level misalignment. And for how far the scope is mounted back will probably give the whole assembly quite a bit of extra recoil. Kind of like a heavey flywheel on an engine. Mount that suckered as low and forward as possible and remember blue loctite if your friend.

 

[JSH]

All of that added mass will cause you grief. The Weigand rail is good, but move the scope forward in regular rings.
I am long armed and don't favor the Leupold variable. About 4-5x and I have to bring the gun back to me, so I just run a 4x Leupold and I am happy. I prefer the now discontinued Bushnell elite 2-6, more eye relief.

As to a Ruger shaking apart and an FA being the answer to that problem. Well I own both and will continue to do so. Yes the FA will out shoot a lot of rifles, but a lot of folks don't have 3k to drop on a new one. The Rugers with a bit of work do a fine job.

I suggest using both hands and any rest you have available. Get use to not being in quite a proper position, because things in the field ain't gonna be perfect.

Shoot and then shoot some more.

 

[Longcarbine]

I think your factory Ruger rings will work best, they keep the scope nice and low and actually kind of evens out the weight at least for me. And with that Bisley model the hammer sits low enough so the scope doesn't interfere.

 

[scubohuntr]

The more weight you have, the more likely you are to shear something. Also the higher you mount it the more stress the bases will take; simple physics. I once had a Contender in .35 Remington that sheared a globe front sight every time I tried to mount it; forget about scopes on that one. I'd tend toward one of the reflex red dots like the PPC folks use. Much less weight, nice low sight plane, easy to see. You really don't want magnification anyway, and your shots will all be around 100 yards MAX.

 

[rogn]

I may be wrong and probably am , but my first impression of Ruger rings is that they are going to resist a clean firm lockup on initial application. That silly round claw with its silly round recess require that the hook needs to drop fully into the recess and seat otherwise as it tries to seat the tensioning nut on the ring will really be loose. That also means that if you dont seat the rings/claw fully before fitting the scope the rings and scope will be eternally loose. When Ive been forced to use them Ive always lubed the ring/claw and shake, rattled and rolled until I was satisfied the ring was seated, then Id mount a scope. I have never had trouble with loosening of the rings by doing that. It has worked for me, maybe it will or wont for you.

 

[Rick in Oregon]

The only Leupold mount I could find at the time for my S&W M648 (22 WMR) dictated that the rear sight be removed. It did not come with barrel mounting slots as I had to have the top strap D&P'd for the mount. Works great, but no rear sight any more.