My scope is 1" and rings are 30mm, options?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
102
The rings I want to use with this scope are the nightforce ultralite. Mainly because they're light, second theyre supposed to be strong. I hear there are reducers available to fit a 1" scope in 30mm rings- are these a good option? Also- do they add weight?

Wonder if Im better off just getting a pair of talley lightweights.
 
Depending on what you are trying to accomplish, rings the correct size for the 1" scope may be the right answer. For under 400 yds, there probably isn't any reason to look further.

However, if you are setting up something for 500-1000yd work, you may find that a 1" scope doesn't have the elevation adjustment range that a 30mm scope does.

And then the answer would be to get a 30mm Nightforce scope with repeatable turret adjustments to match those rings.

And then the rifle under this pair would have to be up to the task, too...so you might have to replace that. :)

(Seriously, rings matched to scope tube size is the correct answer. Usually.)
 
thanks boys.

I resist the milpitary scope thing- mainly for weight. Its an m14 with an 18" barrel so I dont expect it to reach out to 1,000 though I do plan on accurizing it over time/reloading so I do expect it to be capable of reaching out.


So talley lightweights are the best option then? its picatinny rail- is that a tricky combo- picatinny rail + 1" scope?
 
Last edited:
I would say that more 30mm rings are available in 1913 rail configuration than Weaver and all the others combined. The reason being that most of the "tactical" scopes and the way expensive "tactical" rings market to go with them are based on a 30mm tube. Most hunting scopes are built on a 1" tube.
 
Leupold used to sell conversion shims for the direction you want to go. If they no longer do, I'm sure someone has stepped into the void.

I've used them a couple times and while they require extra care on set up - they held zero well but note that they can be hard on a scope's finish if you're not careful.
 
Measure the thickness of the rings (front to back) and let me know. If they'll fit, I have a set of reducers that came with an SWFA mount that I could donate.

If you don't have rings yet, buy 1" rings.
 
Plenty of 1" 1913 rings as well. Weaver rings will work on a 1913 rail just fine as well.
 
Yeah I havent had a great time looking for 1" picatinny rings that are light. Maybe Ill just get weavers then thanks helotaxi.

now...which ones...
 
Weaver makes a very light set of "tactical" rings. They are available in both Weaver and 1913 style. Either will work. You can find the very same rings marketed under the Blackhawk brand as well.
 
Rustle;

Brownell's offers, or did, delrin inserts to accomplish what you wish to do. They are lightweight & certainly seem to offer good recoil retention in my application. That being a .223 platform. Inexpensive, clean looking, does the job, no downside that I've noticed.

900F
 
Last edited:
Im taking the rear sight off for clearance and putting a pair of EGW aluminum rings on.

Seems wrong to remove the sights from a battle rifle.
 
Buy smaller rings to fit the scope. Reduce the number of components, increase reliability.

If my wife is not watching, then I buy a scope to fit the 30mm rings, and then a new rifle to put them on.

Just trying to help a fellow shooter...

Mark H.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top