Occular clearance on Ruger 77/17 - Ruger Forum

Ruger Forum

Occular clearance on Ruger 77/17

This is a discussion on Occular clearance on Ruger 77/17 within the Optics forums, part of the Firearm Forum category; G'day all, I have purchased this rifle in 17WSM: Being in Australia, sometimes it's a little hard to 'try before you buy' with optics etc. ...


Go Back   Ruger Forum > Firearm Forum > Optics

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes

Old October 18th, 2019, 02:12 PM   #1
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Qld, Australia
Posts: 17
Dicko is on a distinguished road
Question Occular clearance on Ruger 77/17

G'day all,

I have purchased this rifle in 17WSM:



Being in Australia, sometimes it's a little hard to 'try before you buy' with optics etc.

Can anyone advise the maximum occular outside diameter that will allow bolt clearance with the #4 and #5 rings please?

Interested in these 2 scopes in particular, sorry I can't post links yet.

Nikon Prostaff 5-3.5-14x40 - specs tell me it has an occular clearance off 44mm or ~1.75".

Burris Droptine 4.5014x42 - Unsure on occular o.d. of this one.

Other options I am considering are the Bushnell Trophy 3-12.

Thank you!



Dicko is offline  
Advertisements
Old October 18th, 2019, 02:20 PM   #2
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Qld, Australia
Posts: 17
Dicko is on a distinguished road
Not 100% sure which rings it ships with yet - this model is not specified on Ruger's scope ring search.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Dicko is offline  
Old October 18th, 2019, 03:16 PM   #3
 
Mark204's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,178
Mark204 is a jewel in the roughMark204 is a jewel in the roughMark204 is a jewel in the rough
Dicko, I don’t own a 77/17 but I have a 77 using the 4/5 ring combo with a 40mm objective. I have zero issues with the ocular and bolt clearance. To be honest with you I’ve never considered the ocular only the objective.

Hopefully someone will have a more definitive answer but I think you’ll have bolt clearance.

My experience has shown that “most” Ruger’s ship with the 4/5 combo.
Mark204 is offline  
 
Old October 18th, 2019, 03:22 PM   #4
Retired Moderator & Gunsmith
 
Iowegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: CB, IA
Posts: 15,425
Iowegan has much to be proud ofIowegan has much to be proud ofIowegan has much to be proud ofIowegan has much to be proud ofIowegan has much to be proud ofIowegan has much to be proud ofIowegan has much to be proud ofIowegan has much to be proud of

Awards Showcase

Dicko, I can't answer your question, however the "Shop Ruger" web site indicates the 77/17 is shipped with medium rings (both are size #4). They are supposed to be high enough to clear a 42mm objective lens but it doesn't say what the bolt handle/ocular lens clearance is. Here's a link to the Shop Ruger site: ShopRuger
Iowegan is online now  
Old October 18th, 2019, 03:27 PM   #5
 
Mark204's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,178
Mark204 is a jewel in the roughMark204 is a jewel in the roughMark204 is a jewel in the rough
Good call Iowegan, after reading your post and looking at the OP’s attached photo the 4/4 combo makes sense since the 77/17 doesn’t have the offset that a “regular “ 77 has.
Mark204 is offline  
Old October 18th, 2019, 03:53 PM   #6
 
Randy99CL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 375
Randy99CL will become famous soon enough
I own a 77/22 with the same receiver and #4 rings. Standard barrel profile that is a little smaller than yours.
Recently mounted a Leupold 3-9x40.
The objective bell is 1.832" or 46.5mm in diameter and is roughly .200" above the barrel.

Edit: And just as importantly, the ocular bell is 1.560" and exactly the largest that will fit without the bolt handle hitting it.

Oops I just noticed you were asking about the ocular, OK.
I had a Tasco 3-9x32 on mine since the '80s and tried to upgrade to a Nikon about 5 years ago. I had forgotten about the ocular/handle clearance problem and the Nikon would not fit.

And...Midway USA tries to list the physical dimensions of all the 1000 scopes they sell. Valuable resource.

Last edited by Randy99CL; October 18th, 2019 at 04:17 PM.
Randy99CL is offline  
Old October 18th, 2019, 04:29 PM   #7
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Qld, Australia
Posts: 17
Dicko is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowegan View Post
Dicko, I can't answer your question, however the "Shop Ruger" web site indicates the 77/17 is shipped with medium rings (both are size #4). They are supposed to be high enough to clear a 42mm objective lens but it doesn't say what the bolt handle/ocular lens clearance is. Here's a link to the Shop Ruger site:
Yes, that's the one I've been looking at.
I drilled down to the 'Target Grey Varminter' as it's more likely ( I think) to have the same heavy barrel profile as the one I've purchase. #5 rings standard.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy99CL View Post
I own a 77/22 with the same receiver and #4 rings. Standard barrel profile that is a little smaller than yours.
Recently mounted a Leupold 3-9x40.
The objective bell is 1.832" or 46.5mm in diameter and is roughly .200" above the barrel.

Edit: And just as importantly, the ocular bell is 1.560" and exactly the largest that will fit without the bolt handle hitting it.

Oops I just noticed you were asking about the ocular, OK.
I had a Tasco 3-9x32 on mine since the '80s and tried to upgrade to a Nikon about 5 years ago. I had forgotten about the ocular/handle clearance problem and the Nikon would not fit.

And...Midway USA tries to list the physical dimensions of all the 1000 scopes they sell. Valuable resource.
Thanks! EXACTLY the info I was looking for. Hoping someone will chime in with what will fit with the #5 rings and then I'll be able to make an informed decision.

Quote:
Dicko, I don’t own a 77/17 but I have a 77 using the 4/5 ring combo with a 40mm objective. I have zero issues with the ocular and bolt clearance. To be honest with you I’ve never considered the ocular only the objective.

Hopefully someone will have a more definitive answer but I think you’ll have bolt clearance.

My experience has shown that “most” Ruger’s ship with the 4/5 combo.
Pretty sure you're on the money re the centrefires. I have a Ruger Hawkeye in 25/06 and it has these rings and I've had 50mm objectives in it. Wouldn't want any larger as it's clearing the barrel by about 1/16" which is perfect imho.

Heart is not set on any of these scopes though. This will be primarily a hunting rifle and 12x about the top for that purpose for me. Though a little more magnification is nice sometimes for peering at tiny little holes a long way away ha ha.

I had the Burris Droptine on a CZ 455 American and it was a very nice scope though. The exchange rate makes it expensive at the moment though
Dicko is offline  
Old October 18th, 2019, 04:58 PM   #8
 
Randy99CL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 375
Randy99CL will become famous soon enough
I feel I should qualify that 1.560" dimension I quoted before. When I hold the rifle to look at the gap between the bolt handle and scope I can push the bolt hard enough to just barely kiss the scope. Under normal operation I don't think they'd touch and there are no marks on the scope bell.
Randy99CL is offline  
Old October 18th, 2019, 05:04 PM   #9
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Qld, Australia
Posts: 17
Dicko is on a distinguished road
Thank you Randy. Just looking at the Midway site now actually.

The Nikon's might be a little large in the occular for mounting nice and low. Same with Athlon.

Droptine or FF E1 might be the winner at 1.54"

Enjoy the day mate!
Dicko is offline  
Old October 19th, 2019, 09:51 AM   #10
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Indiana
Posts: 96
LeverGunFan is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy99CL View Post
I feel I should qualify that 1.560" dimension I quoted before. When I hold the rifle to look at the gap between the bolt handle and scope I can push the bolt hard enough to just barely kiss the scope. Under normal operation I don't think they'd touch and there are no marks on the scope bell.
I have an early 77/22 with a Weaver K4 in Leupold low Ruger style rings and it also just barely clears the scope. Fortunately there is a little play in the bolt when it is fully retracted so the bolt handle clears the 1.48" bell. In addition to the rings that Ruger supplies, there are other options in that same pattern. Leupold has the low (.73 inch) and high (1.14 inch) Ruger style rings, and Warne also makes rings to fit the Ruger mount. There are probably a few other suppliers as well with ring height options for the Ruger ring nount.
LeverGunFan is offline  
Old October 19th, 2019, 01:45 PM   #11
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Qld, Australia
Posts: 17
Dicko is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeverGunFan View Post
I have an early 77/22 with a Weaver K4 in Leupold low Ruger style rings and it also just barely clears the scope. Fortunately there is a little play in the bolt when it is fully retracted so the bolt handle clears the 1.48" bell. In addition to the rings that Ruger supplies, there are other options in that same pattern. Leupold has the low (.73 inch) and high (1.14 inch) Ruger style rings, and Warne also makes rings to fit the Ruger mount. There are probably a few other suppliers as well with ring height options for the Ruger ring nount.
Yes, there's definitely a few available, unfortunately not readily down here though. I'm sure I can find somethine to work with the issues rings.

Might be onto an older model Burris Fullfied E1 4.5-14x42 with AO, if I can get it cheap enough I'll probably go that way.
Dicko is offline  
Old October 19th, 2019, 02:10 PM   #12
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Indiana
Posts: 96
LeverGunFan is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dicko View Post
Yes, there's definitely a few available, unfortunately not readily down here though. I'm sure I can find somethine to work with the issues rings.

Might be onto an older model Burris Fullfied E1 4.5-14x42 with AO, if I can get it cheap enough I'll probably go that way.
Even though we live in a worldwide economy, it is amazing how many items are not available everywhere. I'm not sure if anyone will ship a set of rings from the USA to Australia.
LeverGunFan is offline  
Old October 19th, 2019, 03:43 PM   #13
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Qld, Australia
Posts: 17
Dicko is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeverGunFan View Post
Even though we live in a worldwide economy, it is amazing how many items are not available everywhere. I'm not sure if anyone will ship a set of rings from the USA to Australia.
Yes, it can be quite frustrating!

I once wanted a fibre optic front sight for my Buckmark Contour.... the lengths I had to go to, to get a completely legal export & import into Australia was a bit silly.

Also, Australia is such a small part of the firearms market that we often miss out on products you guys have readily available.
Dicko is offline  
Old November 15th, 2019, 02:10 AM   #14
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Qld, Australia
Posts: 17
Dicko is on a distinguished road
G’day all, ended up going with a Burris Fullfield E1 4.4-14x42.
Should receive the rifle early next week - there weren’t any in Australia when I ordered.

Unfortunately will be at least 2 weeks before I can test it out.
Dicko is offline  
Reply

  Ruger Forum > Firearm Forum > Optics

None

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Top Gun Sites Top Sites List
Powered by vBulletin 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1
Copyright © 2006 - 2020 Ruger Forum. All rights reserved.
Ruger Forum is a Ruger Firearms enthusiast's forum, but it is in no way affiliated with, nor does it represent Sturm Ruger & Company Inc. of Southport, CT.