[J-Pipes]

Easy answer, get the best scope you can afford. But more important, you NEED to start shooting from the dominant eye shoulder. Regardless of what your dominant hand is, you need to shoot from your dominant eye.

 

[Tatersoup]

well I made a paper cutout of the fx2 today and used it and a ruler to see where it would mount on the gun. Looks like I could do it with a scout mount, but at that point I would have several inches of scope rail out in front of the scope, and a fixed 2.5x mounted that far forward might as well be a scout scope.
View attachment 102000

Reality check. It looks to me as if you are working very hard to avoid mounting a hammer spur. Here's a thought:

Get a Weaver or other standard scope mount. Then get some low rings and mount the 2.5x20 where it is comfortable to shoot. Install the hammer spur and be happy.

 

[Tatersoup]

I've tried the scout scope on another gun with a cheap scope. It works pretty well, but I shoot left and I'm right eye dominant t so the both eyes open thing doesn't work real well for me and 1 eye gives a pretty small field of view.

I once lent my 336C with a 2.5x scout scope on it to a lady (who is a good marksman). It is my best rifle and dead on accurate. She was also cross-eye dominant. Her answer to the problem was to mash her face into the stock and look out of the corner of her strong eye through the scope. Her 50 yard groups were huge (6-8" or more!) and it took her probably a full 1/2 minute to smash her face against the stock to get off the shot. It hurt me to watch her.

Since she was die-hard right hand shooter with left eye dominance, the only thing I could think of that might work for her would be a scope mounted HIGH ENOUGH for her to see through it with her left eye and came to the conclusion that a set of "see through" (sorry for cussing) rings might be the answer. Where she grew up, most of the rifles had see through mounts and I think that's where her problem was never picked up. As an aside, she could shoot my 44 Magnum revolver better than I could!

 

[greyling22]

using a hammer spur is no big deal to me, but when I close my eyes and shoulders a gun, then use a ruler to count forward 5 inches from my eyeball to the back of the scope, which is the claimed eye reliefe for that Leupold, That is where the scope goes. If I could adjust the eye relief to less or if it was less than advertised, and mount it closer to the rear of the back on the gun my problems would be solved.

Reality check. It looks to me as if you are working very hard to avoid mounting a hammer spur. Here's a thought:

Get a Weaver or other standard scope mount. Then get some low rings and mount the 2.5x20 where it is comfortable to shoot. Install the hammer spur and be happy.

 

[dpe.ahoy]

A set of extended rings might get you the eye relief you need. It does add height to move the ring ahead of the base it is attached to, though. DP

 

[djj2012]

what base are you using with yours?

I have the FX2 2.5 Ultraligth on my 1894 44Mag - love it. I also have one on my 416Rigby, it has held up just fine to the recoil.

 

[IN1894SS]

what base are you using with yours?

I'd like to be able to tell you, fact is it's been enough years ago I don't think I'm going to come up with the answer.

 

[Mannlicher]

the scope I have on my 1894 now, is a Nikon Monarch African, 1-4X. This is a straight tube, one inch scope. It has worked well for me, for over three years now.

 

[Kingston73]

I know this is a very very old thread but didn't see any poi t in making a new one about the same exact topic. Just wanted to post my new old scoped 1894. Weaver k3, last year they had all metal internals. Warne base