Although I learned to shoot in the 1960s, I didn’t purchase my first firearm until the late 1980s and my first rifle purchase was in 2009. As a result I don’t know squat about older scopes.

Recently I purchased a Sako A III carbine chambered in .270 Winchester.


It is a unique and beautiful (to my eyes) rifle. Putting a modern wiz-bang scope on it just doesn’t seem right. I’ve started looking for a period correct scope for this rifle (1977-1981). A fixed 2.5x or preferably 4x scope would work. A variable scope with at least 2x and no more than 10x also would be good. Leupold M8 and Vari-X scopes seem to fit the bill. A Burris Scope Chief or Weaver K4 as well.

I found a vendor who specializes in refurbished older scopes but have no idea if they are good or not. I am intrigued by the “TV style” scopes that Weaver and Redfield made in the 1970s. Here’s an example:

Vintage Gun Scopes — Weaver K4-W. 1". c.1973-77. Duplex.

I know it’s goofy looking but I like it for some reason. Maybe growing up in the ‘60s and early ‘70s warped my taste.

Does anyone have experience with VintageGunScopes.com? Any other vendors?

I know that there are tons of scopes for sale on EvilBay, but I don’t want to gamble on the condition of the glass, reticle, or function.

P.S. I know that this is a S&W forum; however, I tried asking on the only rifle forum I participate in actively and got 1 response: buy a new Swarovski scope.

See post #48 for what I eventually mounted on this rifle

Realize that any older Leupold scope like a fixed 4x or Vari-X 2-7x can be sent back to Leupold and refurbished at no cost.

That rifles a beauty. Love mannlicher stocks.

Is there a specific reason you are looking at older scopes? Are you mostly looking at it for aesthetic reasons? Or for nostalgia?

The reason I ask is, scope technology has come a long, long way from the 70s. The glass is much better now, as are the lens coatings and the adjustment systems tend to be more repeatable and robust.

Something like the Hi-Lux M40 might fit your needs, which has the aesthetics of the older scopes, but many of the benefits of modern manufacturing and technology.

Aesthetics first and nostalgia second. I am aware of the advances in scope technology. Leupold makes some attractive fixed power scopes. A Swarovski Z3 3-x36 is an option. That HiLux is an interesting alternative I hadn’t seen - thanks.

I have had a bunch of Leupolds over the years, both fixed power and variable and I highly recommend them!

__________________
14 S&W Revs none with locks!

Beautiful Sako (Socko) As an avid Sako collector, I’d go with an older, gloss Leupold Vari X II 3-9 in vintage Sako or Leupold medium rings. eBay can be your friend. Will be period correct for you rifle.

The AIII is a transitional gun between the L61R and AV. The AIII has the short tang of the L61R and bolt shroud of the AV, which has a long tang. The AIV action was used only with the Safari Grade.

Here’s one of my Sakos:

L61R (pre Garcia) deluxe barreled by PO Ackley in 6.5-06. It wears a Leupold Vari X III 3.5-10 AO in Millet Rings. Not period correct, but I don’t care.

Attached Images

8E56D112-F024-45AE-9195-BD76965F92D2.jpg (113.9 KB, 36 views)

__________________
213th FBINA

Beautiful rifle and certainly worthy of a nice vintage rifle scope. I have many vintage hunting rifles and most have period correct optics like Weaver K4’s, Redfield Accu Trac 3-9, Leupold fixed 4X, vintage 70’s Leupold Vari XII 3-9, 2-7 and several Bushnell Scope Chief’s in fixed 4X and 3-9 to name some. Bushnell made the Scope Chief not Burris.

All the vintage scopes you mentioned are excellent IMO. I’ve not purchased from vintage gun scopes.com but they seem very legitimate. Most of mine either came with the vintage rifle’s I purchased, rifles passed down from my grandfather and father and eBay but only if they accept returns.

I grew up hunting with vintage rifles and scopes in the 70’s and very early 80’s. That is what my grandfather, uncles and dad all used. A lot of it is nostalgia for me but these scopes are still quite viable. I just used my Winchester pre 64 Model 70 fwt 30-06 mfg in 1956, mounted with a fixed 4X Bushnell Scope Chief to shoot a nice buck this past hunting season. Pic attached.

If a had that Sako, I would mount a period correct Leupold 2-7 Vari-XII. I feel that would be the perfect scope for your rifle.

At present I have six older Weaver 1" fixed power scopes, K2.5, 4, and 6. Two K2.5s are on older .22 rifles. Two K4s (60B) are on vintage Winchester Model 70s. One K6 is on an early Remington 700, the other is on an early Remington 740. All scopes are from the 1950s-60s and all are in high condition. True, scope optical technology has advanced well beyond my old Weavers, but that does not mean the old Weavers are obsolete, far from it. If you want retro scopes to go with retro rifles, you can't go wrong with a Weaver. None of my Weavers are mounted on a rifle of magnum caliber.

I have done business with the company you are asking g about. They are very knowledgeable in what they do and can help you with matching the scope with the rifle. I continue to be very pleased with them and plan to do business with them in the future.

Way too much money for that scope...

An older gloss Leupold Vari-X III 2.5-8X, 1.75-6X or a 1.5-5X would be a great match for your gun.





I picked up a an older Zeiss 4X for $300 and put it on a custom Winchester model 70. The optics on the Zeiss and the Leupolds blow old Weavers out of the water and Leupold offers a lifetime warranty. You're on your own with an old Weaver.

Attached Images

	IMG_0861.jpg (58.7 KB, 431 views)
	IMG_5422.jpg (81.7 KB, 437 views)
	IMG_0502.jpg (88.6 KB, 436 views)

__________________
"I also cook."

There used to be a company in Texas called Weaver Scope Repair or something similar that reconditioned old Weaver Scopes for a reasonable cost. I had an old Weaver Marksman 1"x 4x done by them maybe 20 years ago. I still have it and it still works great. They did replace the crosshairs with a duplex reticle.

I think Weaver Scope Repair went out of business years ago.

__________________
My sgntr is mor thn 30 chrctrs

I've had probably twenty or more of the older Weavers; still have three or four. Two-thirds have been K-4s. The adjustments are often not repeatable on these older scopes, but once zeroed they generally hold that zero well. Optics aren't the best but even a K-4 is adequate for 300 yard shots on deer-sized game.

Lowered-powered scopes are not popular today and many scoff at their use, but most of the critics have no experience with them. Nevertheless, K-3s, K-4s, and K-6s remain quite useful. K-6s were advertised in the 50s and '60s as being "long-range" scopes.

I have several older Weaver K4's, always on the lookout for a post and crosshair K6. I also have some older Redfields that were made in Colorado and are excellent vintage scopes. Can never go wrong with Leupold.

I have also done business with Vintage Gun Scopes. They had adjustment knob covers available for an old Weaver Marksman that I was gifted. Fairly priced, and quick shipping.

+1 for a gloss finished Leupold 1 inch tube 2x7 or 3x9. They are hard to beat and they stand behind their scopes.

The vintage steel tube K-4 and K-6 scopes are bullet proof and are classic designs. They are perfect for a vintage rifle.

Yes sir, back in the day the K-4 and other 4x scopes were considered ideal for hunting east of the Mississippi and the K-6 and other 6x scopes were considered ideal for hunting west of the Mississippi.

If you do some research on Weaver’s range finding reticle you’ll find it was designed to allow accurate range estimation and hunting to ethical hunting ranges out to 500 yards.

Given the long standing and still valid half second rule, and the realities of bullet expansion and terminal performance below 1600 fps, very few cartridges today can make consistent, clean, ethical kills beyond about 500 yards and those that do only exceed it by 150-200 yards. And those hunters still need to be aware of the limits involved with game startling due to muzzle flash or birds spooking due to the gun shot and the related 1/2 second rule.

I’m old school and even for long range shooting 1x per 100 yards is ample magnification.

Unfortunately way too many shooters mistake magnification for resolution and think more magnification will give them a clearer view of the target. That’s not the case. Resolution depends on objective diameter and lens quality. Period. Full stop.

In fact if you over magnify the image the exit pupil of the scope becomes too small to fully illuminate the fovea on your retina and the resulting image starts looking dim and grainy.

Exit pupil is determined by the objective diameter and magnification. So a 4-14x56 scope will offer an exit pupil of 4mm which is well matched to the size of your pupil on a heavy overcast day or around dawn and dusk. Most adults only have an exit pupil around 5-6mm so earlier or later in the day they could still use 9x with a 56 mm objective and have a 6mm exit pupil.

In contrast the tacticool wannabe with a 4-32x50mm scope will only be able to use 12x on a heavy over cast day before the image gets dim and grainy and at or just after dusk the limit will be 8x.

Worse, if they chose a first focal plane reticle they will be working with a reticle that is only 37% to 25% of its regular size at 12x and 8x. That will be a tiny, hard to see reticle and the hawk marks will be near useless for hold offs.

In short, more isn’t better.

The old K-4 and K-6 scopes with 38 mm objectives still gave 6.3mm exit pupils for the K6 and 9.5mm for the K-4. Despite the small objective and less effective anti reflective coating at the time they were still very good in low light conditions.

My K6 Weavers are from the late 1960s. Optics and sharpness are very good, and I consider 6X to be a little more magnification than I need. While I have several variable power scopes, I can live without them just fine. My hunting usually does not involve taking shots at much more than 100 yards. As I mentioned, I have two K2.5 Weavers mounted on .22 rifles using 1" mounts. They are ideal, far better than any 3/4" .22 scopes. I know about parallax differences, but for a scope with only 2.5X magnification, that is in no way significant. I once had an older Weaver scope with sort of a post reticle, fairly low power but I do not remember what it was. It was in well-used cosmetic condition and it couldn't be trusted to hold a zero, so I sold it for a few bucks.

Wow! Your responses are fantastic - thank you all.

,

I agree. I have no desire for old scopes, but if I did, an older Leupold would be my first pick due to the ability to have them repaired free of charge.

I have an old Bausch & Lomb Balvar scope where the elevation & windage are made using the mount. It's mounted on an old Flaig's custom Mauser.

Probably more correct for the 50's or 60's, but it's rock solid. It has a slight yellow tint, but the glass is clear.

The sleek Leupold M8 4X is one of my favorites. A couple of years ago I was buying them at gun shows for $50-$75, now I see them going for more than $200 on internet sales and auctions.

__________________
6/23/2022

I remember those. Pretty much best of breed scopes at the time. Have not seen one for years. I once had a Weaver with the W&E adjustments in the mounts. I had it on a rifle I sold along with the scope long ago.

I guess the word vintage is subjective, When I think of vintage scopes, I think of Unertl's, Lyman's, Fecker's and Malcom's. All are barrel mounts. Also B&L, Tasco, Remington and a couple of others. I am partial to Lyman's.

__________________
USMC 69-93 Combat Pistol Inst.

And there is Stith. They were made here in San Antonio. The Stith factory was in the basement of a downtown office building. I remember some of the Stith scopes were made for them by Weaver.
https://static1.squarespace.com/stat...ight+Mount.pdf

The Leupold 100th anniversary scope is something you don't see too often.

Attached Images

	1000009424.jpg (109.6 KB, 28 views)
	1000009428.jpg (132.0 KB, 23 views)
	1000009427.jpg (64.5 KB, 22 views)

You're certainly correct in your assessments.

It seems many of today's shooters equate high magnification scopes and light triggers as replacements for shooting skills; one reason such items are so popular. It just doesn't work that way and never has.

I bought me first rifle in 1973 a rem 788 in 308 when I turned 18 and mounted a bushnell 2.5-10x40 scope on it and still use that same scope on that rifle today . I like the 2.5-10 as it has worked for me hunting in thick swamps to take deer at very short distances and creek bottoms at 25 yards to taking a deer at 350 yards in a clearing or wood sroad . Your 270 is a great thin skinned game cartridge so draw a line as to what vintage rifle scopes really are as they do go back to breach loaded big bore rifle in the mid later 1800's .

MY current AR15 wears a nikon pPS7 2.5-10x42 scope but there gone today . Now if you find a Tasco made in japan 4-16 scope wih a range finding design and its clear , Buy it . That is a '70's scope that was very under rated in the day . I have one on a 223 savage

Today on your rifle I would buy a - Bushnell ELITE 4500 2.5-10X40 RIFLESCOPE MULTI-X

For "classic " rifles ... I like the older blued ,steel tubed , Weaver scopes.
The Weaver K4 is my favorite .
I have them mounted on a couple sporters built (late 60.s early 70's) on a 1903-A3 Springfield 30-06 and Model 95 Mauser 7X57 sporter ... They just look right at home .

E-Bay and "want to buy " ads should turn up a serviceable
scope !
Gary

__________________
Certified Cajun
NRA Member

I started buying in 60s, K series weavers. Good scope at the time but I wouldn’t buy an older Weaver today and definitely not a new one. I still have several rifles still with Weaver K series scopes from 22s to 375H&H.
But compared to Leupold they loose. There is no comparison of clarity. Buy a nice used Leupold and if it don’t work they will fix it for free. That’s if you actually want to use the gun. The other major brand scopes of the day no longer are backed by service. You can get them refurbished but it’s not cheap.
All the new generation scopes have shorter tubes and can be a problem to
get eye relief. On stalking type rifle like OPs I would look for 4x or less. I had 2.5x, 2.75x & 3x on my woods rifles, 4x & 6x on open country rigs and
10x to 16x on varmit rifles. All straight powers because when I started in early 60s variables had poor rep. I never had scope problems except for physical breakage which wasn’t scopes fault. I like the older straight power scopes but have to be practical. The Leupold variables from 70s up seem to be dependable. I’ve just always went by the theory the least moving parts the least things to go wrong. Don’t like bells and whistles on my optics.

I approve wholeheartedly of your sentiment that vintage glass looks great on a vintage gun. I don't want a fuel-injected engine and alloy wheels on my 1967 Jeep even if it would handle better and go faster. Honoring the craftsman of old is always a classy option in my book.

Yes, the old Weaver scopes were actually quite good and I see very little mention of the old Bausch & Lomb, but those were excellent BITD.
It is possible to significantly improve a vintage scope by having it torn down and the lenses sent out for the new whiz-bang coatings, but it depends on your budget and also need. The new scopes have better coatings, but fixed power scopes have fewer elements and a more optimized lightpath, so less inherent light-loss. With an old scope you might give up some distance and some time in twilight, but for most other applications you just won't loose that much.

Iron Sight in Tulsa, OK still repairs vintage Weaver scopes and a few other brands from specific eras as well. I have a Weaver 2.5X fixed with a post reticle there now and am anxiously awaiting its return.

It takes about a year, and they pretty much tell you that up front, but they've done a nice job on several older scopes for me. I've previously sent two steel tube Weavers and a mid 70's vintage Redfield Widefield fixed 4X to them for repair and used them all since and they've functioned as new.

You pick what you want them to do from a menu and send in your scope with a check and then practice patience as they warn they won't respond to your need for updates. You get it back when you get it back. Nevertheless I use them without hesitation as they do quality work.

Bryan

__________________
Ordnung muss sein
SWHF #789

I used Iron Sight for scope repairs several years ago. Excellent work and good prices. Took about six months, certainly a reasonable amount of time today when so few places do such work.

There’s a Win model 52 sitting in the safe waiting
on the return of a Weaver K10 from those folks.
Strictly a 50 yd paper puncher.
I think it’ll serve well for the purpose.

To me this is a vintage scope on a Winchester 52D, Are you using a Ken Viani mount for the Weaver?

Attached Images

Win52D Benched.jpg (120.7 KB, 22 views)

__________________
USMC 69-93 Combat Pistol Inst.

How much is repair at a good price? A Weaver Marksman was their low end model that came out to compete with Tasco, Bushnell and Simmons. As I remember Marksman 4x was $29.95. How much can you pay to have cheap scope repaired and be ahead. I know guys that inquired with a scope repair company that does Weavers and base price was close to $100 at the time. Take that repair charge in today’s money and you can probably find a good deal on a used Leupold. There is also option of older Redfield and Burris which usually are less than Leupold.

The cheap Weavers, Tascos, Simmons, Bushnells and others in that category are certainly not worth buying in the first place or repairing in the second place. Junk scopes that best be thrown away and replaced with something of good quality like a "vintage" scope or one produced later. The really cheap scopes have no dollar value in the resale market.

The cheap ones, sure, but let's not forget that before some of those brands were degraded by corporate-types looking to cash in for the shareholders that Weaver and Tasco both made some fine scopes, so it's important to differentiate the later junk from the vintage items.

I still have a Redfield 2-7x Widefield Low Profile scope on my 1970's Rem 700 .308. I bought the scope same day I bought the rifle. Still a decent scope, holds zero even after all these years of recoil.
There are many Redfield 3-9x Widefields on eBay right now.

Not what I said. I wasn't speaking of the better quality scopes marketed by some companies, I was speaking of the very cheap "junk" scopes.

I had a 10X Redfield (late 1970's) and 15X Unertl 'refurbished' by Iron Sight. Reasonable price, excellent work, returned early (1 month, not 2 months). 110% satisfied with their work.

__________________
S&WHF 366

I understand your point but have difficulty relating to it. I sent Iron Site $95 to clean, purge, and reseal an El Paso made steel-tube Weaver 2.5X with a post reticle. They aren't making any more of those. When I get it back it will be, for all practical purposes, new.

If I spent a similar amount on a new-in-the-box scope it wouldn't amount to much and would certainly not be in the same quality discussion with an old Weaver in good shape. If I spent perhaps a little more I might find a used Leupold. I would have no knowledge of its historical use or abuse and it might need a trip to Iron Site before very long.

My older, good quality, optics are precious to me in the same way my S&W firearms shipped in the 20s, 30s, 40s and 50s warm my heart more than some in our inventory that shipped more recently.

__________________
Ordnung muss sein
SWHF #789

I have been less than successful using above option. A M8 4x went in for question about adjustment integrity. It came back with no improvement but water drops under the turret cap.

Another steel Weaver K6 suffering 6" parallax at 100 yds went to Oklahoma because a girl on the phone said they could fix it. After 100$ and twice shipping the shop manager informed me I don't know what I am talking about.

I have many other Leuopolds and Weavers clear as a diamond, but I no longer trust to change adjustments or power with out needing to fire five or ten rounds SLOWLY to settle them in and hope that later they stay there.

Compare these complaints to the high cost of today's options and the way they look on a fine older rifle, I think they are still worth the gamble.

__________________
"Don't Give Up the Ship"

My Sako sports a vintage Zeiss

Attached Images

	Sako w-scope.jpg (106.8 KB, 12 views)
	ZeissScopeweb.jpg (14.5 KB, 13 views)

Water drops under the turret cap but not inside the scope? Probably from their testing for leaks. I like compact scopes on compact rifles. My favorite Leupold is the 1-4X variable. Actual magnification is 1.4-4.2 and is all you need for big game. Reportedly a favorite with Leupold employes. No end bell to bump and get out of alignment and is as reliable as their fixed scopes. A hunting rifle is carried a lot more than aimed and fired. The pre Freedom 1-4s are 8" and 8 ounces . Perfect.

All things considered they are decent scopes and are still holding up well. I wonder if there is any kind of database for manufacture on them?
Now my real treasures in vintage glass are my Leupold M-7 3Xs. I have two of them on my heavy game rifles and they are pretty slick. They are in excellent shape and just the ticket for my two Winchester model 70s in .300 H&H magnum and .338 Winchester magnum.
But today we have some pretty good options for glass all in all.

Attached Images

	IMG_1273.jpg (97.6 KB, 13 views)
	IMG_1272.jpg (78.9 KB, 13 views)
	IMG_1270.jpg (109.1 KB, 14 views)
	IMG_1198.jpg (90.2 KB, 16 views)

I looked at Leupold M8s and Vari-X II scopes. Either would’ve been fine, but for some reason this Redfield Widefield 2-7x just spoke to me. The “TV screen” eyepiece is just so ‘70s…




(Sorry I couldn’t capture the view through the eyepiece - the field of view is great)



I ditched the Warne rings and found some vintage Sako low height rings. The scope came from VintageGunScopes.com. You may well think I paid too much, but the scope is fully refurbished and guaranteed for a year.

It looks great!

I've found that early Redfield's often suffered from objective lens seperation (cloudy front lens), but the Widefield's seem to hold up better. The lens separation issue is one of the reasons Redfield bellied up. The lens was made from two pieces of glass glued together and the adhesive often failed.

__________________
"I also cook."

I'm late to this thread!

I believe that generally, you get what you pay for! In long range rifle scopes, most run $1800 to 4000! I have two in the $2500 range.

I like Leupold scopes and buy used ones that I like whenever I see them and have them stacked like firewood on the shelf!

That brings me to the exception to this personal rule. One of my favorite rifles is a 1976 Rugar No 1 in 7x57mm Mauser. A lightweight barrel that is 22" long. I had a nice Leupold 3x9 compact on it (probably from the mid 70s also)> In my gun trading I had bought a late 50s Marlin 336 in 35 Rem. On that gun was an age-appropriate Bushnell Banner 3-9x32mm. Sorry I sold the gun, but I kept the scope and put it on the No 1. It just looks right. It is as clear as the Leupold it replaced, and I think has a better fitting eye relief. While the monetary value is less, it makes the whole package come alive in my hands! AND THAT IS PRICELESS!

Ivan