Vintage Rifle Scopes

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.
,

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.
 
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.
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.
 
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.

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
 
Last edited:
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.
 
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.

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
 
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

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?
 

Attachments

  • Win52D Benched.jpg
    Win52D Benched.jpg
    120.7 KB · Views: 22
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.
 
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 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.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top