Vintage Rifle Scopes

[Drm50]

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.

 

[teletech]

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.

 

[TXBryan]

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

 

[rockquarry]

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.

 

[hivel37]

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.

 

[AJ]

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

 

[Drm50]

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.

 

[rockquarry]

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.

 

[teletech]

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.

 

[ameridaddy]

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.

 

[rockquarry]

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.

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.

 

[Engineer1911]

Iron Sight in Tulsa, OK

Iron Sight in Tulsa, OK still repairs vintage Weaver scopes and a few other brands from specific eras as well. .......

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 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.

 

[TXBryan]

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.

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.

 

[pantannojack]

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 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.

 

[Arm]

My Sako sports a vintage Zeiss

 

[alwslate]

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.

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.

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.

 

[Charlie Foxtrott]

I have a Weaver K-4 and a K-6.

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.

 

[TheTinMan]

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.

 

[s&wchad]

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.

 

[Ivan the Butcher]

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

 

[ameridaddy]

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.

Hey - you got my scope! I better check my closet.
Enjoy it on the lovely rifle you have!

 

[TheTinMan]

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

Ivan - I am more than a little jealous of your 7x57 Ruger No. 1. That rifle is on my long-term wish list!

 

[AJ]

This is a vintage scope. It is a Lyman Super Target Spot 25X mounted on a Winchester 52D. To some it is very antiquated, however it is clear as a bell and works extremely well! Works as good for me as my Leupold 36X or Leupold 24X.

 

[Eddie Southgate]

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.

They are all made that way and all can separate.

 

[Eddie Southgate]

I'd have put a Weaver V4.5 on it . It's my favorite short rifle scope and they were made in round and tv . I like both but prefer the round. They are perfect on the full stock carbines .

 

[CH4]

OP, long action Sakos' integral dovetail bases and commonly available non Sako rings will require a scope with a longer tube for proper eye relief. From personal experience, you'll have trouble with a Leupold 2-7 or 2.5-8. Unless you use vintage sako rings or the huge optilok rings, rings from Leupold, Burris, Millet, etc., require mounting at least midway on the dovetail, creating a large space between the rings. Again, here's a picture of one of my Sakos with Millet rings.

 

[CWH44300]

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.

I think you made a great choice, it looks awesome
I'm kinda partial to the old tv look myself

 

[muddocktor]

TinMan, that Redfield looks great on your gun. I've always been partial to the Widefield scopes myself and still have my original Widefield 3x9 (non low profile) on my old Model 70 from when I put it on around 1970 or so. Mine is still clear and has great light gathering power at dusk and dawn. I don't hunt any more but do bring my old club to the range every once in a while and the old 264 Mag still shoots well.