I bought a rifle recently that came with a period Bushnell Scopechief 3X with a Command Post. Anybody remember those? It has a little red lever half hidden under the windage adjustment. You turn it one way and it is a normal crosshair. You flip it the other and up pops a thick tapered post on the bottom half of the crosshair. I've never been a particular fan of posts, but the idea is pretty neat. Wonder why no one else ever used it?

This scope also came with a screw-on "doubler" which increases the magnification by 2.5x. This attachement's fine male threads screw into the matching internal female threads on the scope's objective. On the 3x scope, this would increase the power to 7.5X. It is relatively clean and very simple. So far as I can tell, it does nothing to the zero and the image is pretty decent. Anyone remember these?

The Scopechief line was Dave Bushnell's top-of-the-line imported Japanese scope. They were fairly popular circa 1960's. Not that I want to go back, but I can see why people liked them.

I remember pining for one of those to put on my Marlin 336. I got over it and got the plane jane 4x that still works fine. Wish I could have got one of them though. Enough of an oddball to have some collectors value.

I'm kinda surprised at the apparent quality of the instrument. It has what I would call a semi-matte finish that I would describe as "satin", which is very appealing to the eye. Perhaps Bushnell was emulating the appearance of the blued steel Weavers which were their most direct competitors. At any rate, they were about three decades ahead of the headlong rush to matte finishes.

I have a .375 H&H "project" gun that I may mount the scope on. I can screw the doubler on for bench shooting and load development and screw it off to take hunting in the field. Who knows, the Command Post might be very useful in low light situations?

One more advantage of this scope: Unlike many low-power scopes, its body is long enough to mount easily on a long rifle action without the use of offset rings.

I was interested in it because the local gun shop was staffed by a young gun nut that pushed the latest and greatest and most expensive to us gullble types. I remember the choice at the time was about 4-5 Bushnells and 4-5 Weavers. My family were all Bushnell users and I was poor so my decision was made. Still I'm working on a vintage Herter's action that would be perfect for a scope like that. A useable period piece. As I remember the finish would also be a good match for the NYlite teflon finish I have on my M70 classic stainless in 375. I have 2-7x32 Leupolds on all my using rifles but they aren't long enough for the 375. The mount has to creep over the loading port a bit. Doesn't interfere but offends my sense of the way things should look.

If my memory hasn't failed me I think the old scopechiefs were priced comparable to leupold--I have one a 3x with the post reticule on a 7x57 that works great.

I was looking at a 1967 Shooters Bible just last night. The 3-9 Scopechief was listed at $99.95, while the Leupold Vari-X II was listed at $89.95! During that period the Redfields were also usually about $10 per comparable model higher than the Leupolds.

And as I recall I paid $59.95 for my Bushnell 4x, which was all I had. Must have been around 67. Still works too.

I've got a BAUSCH AND LOMB (sic? in the safe and not going to get it out just for this post)Scope Chief. Is this the same thing?

Bushell owned (or leased) the rights to the use of the "Bausch and Lomb" name on their sporting optics for several years (rights have since reverted and they no longer use this brand). I'm not aware if they labelled any of their "B&L" scopes as "Scopechief" or not. At any rate, a B&L by Bushnell would have been a generation or so later than the orginal Bushnell Scopechiefs that are the subject of this thread.

By the way, did you know that Leupold now owns the rights to the label "Redfield" for sporting optics (but not mounts or iron sights). I have no idea if they plan to utilize the name or if their strategy was to simply take the name out of circulation so that no competitor could use it.