Bleh! Ive never met a 3/4" scope that I liked. But alas, I have an old JC Higgins rimfire with a Weaver side mount, no dove tails, so 1" isnt an option. Did anyone ever make a 4X15 or 4X20mm scope or anything of that ilk that was actually worth owning? Perhaps something in an old Weaver with a bit more exit pupil or ??

I've got a German Ruediger 2.5x15 with an 18mm body and it's a little sweetie. It seems to have no deliberate field stop and the field blending is like the best old Nickel or Zeiss's.

This one has 10-11mm dovetail mounts soldered on but they are so far forward I wonder if it's been used on a rook rifle or even db.

funny I have a weaver v22-a 3-6 scope but it's 7/8" for grooved receiver.

quote:

Originally posted by richj:
funny I have a weaver v22-a 3-6 scope but it's 7/8" for grooved receiver.

Do you like your V-22? I see some old Weavers available, but Ive never had one that size. One of my favorite aspects of the typical 1" old Weaver steel tubes is the monster eye relief. They are fantastic for that. Do the small ones fare pretty well?

I have had a couple budget 4X15's and I always pitched them in favor of open sights, but the eyes are aging.

Well I found an old Ted Williams just like this one. I guess we will see.

The little Weaver J series scopes were nice. Nothing fancy but they worked well. Redfield made a 4x .22 scope that was pretty good but I think it was 7/8" not 3/4".

quote:

Originally posted by cgbach:
The little Weaver J series scopes were nice. Nothing fancy but they worked well. Redfield made a 4x .22 scope that was pretty good but I think it was 7/8" not 3/4".

Thanks for the input. That tube size is good to know. Ive seen a few of the Redfields, they know what they want for them. Old Redfield's are good glass, but sometimes they just seem a bit overpriced to me. I have always preferred the non-critical eye relief of Weavers over them. I have an old Redfield 5 Star in mint condition, its a beautiful scope but I wish it had longer eye relief.
The Ted Williams I bought is supposed to be based on the J4. Sometimes those fine cross hairs can be hard to locate, but I figure it should suffice for a .22 plinker.

It's got a 3+" eye relief . I just got it from a n estate ( my buddy passed thanksgiving week.)

quote:

Originally posted by Wstrnhuntr:

quote:

Originally posted by richj:
funny I have a weaver v22-a 3-6 scope but it's 7/8" for grooved receiver.

Do you like your V-22? I see some old Weavers available, but Ive never had one that size. One of my favorite aspects of the typical 1" old Weaver steel tubes is the monster eye relief. They are fantastic for that. Do the small ones fare pretty well?

I have had a couple budget 4X15's and I always pitched them in favor of open sights, but the eyes are aging.

the 3/4" redfield hasn't been made for awhile,but if you can find one they are really great

quote:

Originally posted by Wstrnhuntr:
One of my favorite aspects of the typical 1" old Weaver steel tubes is the monster eye relief.

I've got to agree with you on that. I bought a 1947 K2.5 and can't believe how flexible the eye relief and eye box are. The lenses are not quite as good but, in those regards and the field blending, it's up with the old Nickel Supras.

Well Ive got the little Sears version of the Weaver J-4 in front of me. After a careful clean up job and focus adjustment it seems like a real nice little scope. Still not quite like a good 1" scope, but I suppose that is to be expected with these miniatures. Seems very serviceable though, clearly a far better product than the lesser brands and it looks great. Im liking it!

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:

quote:

Originally posted by Wstrnhuntr:
One of my favorite aspects of the typical 1" old Weaver steel tubes is the monster eye relief.

I've got to agree with you on that. I bought a 1947 K2.5 and can't believe how flexible the eye relief and eye box are. The lenses are not quite as good but, in those regards and the field blending, it's up with the old Nickel Supras.

A lot of those old Weavers have seen many miles. But if you find one in really good condition and can get it cleaned up their glass can hold their own pretty well, I get a nice clean image right to the outer edges, but the coatings is where they seem to fall woefully short compared to modern scopes. No where near the light transmission. At least that is the impression I get with many of them.

Yeah, coatings have improved but as one who only hunts in daylight, I see a scope as a sight, not a spotting scope. In the country I hunt, the one that gets you on target quickest is most important.

I know that illuminated dots can even improve speed, too, but they're against my religion

I agree. Eye relief can be a big plus for target acquisition as well. Nothing wrong with gobs of light transmission if you can get it though. Less strain on the old eyes.

Weaver 330 and 440s and back in the day I saw them at turkey shoots on 22s and 30-06s, then we had the J2.5 and J4 and I stillhave a couple of them, and they are excellent scopes..I have a number of 3/4 and 7/8 rings and bases in old Refield,Weaver, buehler and Leupold..I like that old stuff, especially the later Leupold Alaskan 2.5X that's on my Win pre 64 mod. 70, 270 WCF, its a ringer and cuts tiny groups at 100 off the bench, all one holers.

Your mission, Ray, should you choose to accept it, is to persuade Leupold to make that Alaskan again - but this time with the original reticle-movement. If they complain that shooters wouldn't like the reticle moving out of centre, suggest they put it on a ferrule/washer of reduced inside diameter (maybe 11mm, as Pecar appear to have used in the Champion 2.75x).

just a note. this scope has no focus adjustment.

quote:

Originally posted by richj:
funny I have a weaver v22-a 3-6 scope but it's 7/8" for grooved receiver.