have recently started experimenting with sidemounts. the G&H and old jaeger too expensive so far. but just won one of the pachmayr side-mount swingovers off ebay and am curious of comments based on experience with these. am so far fairly impressed.

have a weaver on a small ring mauser and while a little flimsy looking and putting the scope too high, i can live with it.

the williams.... that one totally turns me off esp considering the cost. it seems sturdy enough and securely mounted but places scope too high as bad as the weaver or worse and the thumbwheels for take-off are abt like trying to rotate a knife edge and have to be rotated simultaneously or they bind. all this while you're holding the rifle in your free 3rd arm. granted it's not necessary they need to be THAT quickly detached. the weaver comes off well but the mounting thumb screws aren't retained to the mount and are susceptible to loss.

i guess there's a reason the G&H is so high. but it appears to me the pachmayr is next best thing.

The G&H mounting plate comes as a blank and you can cut and fit it to whatever height suits you and your scope.

that i did not know and shows a tremendous amount of foresight. i'm assuming that also permits putting the mounting screws wherever they're best suited also. this has been somewhat of an issue on mausers with the thumb slot.

boy going back to the old pachmeyer takes me back a few. I still have a couple of rifles with them on. They were about the ugliest thing on the market, but they worked. Every time. I think I've got one on al old m70 270 that has been on the rifle since the 70's and is still hitting in the same place. Had another on a kimber 375 what i used alot in the bush, swing it on and off. I wish they still made them ugly or not. the weaver one never was worth a sh-t

quote:

Originally posted by willmckee:
that i did not know and shows a tremendous amount of foresight. i'm assuming that also permits putting the mounting screws wherever they're best suited also. this has been somewhat of an issue on mausers with the thumb slot.

I just recently bought a G&H side mount to use on a 03 sporter I’m building. They have three screws and two tapered pins for mounting the plate. You also have to mill a radius into the plate to match your receiver.

You do have some leeway in where you mount the plate...within reason. On an 03 you either have to drill a hole, or cut a contour to clear the gas vent hole if you try to place it too far forward, or to clear the cut-off boss if you want to move it to the rear. As is, the plate fits perfectly between the gas vent hole and the sloped radius on the front of the cut-off boss. The plate is 3/16†thick, 2 ⅞†wide and 1 ⅞“ high, not counting the dovetail rail.

Just as an added comment...if you want a mount that you can just screw on as it comes from the box the G&H is not what you want. This mount, while extremely well made, requires a milling machine and quite a bit of set up to fit it to your rifle.

The quality is incredible though. The lock up between the base plate and the rings and their base is as solid as a bank vault door. Absolutely no movement or play in the mating. The other thing I like is that the base plate is steel and can be matched to the bluing on the receiver.

Had Pachmeyer Lo-Swing on a 98 based 30-06 years ago and found it to be perfectly acceptable as a mount. If I rememeber correctly it had a pin that hit front ring to bring it to register. I had a G&H side mount on a 270 Mannlicher Schoenauer that had been mounted by Pachmeyer of all people. The base had been TIG welded to reciever and entire gun so perfectly refinished you couldn't tell it didn't come from Factory that way. Took it to Africa first year I went. Currently have a modified 03 that has G&H and Lyman Alaskan and here again it's excellant. I believe the G&H is the second best of the removable mounts second only to ERA which is of course a top mount. Have never had any experience with the Jaeger but imagine it would be comparable to the G&H. Two big drawbacks to G&H cost and installation. Requires extensive gunsmith work to do properly but they ARE still available. If you want something REALLY unique have an H&H side mount built. I saw one a couple of years ago that Clayton Nelson was building and it was really WAS neat.

I think I have pretty much used all of them over the years.

The Jaeger is the most streamlined, with no sharp edges. If you find a set of high rings, you can attach the mount low on the receiver.

The G&H is high quality as well, but it has a lot of corners on the base, as well as the rings.

The Pachmayr is acceptable on a hunting rifle. It can be detached for travel, but it is designed to be flipped over to the side if you want to use iron sights or load from stripper clips. It does make contact with the receiver ring and will leave a small mark. I think I have one still in the box for a Mauser 98, if anyone is interested.

The Williams is low budget.

The Echo was tolerable.

If you can find them the Echo made by Herkner...the Noske, or the Neider, are also really nice side mounts.

Rounding off the edges on the G&H wouldn’t be real hard to do...and I plan on doing just that with mine.

The base is easy to dehorn, but the top half and rings are anodized aluminum (if I recall correctly) and would have to be re-anodized or coated with one of the newer finishes.

quote:

Originally posted by KurtC:
The base is easy to dehorn, but the top half and rings are anodized aluminum (if I recall correctly) and would have to be re-anodized or coated with one of the newer finishes.

You are correct about the “top-half†being aluminum...but there are no sharp edges on the rings at all, and the points on the square corners oof the sliding base are about the only things I would call sharp.

i'd forgotten abt the echo mount. i know those are in old shooters bibles. will have to look for one of them too.

the williams mount i don't consider low budget. well, as to design yes very. but so far is the most expensive since i bought new (mail order, not retail). this pachmayr i lucked up on ebay for $24 and was thrilled.
a top mount ended just before and went for half again that much. which was probably still a decent deal.

On my rifles with g&h mounts intalled by them, they machined or ground over the base screws and pins and then blued to match the receiver (or on a complete g&h custom blued receiver and mount base together) so that screwheads and pins don't show. Most outside smiths who used g&h mounts did not bother with this. Recently had them do this to the base on a Savage 1899 that an outsider had installed and it looks very "unitary" now.

Should also note that I had a Pachmayr on an M70 years back and as I recall you could adjust the height of the scope by filing the bottom of the locator pin under the front ring, also to some extent could rotate the base around the curve of the receiver to get the scope centered. It was an '06 with clip slots, a Standard Grade, my first rifle I actually bought brand new, and fresh out of the Army after Korea I took it to Camp Perry of course the real target shooters were (properly) skeptical. I had done something wrong with adjusting the spring that holds the scope down so after each single loaded shot sighting in the scope popped up and over. The guys pointed out that it was wrong, which was obvious, but I was a young cocky guy and I said I adjusted it that way so I can load the next shot easier. O yeah, came the response, and can you set it so it will pop up after every fifth shot so you can clip load?

Since I have already had too much to say on this subject, I might as well add that Clark S. Campbell, in his very good book "The '03 Era", has a chapter on building a classic Springfield Sporter in which he highly recommends the Echo mount, perhaps, speculatively, because it is less bulky and obtrusive than most of the others.

I must be the odd nut, I just go for the G&H and Jaeger mounts, "damn the torpedoes...."

LLS
Mannlicher Collector

quote:

Originally posted by vigillinus:
On my rifles with g&h mounts intalled by them, they machined or ground over the base screws and pins and then blued to match the receiver (or on a complete g&h custom blued receiver and mount base together) so that screwheads and pins don't show. Most outside smiths who used g&h mounts did not bother with this. Recently had them do this to the base on a Savage 1899 that an outsider had installed and it looks very "unitary" now.

If you look at the thickness of the base plate and the depth of the screw heads it’s pretty easy to see why they install them like that.

Once you remove metal for the radius you do not have much material left to counter sink the 10x32 screw heads to full depth. Sinking them about half their head depth and grinding off the excess makes good sense.

Good thread!

I have been considering using Griffin & Howe side mounts for a couple rifles but, I have some questions for you folks that have already used this type of scope mount.

Rick 0311 & KurtC

Did I understand you correctly? The top half of the Griffin & Howe side mounts are made of Aluminum...?

quote:

Originally posted by KurtC:
The base is easy to dehorn, but the top half and rings are anodized aluminum (if I recall correctly) and would have to be re-anodized or coated with one of the newer finishes.

You are correct about the “top-half†being aluminum...but there are no sharp edges on the rings at all, and the points on the square corners oof the sliding base are about the only things I would call sharp.

That would be a deal killer for me if I understood you correctly. I am considering using the G&H side mounts on a .375 H&H and a .416 Rigby but, I don't like the idea of aluminum anything on my rifles....

If thay are aluminum does G&H also offer a model made of steel through out?

Lastly, in you experience how does this type of mount design stand up to the heavy kickers.

Regards,
Dave

Dave,

Yes, you understood it right. The G&H rings and their attached QR base are made from anodized aluminum while the mounting plate is made of steel. I suppose G&H could make you whatever you want, but you would have to contact them...and get your wallet ready!


I don’t own any “heavy-kickers†so can’t speak with authority on that subject. I have seen G&H side mounts on rifles chambered for larger cartridges than the .375 H&H but I have no idea how much they had been fired. I can’t really see why the mount wouldn’t be strong...it mounts with three 10x32 screws and two #0 size tapered pins.

G&H double lever mounts have been made since the early 1930s, I definitely recall a set of brass or bronze rings on a Savage 99 mount and I would surmise there might have been some steel rings too, altho I don't seem to have any right now. Maybe Mike Petrov would know.

quote:

Originally posted by vigillinus:
G&H double lever mounts have been made since the early 1930s, I definitely recall a set of brass or bronze rings on a Savage 99 mount and I would surmise there might have been some steel rings too, altho I don't seem to have any right now. Maybe Mike Petrov would know.

The first models G&H introduced in the late 1920’s that had the windage adjustable base and a single release lever were made entirely of steel. The later model, patented in 1932, had the dual locking levers, a steel base, alloy rail and either steel or alloy rings.

They also made a model with a dovetail base that would allow mounting railed scopes.

The Mount for the M1D sniper rifles were unique in that they had rings that were split at a 45 degree angle rather than parallel, horizontaly split.

No, I didn’t have all this committed to memory...it comes from Strobel’s book: Old Rifle Scopes.

My 1940's Savage 99RS most likely installed by G&H since the screws and pin heads are flush.

Rob, there two kinds of g&h double lever base for Savage 99s. One one, the base was thicker at the front than at the rear to allow for the taper of the 99 receiver. On the other, the base was the same thickness throughout but the dovetail at the top was skewed at an angle. I do not know which was the earlier. I do know that mount brackets where the levers have rounded ends are earlier than the levers with squared off ends, which are post WWII. Which base and levers does your 99 have?

I just bought a brand new G&H mount last week and the levers have rounded thumb pieces, not square.

rick, did you get it from g&h? I suspect you have a brand new prewar or early postwar mount.
I will check with them next time I am down there, probably next week some time.

quote:

Originally posted by vigillinus:
rick, did you get it from g&h? I suspect you have a brand new prewar or early postwar mount.
I will check with them next time I am down there, probably next week some time.

Yes, I bought the mount two weeks ago directly from G&H...it is brand spanking new. Sales person listed on the invoice is “PEC.â€

Thumb pieces are sort of a curved teardrop shape with checkering in the center.

It’s difficult to describe in writing...but the QR release mechanism (including the levers) on the dovetailed removable base is also steel on the G&H mount.

Only the rings themselves and the inner base they are attached to are aluminum. The fit is extremely precise and clean and the anodizing matches the blued steel very well, IMO. All in all they are extremely well made and would complement any rifle and scope.

quote:

Originally posted by vigillinus:
Rob, there two kinds of g&h double lever base for Savage 99s. One one, the base was thicker at the front than at the rear to allow for the taper of the 99 receiver. On the other, the base was the same thickness throughout but the dovetail at the top was skewed at an angle. I do not know which was the earlier. I do know that mount brackets where the levers have rounded ends are earlier than the levers with squared off ends, which are post WWII. Which base and levers does your 99 have?

vigillinus,

My mounting plate is about 0.18" in the front and 0.16" at the rear.
When you ask about the lever ends I assume you mean their side profile perpendicular to the axis of their pivot? Mine are squared off.

BTW, there is a small screw next to each lever, on the outboard side, what is their purpose, to adjust lever position or tension?

My gun has aluminum rings that were sightly buggered up as were the screws. I looked into a new set of rings but at $125 for a set I decided that some judicious filing and touch up paint was in order.

One more interesting point is that I have heard from 2 other 99 owners that have G&H mounts that were done by G&H and they both have the added checkering on the sidepanels.

Rob

believe it or not, the two little screws next to the levers are nothing more than stop pins to stop the lever in the correct position to remove the slide. If the lever moves further down, the flattened portion on its shank that rotates into position to open up the slot will go past that position and keep the slide locked in place.

Rick, I consulted Mike and he is also surprised that a new mount has round end levers. We use the square/round dichotomy as giving a hint on the date of a mount and/or rifle and will have to reconsider, maybe g&h has switched back and forth over the years, will ask them next time I am down there.

On the subject of the G&H Sidemounts, I have never heard or read of any complaint of mount failure on the Garands that were used as combat rifles. That would be about as tough a test as one could find. I had a set on a classic G&H style springfield that I hunted with a lot. My son now has the rifle, and the mounts are as solid, reliable, and repeatable as you can get. I doubt that you will hear a complaint regarding reliability and repeatability from those who have used the G&H mounts.

Dave

quote:

Originally posted by vigillinus:
Rick, I consulted Mike and he is also surprised that a new mount has round end levers. We use the square/round dichotomy as giving a hint on the date of a mount and/or rifle and will have to reconsider, maybe g&h has switched back and forth over the years, will ask them next time I am down there.

The only markings on the mount I got from G&H is “Griffen & Howe, Inc New York†stamped across the top of the ring base.

Like I said, the thumb pieces on the levers are tear drop shaped but are definitely not square.