The Accurate Reloading Forums
Scope bases for unaltered m98 with charger hump
24 January 2007, 20:48
GSP7Scope bases for unaltered m98 with charger hump
For you gunsmiths here on AR.
What brand/type 2 piece bases do you all think would be best on the rear of a unaltered m98 with charger hump before you have it drilled and tapped.
What I dont like is Luepold, Warne, weaver all have different hole spaceing .325,.440,.445
What if you wanted the option of changeing bases from standard windage screw luepold type to a weaver type slot base or even a talley base
What about useing a FN mauser type base for a non charger hump rear with .500 hole spaceing and machine the rear base to clear the hump and clear the bolt handle swing?
Is this pretty easily doable for a good gunsmith? Any problems with useing a .500 hole spaceing with the charger hump still there?
24 January 2007, 22:40
tnekkccThe rear hole spacing for Weaver #45 is .504".
To relieve for the rear hump, a die grinder can be used.
24 January 2007, 23:16
GSP7Im actually leaning toward useing the Luepold standard with the windage screw rear and dovetail front, The .325 hole spaceing on their unalterd m98 base is just oddball. If I could get the luepold FN rear base(or even a redfield 2 piece standard base) with .500-.504 spaceing machined to fit I could use other style bases also.
I bought some Warne rings to check them out, and they are nice but quiet bulky or massive. I like more of a trimmer base ring set up. Other than Talleys(more money) I like the luepold standard. Also luepolds low rings mount the scope lower than Warne or Talley.
25 January 2007, 03:02
M1Tankerquote:
Originally posted by GSP7:
I bought some Warne rings to check them out, and they are nice but quiet bulky or massive. I like more of a trimmer base ring set up. Other than Talleys(more money) I like the luepold standard. Also luepolds low rings mount the scope lower than Warne or Talley.
You need to take a look at the Warne Premier rings. They are no longer made but can be found on Ebay quite often. They are a LOT slimmer and trimmer ring and base than the current Maximas Warne makes. Warne still makes the premier bases and their current 7.3 series rings will fit them. I have attached a pitcure of the Premier and 7.3 rings for you. The Premiers are my favorite rings and i have them n almost all my guns.
The Premier:
The 7.3 series:
William Berger
True courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway. - John Wayne
The courageous may not live forever, but the timid do not live at all.
25 January 2007, 05:22
ireload2Guys,
The current Warne Maximas appear to be powder coated rather than blued steel. That makes me a bit suspicious that they are covering up the texture of a injected molded metal ring.
The Premier above appears to be a hogout of bar stock.
25 January 2007, 06:22
KurtCBill Supple at Griffin & Howe made these for my Brno 1938 Model A in 8x60S. He started with a set of Leupold QR gunsmith bases. It was not an inexpensive solution to the problem, but it enables me to uses as many different scopes as I chose.
Another choice would be EAW swing away bases.
25 January 2007, 08:59
GSP7KurtC, What is your hole spaceing on your rear base?
25 January 2007, 18:20
KurtCThe spacing appears to be .575, which is probably the minimum you can use to have the QR hole in the middle.
25 January 2007, 23:33
Mauser98When I had my 9.3X62 built on a 1908 Brazilian, I initially went with Warne bases. Unfortunately, the holes in the front base were drilled off-center so I was forced to look for an alternative as I wasn't going to try Warnes again. The rear holes had been drilled with a .500 spacing. After some brain-storming with the gunsmith, we decided to use a modified FN rear base.
Here's the result.
If It Doesn't Feed, It's Junk.
26 January 2007, 00:19
GSP7M98. Thats exactly what I would like done.
Basicaly your luepol FN base has been cut just like a luepold unaltered m98 base but now you have the .500 spaceing instead of lueplold .325
I ordered a unaltered m98 base to see if a .500 hole could be drilled in the base next to the .325 hole. Otherwise Ill see if I can get a smith to machine my FN base to fit like you did.
26 January 2007, 02:42
richjThis is a Redfield (SR-M) M98 rear base. It has .420" hole spacing. The base is releaved for the bridge clearance. The base/ring intrudes into the receiver opening a bit.
26 January 2007, 03:02
GSP7Richj, Thanks for that pick. Yes I researched that base also with the .420 spaceing. Aparently redfield doesnt make that one anymore but weaver has that one now. I think they are the same. I mistakenly said that was .445.
Thanks all for posting the pictures
Here is a unaltered type luepold with .325 space. Its on a swede, but i think its the same as a m98
Rick