I have a 2 piece B&L mount marked only "MAUSER" that I want to use on a vintage 7x57. I am pretty sure I took this off a large ring Mauser. However, I want to use it on a Mex small ring. The rear bridge is the same and the mount screws to the side, and does not interfere with the "hump" so that looks OK. The front mount has two skis and does not contact the front ring at all in the vicinity of the two screw holes. Due to the "skis" it seems to sit on the small ring action OK. But if it's for large ring only, then the level will be off. Given the oddball design of this mount, it's not straightforward to check for level as you can't even put a scope on this mount unless it's installed. And that's another thing .. the mount spacing has to be exactly right, with no obvious way to determine that. You only get to drill once so I want to be sure before I start.

Any chance of pics? Do you have a LR action you could test fit to determine positively it is for a LR?. You say you think you had it on a LR but that now you think it may not be level? Do you think that's why you took it off originally? Perhaps the "skis" are spacers for a SR and they are ground off for a LR? As for spacing can't you attach the rings to the scope and see where your locations are?

Is this close to what you have? If so could be it was not designed to be used with scopes having turrets.

https://www.ebay.com/i/2744487...QhOsyTsaAuyvEALw_wcB

quote:

Originally posted by Russ Gould:
I have a 2 piece B&L mount marked only "MAUSER" that I want to use on a vintage 7x57. I am pretty sure I took this off a large ring Mauser. However, I want to use it on a Mex small ring. The rear bridge is the same and the mount screws to the side, and does not interfere with the "hump" so that looks OK. The front mount has two skis and does not contact the front ring at all in the vicinity of the two screw holes. Due to the "skis" it seems to sit on the small ring action OK. But if it's for large ring only, then the level will be off. Given the oddball design of this mount, it's not straightforward to check for level as you can't even put a scope on this mount unless it's installed. And that's another thing .. the mount spacing has to be exactly right, with no obvious way to determine that. You only get to drill once so I want to be sure before I start.

I think I figured it out ... if marked "MAUSER" it's for a 98; if marked "MAUSER S M" it's for a Swede or Mexican small ring. So the bases I have are for a 98 LR as I thought. I found a set for the small ring on GB with the SM marking. And yes, I know that the mounts are for a turret-less scope, in fact the ring set I have is for a straight objective as there is no way to get them onto a scope with a bell at both ends.

But I have come up with plan B, which is to find a Redfield JR one piece base for a small ring 98 .. not easy to do as I am learning. Apparently no longer made, no clone either.

Good I'm glad you worked it out. We have a box full of older style mounts NIB old stock at the shop that dates back to the early 1970's. I'll go through it tomorrow to see if there is a SR Redfield one-piece in it.

These folks may have one: https://www.vintagegunscopes.com/redfield-bases

Bob

If you are determined to use those mounts, just make a saddle for the front ring of appropriate thickness. I did the same for my action wrench. I use the LR Head on Sr actions by placing the saddle on top of the receiver ring. Basically a thick shim.

Russ

For my own interest.. What does this mean:

in fact the ring set I have is for a straight objective as there is no way to get them onto a scope with a bell at both ends.

Do you have a set of B&L rings that are not split in two.

Did you change technology to another mount system?

I do not think Redfield ever made a one piece (or two piece) JR base for a small ring 98. The M96 SR base is a two piece that could be used on a small ring 98. I don't think that I ever saw a one piece JR 96 base, but can't say for sure.

quote:

Originally posted by Bobster:
...

https://www.ebay.com/i/2744487...QhOsyTsaAuyvEALw_wcB

Thanks for showing us that, Bobster. I've always known Bausch & Lomb's mounts had the ability to spring back but had not seen them use a hammer to demonstrate it.

I just wish they had dared to point out the mechanical/optical dodginess of image-movement (the constantly centred reticle concept) before it infected the whole scope world.

Yes the ebay ad depicts the mounting system I am talking about, the concept is a V block front and back with the scope pressed into them by a spring or clamp.

Yes the system uses a scope with no turrets, the adjustment is in the mounts. Looks a bit funky but they are interesting and correct for a period rifle. The idea was you could own one scope and several rifles and just switch the scope around without any need to rezero. There was obviously some skill necessary to mount the bases perfectly spaced as the spacing is critical. I came across an ad for a B&L jig to space the holes but it only works for the FN Mauser and other top mount bolt actions; the 98 uses a side mount in the rear and there is no easy way to position the rear mount at the correct height.

And the scope rings themselves are split but not two piece rings .. you have to slide them onto the scope from the front for the straight tube version ("Balfor" 4x), or remove the ocular bell. Other ring setups were available that were conventional split ring.

I just bought a "Balsix" 6x scope to use with these rings, but they will go on another rifle not this small ring Mauser.

Re Redfield JR, there is an ad on Amazon for a 98 small ring one piece base but they are out of stock. If anyone comes across one let me know.

I have B&L mounts on a Win 100 and M70 and a M670.
2 = 2.5-8x40? scopes. with plunger type rings. also have a set of the leaf spring type ring but never used them

30-06 M70


30-06 M670 carbine


308 M100

You know, the more I look at that clean tube and those adjustable mounts the more more I like them.
Especially the clean tube without the protuberances. Perhaps the mount base could be re-engineered to be more aesthetic, trimmer with finer adjustments. It sure could reduce the price and increase reliability of scopes. Hell if you could hit that mount in the ad with a freaking hammer and it remain unchanged I'd buy it!

The Beuhlers were quite trim and low. Not much bigger than a 1 piece Redfield.

My buddy has one on a p64 300H&H with a B&L scope but it's not really meant to be taken on and off.

quote:

Originally posted by Russ Gould:
Yes the ebay ad depicts the mounting system I am talking about, the concept is a V block front and back with the scope pressed into them by a spring or clamp.

Yes the system uses a scope with no turrets, the adjustment is in the mounts. Looks a bit funky but they are interesting and correct for a period rifle. The idea was you could own one scope and several rifles and just switch the scope around without any need to rezero. There was obviously some skill necessary to mount the bases perfectly spaced as the spacing is critical. ...

The B&L mounts were supposed to be reasonably easy to mount at home, though one AR member said he ran out of adjustment on his.

The critical spacing would have to do with the length of the spring provisions and graduation values but B&L's 1969 Application Codes table, at least, showed two-piece bases to have been quite rare.

Of the eight types labelled 'Mauser', only the FN was available in two-piece mode, though Browning, Husqvarna, PH, Weatherby and J.C.Higgins models were also available two-piece at that time.

Your description of the V blocks and rings suggests they are the 1960s daisy-wheel type rather than the 1950s plunger type shown in Rich's pics, in which the scope lodged in 'cotton-reel' cones.

I'd be surprised if you really need to remove the ocular to get the rings on, though.

I don't suppose your mounts have the model number 61-42-53 on them? if so they are for "Mauser FN" and will fit various commercial Mausers but apparently not the old Brownings.

The "Mauser, Mexican or Swedish (small ring)" base 61-77-06 is one-piece, of course.

Bobster, though the mounts might take the hammering and spring back to zero, I'd be worried about the scope, esp. once B&L changed to light-weight alloy tubes. Some of those seemed to wear from recoil inertia at the front cone, too, so if anyone ever brings back the idea, I'd advise they have the cradle bearing against hardened-steel bands around the scope. I'd also like to see an optional mount with greater distance between the 'Vs' cf the old Stith cradle mount.

There is no 6 digit code on either base. Just "MAUSER" .. and the rear appears to clear the hump on a mil 98. It mounts to the side of the rear bridge.

I think you are right .. the small ring mounts were one piece. I found one on Gunbroker.

From what I have read there were 2 types of rings: conventional split, and slip-on. Only the "Balfor" 4x scope had a straight objective. Of course there are no turrets on any of these scopes.

There are two types of clamps: the flat spring type with a star wheel; and the plunger type. I read the latter were supposed to be used only with the one piece base but I don't see that. However, given the way the plunger works the mounts have to be spaced exactly.

All mounts of this type use the V block concept (what you refer to as "cotton reels" to repeatedly position the scope without loss of zero.

Mounting to the side of the rear bridge sounds a little strange, Russ. I know some commercial rifles like Husqvarna had holes on the r/h side for receiver sights but can't see the application for scope mounts.

That link of Bobster's showed the 1960s daisy-wheel mounts. I have a set for the Rem 742/760 in which the rear, eccentric cotton-reel of the older plunger mounts has been replaced by bearers that move together or apart to adjust elevation.

My rings are straps a bit like the old Weavers, screwing down on the r/h side as seen in Bobster's ad.