I'm moving toward mounting one of these scopes on this rifle with Talley rings & bases. I have the same scope in rings for another rifle, and holding it over the M70 SE receiver, it looks like it won't fit without some kind of extension base.
Anybody try this combo? This is the late model rifle with the .330" rear hole spacing.
I have the same scope mounted on my SE, using Warne bases and QD rings. The scope fits and leaves a little room for adjustment, but with the long eye relief you should not need it.
I bought that same scope for a new Safari Express in .375 H&H with talley bases and detachable rings. I mounted it on a .338 Win Mag Mod 70 cause the .375 was at the gunsmiths being modified. I have not tried to mount it on the .375 but even on the .338 there was very little room for adjustment.
So on my gunsmith's advice I have decided not to mount it on the .375 and keep it for the .338Win Mag. I hate it when the mount base protrudes over the ejection port.
I am now thinking of the Swarovski 1-4 for my custom. Leupold technical dept says the 1-5 & the 1.75 - 6 x 32 both will fit .375 M70's.
If it does fit you'll have practically no adjsutment for eye relief. Pity cause I think the adjustment range is perfect for a .375. Give leupold a suggestion to produce an extended version of this scope.
No Problem! Just get either extention bases or extention rings,several differant companys make them. I mounted that scope on a Savage 110 30-06 and used Millett rings and bases and it worked fine with that extra long action.Shop around on the web theres rings or bases that will fix you right up.
In Leupold Dual Dovetail mounts the Leupold Vari-X III JUST fits on a Model 70 LT sporter in .30-06. It will also JUST fit in Leupold STD mounts on the M70 Safari Express, this with the rear mount hanging over the ejection port a bit. Dual dovetails are not yet available for the .330" rear hole spacing as far as I know.
By JUST fits I mean that the front ring is right up next to the objective bell and the rear ring is right up next to the power selector. Absolutely zero room for fore and aft adjustment but the rings are not pinching the scope at either end. The good news is that, as has been noted, the eye relief is such that the forced positioning is okay for most shooters.
FWIW, a Leupold 1.75X6E, NOTE THE "E", fits quite well in Talley detachable mounts on a Safari Express Model 70. It will leave some 1/2 inch or more of adjustment room. Have not tried the 2.5X8 in the Talleys so can't comment on that fit.
I had the same problem on my pre-64 model 70 custom I just did up in 338 mag. I had PM rings and Pm bases, the magnum ones, and found there was not enought room for the scope. I made a new front base and it allowed the scope to fit very nicely.
Posts: 5533 | Location: Minnesota | Registered: 10 July 2002
Jim, Morris Melani built bases for a pre war Model 70 that I took to Africa this year. The 2.5 to 8 was just shy of fitting. I ended up putting a 1.75 to 6 on it as it is about .25" longer, bell to bell.
I don't exactly understand people objecting to a base extending over the magazine port. They work fine with a one piece base.
Posts: 4917 | Location: Wenatchee, WA, USA | Registered: 17 December 2001
I had the same problem with the 2.5-8x, but a set of extension rings allowed me to install it on a Ruger .338WM.
The problem with the Leupold 2.5-8x is not the length, but instead the turret. If the turret was a little forward than where it is, then it would not be a problem. But a good thing about this little scope is that it is very clear and provides a sharp image. I have used on my .338WM for the past eight years, and have been very pleased with it, since at dusk I can see much more through it than what I can see with my own eyes.
Posts: 2448 | Location: Alaska | Registered: 25 May 2002
Just checked the Leupold website for dimensions. The 2.5-8x has 5.12" allowable ring spacing (out-to-out), and the 1.75-6X has 5.39". Sounds to me like I'll just get the bases & rings first and choose the scope that fits.
