Practicality of “Vintage” rifle/scope combo?

E

El Paso Mark

Guest
Greetings all. I’m looking for another .22 to use off the bench, but not for benchrest, for practice in the wind (50 & 100 yards) and for fun (Any excuse to buy another gun, right?). I was considering a “modern” rifle/scope set up, but after I saw Ernie’s vintage 40x’s (http://www.jouster.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5803) I thought- “Why not”? Plus I think it’d be kinda neat to have a vintage set up. So my question is, would the older target-style (Fecker, Unertl) scopes still be practical to use (In today’s world) for my intended application? Thanx.

Cheers,

Mark
 
Sure they can be. I own two Lyman STS's and use them once in a while just for fun. No way they can compete with my Leopold or Nightforce benchrest scopes on bench guns in competition. Even the T36 Weaver is superior. Scope makers have learned a lot over the past 60 years. bob
 
I have a 15X Lyman Targetspot on a heavy barrel target .22 RF.

The gentleman talks about new scopes being better.

Don't know how you could ask for "better" than this scope. Crystal clear, objective screws for parallax correction and focus. Puts the holes in one ragged hole.

They do take a little getting used to. And one possible shortcoming depending on your point-of-view. You set them up for one distance -- e.g., 25 yds. Try to use them at a different distance and they are blurry. So you could not use this sort of scope set up for -- say == squirrel hunting.
 
Old Scope Mounts and Scopes

First, if assembled properly, there is nothing "wrong" with these old mounting systems. They did seem to offer a high degree of repeatablity in a Rifle ability to hold Point of Aim.

The advent of the lightweight internal adjustable scope is what did them in. In Classes, such as LV and Sporter, where weight is a huge consideration, a reliable scope system, (rings and Scope) that weighs only 26 ounces is desireble trait.

Of course, as with any scope system that is to be used for Extreme Accuracy work, it isn't worth an ounce of primer residue if it will not hold POA. Keep in mind, all internal adjustable scopes employ some type of moveable erector tube that allows you change the Point of Aim. In scopes systems that use and external adjustable mounting system, the entire scope becomes the "erector tube", in that the entire thing is moved from left to right, or up and down, to change the POA.

If you think having one of these vintage sighting systems is a neat thing, by all means go for it. Heck,I have a custom '67 Chevelle sitting in my garage that is, by todays standards, not a very practicle means of transportation, but I still love.......jackie
 
Mark...

El Paso Mark said:
Greetings all. I’m looking for another .22 to use off the bench, but not for benchrest, for practice in the wind (50 & 100 yards) and for fun (Any excuse to buy another gun, right?). I was considering a “modern” rifle/scope set up, but after I saw Ernie’s vintage 40x’s (http://www.jouster.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5803) I thought- “Why not”? Plus I think it’d be kinda neat to have a vintage set up. So my question is, would the older target-style (Fecker, Unertl) scopes still be practical to use (In today’s world) for my intended application? Thanx.

Cheers,

Mark
Click to expand...

they can be competitive. Send me your email via PM and I'll send you 3 recent 100 yd targets (.22 rimfire) shot with my 40X heavy barrel and an 8X Unertl. I have had Weaver, Burris, BL, Leup scopes and NONE are as good optically as an old Unertl. Think about it. The Unertls are long focus units. This means the lenses need not be ground with the steep curves necessary to generate focus in a short, modern internal adjust scope or to have to use lenses ground to to compress the light cone to a quick focus. Steep lens curves depending on glass quality and type ususally means less sharpness off center view. I have one Lyman super target and have looked through and used others. I have never found them equal to Unertl optically. I would stick with Unertl.

Or, if you can find a modern Mitchell (no longer made), or if you can settle on 6x look at these
http://www.montanavintagearms.com/scopes.html

--Greg
 
Last edited:
Thank you all!

WOW! GREAT info guys, thanx! Let me respond in order:

Bob- Thanx. It wouldn't be used for competition, just practice, fun, the "Nostalgia/Vintage” look, and to own/collect a piece of history/nostalgia.

Pete- Good info on the optics/mechanics. Thanx. No hunting, just off the bench at set distances (50 & 100 yards) Is there enough adjustment to get a 40 grain .22 bullet to 200 or even 300 yards? I “Assume” the scopes are adjustable/re-adjustable for different distances? You set it for one distance (25 yards) and then if you want to change and shoot at say 100 yards you have to make a physical adjustment?

Jackie- Most excellent! When you say “If assembled properly” do you mean the original manufacturer or me putting the mount on the scope? If the manufacturer, is one (Fecker, Posa, etc.) type better than the others? And if it’s “Me” maybe I could ask you guys for help/instruction if/when I get to that point?

Now regarding holding POA, I understand what you’re saying. Will the older scopes hold their POA? Is one system (Internal/External) better than the other?

I’m not old enough (52) to have used a set up like this in their “Hay Day,” but I’m a History/Military History buff and I think it’d be really neat to have a vintage set up for not only the "Nostalgia/Vintage” look but also to own/collect a piece of shooting history.

Greg- Thanx for the good technical info. Interesting you should mention Mitchell scopes. One of the fellows I shoot with uses a Mitchell for our long range high power matches. I tried searching several times for info on them but could find nothing.

I was considering a Fecker over the others mostly because they seem less common. However, you and a couple other folks recommend a Unertl so I believe that’s what I’ll look for. That said, how about Lyman Super Targets?

My e-mail is: jbbooks@elp.rr.com

Again, thank you all for your response. You’ve provided the technical and, oh, I don’t know what I’d call it, “Social” perhaps(?) data and information I was looking for. Hope that makes sense and you understand what I mean.

When/once I start my search may I contact you guys via PM or e-mail to ask for help with specifics?

Of course I also have to look for a rifle. I thought a Winchester 52 C or D would be kinda neat as they seem less common than a Remington 40X, but it also seems like that causes the price to be higher too. Now I know it's like asking "Ford or Chevy?" but, all things being equal, is there any compelling reason (On paper) to get one over the other? Alas, I know little or nothing about either. Would I possibly want to consider a Remington 37?

Again this would be for practice and fun, not competition, but still, accuracy of course would be the primary factor/concern and an adjustable trigger to a low pull weight is highly desirable too. Thanx.

Regards

Mark
 
mARK

Regarding Unertl scopes try www.unertl.alexweb.net
Remember that the clicks on the Unertl, ie 1/2" 1/4" 1/8" 1/16" per click depend upon the spacing of the front and rear mounts. Further apart for finer click adjustments. The bases are very important to get up front.
Centerfire
 
Mark..

IMHO, stick with a good condition Unertl. Bases are available from Champions Choice if the rifle does not have them. Bear in mind that the these are mounted on the barrel so the barrel has to be drilled and tapped for them and sometimes the front of the action like the Rem 40X. Good luck. --Greg

" was considering a Fecker over the others mostly because they seem less common. However, you and a couple other folks recommend a Unertl so I believe that’s what I’ll look for. That said, how about Lyman Super Targets?"
 
Mitchell optics closed its doors a few years back. Base price at that time on the lowest model was $1100.I believe there was one listed a short time ago on the this sight, think it went very quickly. Unertels and Lyman Target spots will start about $400 and up. Bausch& Lomb (Balvar models) also made a few external adj. scopes, They were the utimate in their time. The one I have is 6-24x focus down to less than 50 feet. I have never seen these priced less than $600 to start. Before the complete switch to short body scopes there was the Redfield 3200, Remington also made a similar unit ( from what I've been told was better than the Redfield but is kinda rare). These were internal adj. but still had the long body.
 
I appreciate the help guys. I can't expect you to make me an expert overnight but would you provide a bit more help/info?

In addition to the website Centerfire provided is there a website that provides good info/details on Unertl and Lyman Super Targets? I've done several searches but come up with nothing.

What are the differences betweent eh different Unertl models, i.e.- Varmint, Programmer, etc.? Is one better/more desirable than another?

I assume the different tube widths are to allow different levels of light transmission? Was that the purpose of the different widths, or was it something else?

Are there "Old-style" and "New-style" Unertls? By that I mean doing an internet search shows some scopes that (Apparently) seem to have been manufactured some 50 or so years ago, yet I've seen two listed as "New in box" and the other "Purchased new in 1969" for example. Is one "Era" of scope better/more desirable than another?

I'm starting to look semi-seriously at buying one of these. What are the "Red flags" to watch out for? Any specific questions I'd want to ask a seller?

I appreciate the time, effort, and help.

Cheers,

Mark
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mark writes, "Pete- Good info on the optics/mechanics. Thanx. No hunting, just off the bench at set distances (50 & 100 yards) Is there enough adjustment to get a 40 grain .22 bullet to 200 or even 300 yards? I “Assume” the scopes are adjustable/re-adjustable for different distances? You set it for one distance (25 yards) and then if you want to change and shoot at say 100 yards you have to make a physical adjustment?"
Click to expand...

Mark. It would not make sense to try to sight in a .22 RF rifle for anything over 50 yds. The arc becomes so extreme, the groups start spreading out. However, there's no reason this scope could not be mounted on any centerfire rifle, including a .22 centerfire. There's a coil spring in the mount that takes the shock out of firing a powerful rifle, thus protecting the scope. Yes, if you stop shooting at one range, e.g., 25 yds, and decide to shoot at 50 yds, then you have to screw the objective to a different setting. There are factory marks at the objective indicating the appropriate screw-out or screw-in -- marks such as 50 ft. 25 yd. 50 yd. 100 yd. etc.

In my humble opinion, these long tube spring-mounted scopes look very cool.

Best--

Pete
 
Okay, 50 yards for practice then, and past that for fun.

Cheers,

Mark
 
Pete...

Montana Pete said:
Mark. It would not make sense to try to sight in a .22 RF rifle for anything over 50 yds. The arc becomes so extreme, the groups start spreading out. However, there's no reason this scope could not be mounted on any centerfire rifle, including a .22 centerfire. There's a coil spring in the mount that takes the shock out of firing a powerful rifle, thus protecting the scope. Yes, if you stop shooting at one range, e.g., 25 yds, and decide to shoot at 50 yds, then you have to screw the objective to a different setting. There are factory marks at the objective indicating the appropriate screw-out or screw-in -- marks such as 50 ft. 25 yd. 50 yd. 100 yd. etc.

In my humble opinion, these long tube spring-mounted scopes look very cool.

Best--

Pete
Click to expand...

would probably agree about not sighting in for over 50 yds, but the things shoot pretty respectible groups at 100 yds. Regarding the tube spring, if one is there, isn't to take the shock out of firing on a heavily recoiling rifle, its there to return the scope to battery. Battery is set by the tube clamp and where it is clamped down in front of the front mount. Then the spring is pushed up against the rear of the front mount so its compressed then locked down. When the gun recoils the scope moves FORWARD in the rings. The spring forces it rearward until the front of the front mount contacts the tube clamp. Without the spring, one simply grabs the end of the scope and pulls it back against the tube clamp. Unertl tube clamps came in regular size and a magnum(wide) size. Not only are they cool, they are extremely well made, have great glass and crystal clear views. Regards --Greg
 
Mark

Howdy Mark!
I have a Balvar 24 that someone mentioned earlier. I like it a LOT! I sold a 1 1/2 inch 20x Unertl to get it. The glass on the Unertl was exactly like the other Greg said (I am Greg too!). The reason I wanted the Balvar was to get a larger ocular lens, that is just me. These old scopes are good pieces of equipment, cool, collectible, and they don't seem to do anything but increase in value.

I hope I don't offend Pete, it is not my intention, but in the 1930's the Winchester factory was testing Win 52's at 200 yards and getting 1.6 inch groups. I was stunned when I read that.

A long time ago there used to be matches commonly shot at 200 yards, at least in the 1930's. Briefly, there were some shot at 300 yards. Can't imagine figuring out the wind for that with a .22!

Time of flight for the bullet could probably have been clocked with a sundial!!

Greg
 
almost forgot!

Would you possibly want to consider a Remington 37?

OOOOOOOHHHH YEEAAAHHHH!!

Ask Bob Finger!

Greg

'course, an aftermarket trigger is required. If you find a 37 with a Canjar trigger, you are doing fine. If you find a 37 with a Kenyon trigger you are doing great!
 
Greg...

404tbang said:
Howdy Mark!
I have a Balvar 24 that someone mentioned earlier. I like it a LOT! I sold a 1 1/2 inch 20x Unertl to get it. The glass on the Unertl was exactly like the other Greg said (I am Greg too!). The reason I wanted the Balvar was to get a larger ocular lens, that is just me. These old scopes are good pieces of equipment, cool, collectible, and they don't seem to do anything but increase in value.

I hope I don't offend Pete, it is not my intention, but in the 1930's the Winchester factory was testing Win 52's at 200 yards and getting 1.6 inch groups. I was stunned when I read that.

A long time ago there used to be matches commonly shot at 200 yards, at least in the 1930's. Briefly, there were some shot at 300 yards. Can't imagine figuring out the wind for that with a .22!

Time of flight for the bullet could probably have been clocked with a sundial!!

Greg
Click to expand...

funny you should mention 200 yard rimfire matches. We have one next weekend 3/14. It should be a lot of fun and has the chance of being quite humbling!! --Greg
 
Unertl

I have recently made a trade that will bring me a Martini 12/15 in exchange for my one of a kind Martini Sukalle. One thing I am keeping from my old setup is my Unertl 10X, with its rings.

The reason is that I own five other scopes and none of them is as clear as the old Unertl. Admittedly, none of the others: two Tascos, a Redfield, a Nikon and a Millett, are high end scopes. Still, I am impressed that a 60 year old design holds up so well.

If I could find a 20X Fecker, Lyman or Unertl to mount to my Ruger No. 1, I would trade three scopes for it: the Redfield, the Nikon and either the Millett or one of the Tascos. I guess that says it all. Of course, if you are willing to accept my offer, you should have your head examined.

To paraphrase the saying, you can have my Unertl when you pry it from my cold dead hands.
 
If you want to have some real fun, get together with a bunch and shoot painted aspirin at 100 yds. One shot apiece is all you get. We would glue about 100 onto cardboard 3 inches apart. Equipment was 40x's, 52's, an occasional anshutz, 36x scopes, match premium ammo, 2 oz. triggers, and flags. We would shoot for dimes, and you have to get the whole pill, not a piece of it, or they wouldn't pay ! You could (at times) watch the trajectory of your projectile.
If it was windy, we somtimes had to hold off 2-3 inches.
What a good time...my 40x enjoyed Eley 10x, red label.
During break time, fresh Italian bread, peanut butter and jelly, or danish pastry.
How does it get better than that ?
 
Slowshot...

Slowshot said:
I have recently made a trade that will bring me a Martini 12/15 in exchange for my one of a kind Martini Sukalle. One thing I am keeping from my old setup is my Unertl 10X, with its rings.

The reason is that I own five other scopes and none of them is as clear as the old Unertl. Admittedly, none of the others: two Tascos, a Redfield, a Nikon and a Millett, are high end scopes. Still, I am impressed that a 60 year old design holds up so well.

If I could find a 20X Fecker, Lyman or Unertl to mount to my Ruger No. 1, I would trade three scopes for it: the Redfield, the Nikon and either the Millett or one of the Tascos. I guess that says it all. Of course, if you are willing to accept my offer, you should have your head examined.

To paraphrase the saying, you can have my Unertl when you pry it from my cold dead hands.
Click to expand...

interesting comment about a 60 year old design holding up so well. Actually, the understanding of refractive optics has been well understood for a LONG time. The longer the scope focal length (meaning the less steep the lens curves) the less chromatic abberation and other abberations that degrade the image. In addition to using good glass for its day, the Unertls, especially the target models, used long focal lengths to take advantage of this. Result is, great, crystal clear views and a sharp picture right to the edges of the field of view. What modern scope makers have done, to reduce the length and weight of the scope, is to steepen the curves and introduce secondary lens groups to "trick" the light into behaving like its a long focus scope. Problem is that unless the glass is top notch and everything is lined up perfectly we get perhaps good images but not that glass sharpness you see in the older scopes. NO FREE LUNCH :)! --Greg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top