Author Topic: Long range sights (Read 1107 times)

handirifle · « **on:** February 20, 2007, 06:34:09 AM »

I'm building a budget BPCR (really budget) with an NEF receiver and a 38-55 barrel. I'm slowly gathering info and parts for my project.

My question here, and I hope it's not off topic, is about the old scopes used by the BPCR shooeter. I have read up some on these and might go to an MVA "style" scope, but for now I'm looking for something cheaper.

OK, here goes.

After reading about the MVA style scopes it seems they all move in the monuts on recoil. This is not really what I'm after. Dues to eyesight issues, even after LASIK, iron sights are still hard for me to use. IF I mounted a 1" steel tube, say 18" long, in a set of scope bases, that had a set of crosshairs in it, would this work on the same single focal plane concept as an optical scope?

If the single plane idea of mine IS correct, I'll try to design a set of mounts that are windage and elevation adjustable, since the crosshairs will not be.

Any input you can give me on this is appreciated.

Thanks

quickdtoo · « **Reply #1 on:** February 20, 2007, 06:51:23 AM »

I'd just get a Dixie scope with mounts.

Tim

http://www.dixiegunworks.com/product_info.php?products_id=13860&osCsid=ee1baf2b753cfcba9abec37ee355436d

http://www.dixiegunworks.com/product_info.php?products_id=4040&osCsid=ee1baf2b753cfcba9abec37ee355436d

http://www.dixiegunworks.com/product_info.php?products_id=4041&osCsid=ee1baf2b753cfcba9abec37ee355436d

Smokin Joe · « **Reply #2 on:** February 20, 2007, 07:10:11 AM »

The sights are not going to be in the same focal plane unless you have a lens in there somewhere. I have a problem with "old eyes" and I use the following setup on my B/C for BPCR. I did enlarge the aperature to .055"

Rear:

http://trackofthewolf.com/(S(za5vs3uqoosiqz22iwqxfs45))/categories/partDetail.aspx?catId=14&subId=167&styleId=770&partNum=RS-CREED-5-E

Front:

http://trackofthewolf.com/(S(za5vs3uqoosiqz22iwqxfs45))/categories/PARTDETAIL.ASPX?CATID=14&SUBID=167&STYLEID=763&PARTNUM=FS-17-AUG

Tim's suggestion is a good one, as the scope mentioned should comply with BPCR rules (if you can get them to allow the B/C!)

handirifle · « **Reply #3 on:** February 20, 2007, 07:29:12 AM »

Quick,
Did I forget to mention I'm cheap

, those look fine, but do they slide in the mounts like the MVA's do? I'm not sure if I care at this point about "competing" since I tried to go that route with my BC and was rejected.

I WAS wondering about screwing on the rear lense fron an old scope. I've tried looking up a cutaway view of a scope on the net but haven't found one yet.

Joe,
That is similar to what I had on my BC as well, but even those are hard for me. The front sight is blurry.

quickdtoo · « **Reply #4 on:** February 20, 2007, 07:34:32 AM »

Yeah, I knew you'd say that, and I don't blame ya, I thought even Dixie's cost, while much less than a Malcolm, still more than I wanted to spend. I'd call Dixie and ask em how they work, but someone just bought one of those scopes, maybe they'll check in, it may have been Edelwiess, IIRC.

Tim

Smokin Joe · « **Reply #5 on:** February 20, 2007, 07:42:08 AM »

Mine was blurry,too. I changed to the straight post insert and it helped quite a bit.

quickdtoo · « **Reply #6 on:** February 20, 2007, 07:54:06 AM »

I didn't care for the Lyman inserts, use the Lee Shaver inserts instead.

Tim

http://www.buffaloarms.com/browse.cfm/4,49.htm

handirifle · « **Reply #7 on:** February 20, 2007, 09:03:51 AM »

I tried lots of different ones, and had clear eye days and blurry eye days.

On clear eye days, they were fine, otherwise was hard to hit anything

, very frustrating, that was.

EDELWEISS · « **Reply #8 on:** February 21, 2007, 02:58:22 AM »

I thought I heard my name, then I checked the forums, and there it was.

I bought a Dixie 32inch scope about 6 months ago, unfortunetly it went straigth to the gunsmith and Im waiting for my prize to come back. I'll report on all the work when it arrives.

Heres what I can tell you about the scope, if only from the quick first glance before shipping it off.
1. Its very cool to look at. Theres no high tech gadetry to be found, and thats a pleasent change from what I was used to from my work toys.

2. All the abaove aside, its crude. The mounts are shameful. When Dixie says unpolished they mean "as cast". I can live with that and the flat base for octagonal barrels; but the shinny silver phillips screws that are "included" must have been another cost saving feature. Zero is gonna be fun as you move one mount for elevation and the other for windage........

3. Still I was happy when it arrived and its the cheapest period lookig scope I could find. I bought from an OLD copy of the Dixie catalog without waiting for the current issue. Thanks to you guys I had seen several other much nicer scopes BUT at a much higher prices. Now that the Leatherwood "Malcolm" scope is close to the Dixie version in cost I just might consider that for the spare BC thats hidden in the vault. If it means anythig to you guys, I was weaned on Leatherwoods ART scope and an M21.

Unfortunetly theres no place here in the PEOPLES REPUBLIK OF MARYLAND to put hands on different models of these sorts of things. Here we are happy to be the world record center for murder, heroin, and syphllis. We maintain this State of confussion by ...........waitforit......................
guncontrol and my personal favorite magazine limits.

Sorry if I went off topic, its just I can remember when I gave directions by saying, "its near this or that gunshop". Now its gotten hard to find a shop here at all, and even less that will take a chance on new inventory if its not specifically designed around the whitetail hunter.

handirifle · « **Reply #9 on:** February 21, 2007, 05:32:15 AM »

EDELWEISS
Thanks for the feedback on the Dixie. Question, does it move in the mounts? That is not a quality I desire. Once it's zeroed, can you adjust for longer range and windage, or do you use Kentucky windage and elevation?

Living in the PRK (Peoples Replubic of Kalifornia) I know full well your woes.

Anyone have any idea how may lenses are in one of those scopes? How about anyone with a link to a cutaway view of a scope, I can't find one of those either.

quickdtoo · « **Reply #10 on:** February 21, 2007, 05:59:24 AM »

Dixie has a contact page, but not a toll free questions line, ask em.

Tim

http://www.dixiegunworks.com/contact_us.php?osCsid=63a234972f4e3e4aa176e21bf0e5de93

handirifle · « **Reply #11 on:** February 21, 2007, 10:19:50 AM »

Might be worth a call.

EDELWEISS · « **Reply #12 on:** February 21, 2007, 10:32:28 AM »

Handi,

Heres my best guesses since I dont have it back yet. I dont think it slides back and forth in the mounts, as say and old Unertl of Carlos Hathcock fame. The mounts were perhaps the most disapointing part of the package. The "bases" and "Rings" are connected if memory serves by a bolt and nut arrangement. Im gonna stress this is from an ageing menory; but I have a picture floating in the grey matter of having to loosen the nut and applying the scientific measure of a wack to make changes.

What I do recall was long convesations with my smith about the mounting options on my BC round barrel. My original thought was to keep it side mounted and make the necessary real life changes to the point of aim/point of impact. My smith being more of an artist than I came up with some other ideas. The first thing he did was toss the phillips screws.

I have a few pics of the work in progress but Im afraid posting them here is beyond me. I THINK I can email them if you send me your address.

Dont let my ranting scare you away from the Dixie scope. It is what it is, and aside from the mounts which may be historically correct I remember thinking it was cool. As I look back at the pics from the smith I still think so. As a soldier and a police Ive carried the best precision rifles made and honestly I like the more simpler designes of the BC and brass scope.

If I had to do it again I might spend a few bucks more for the Leatherwood; but theres no way I could afford one of the big buck "target" types. Frankly I like your Idea as well. Im searching my dark spaces of the grey stuff again; but Im pretty sure the Brits used a similar design as your concept in the early days of WW1. No glass just the crosshairs in a tube, it wasnt a single focal plane; but it eliminated the frontsight/rearsight/target blur.

Keep us informed

handirifle · « **Reply #13 on:** February 21, 2007, 11:17:26 AM »

OK thanks for the feedback. I fully understand about the ageing memory thing. (what was I talking about???, oh yea)

I'm gonna give it a try, if for no other reason than I'm cheap. Maybe the Brits were cheap too

I might give it a shot using the std mount holes first, then if it works to my satisfaction, I'll make a mount farther down the barrel and work out a windage/elevation rear mount.

What the heck, I'll just fit this in between the 3 million other things I have to do.

Once I start, I WILL post pics if it looks like it might turn into a bonafied project.

edelweiss
my email is slewis53@adelphia.net, yes , thanks I'd like to see the pics.

quickdtoo · « **Reply #14 on:** February 21, 2007, 12:38:57 PM »

It would be nice to post the pics here Handi, I would be glad to if you can't.

Tim

handirifle · « **Reply #15 on:** February 21, 2007, 06:23:53 PM »

Quick
I can post them when the time comes. Edelweiss sent me some but I think my email program ate them. I gave him some info on how to post using photobucket or similar. Hopefully he can get them posted.

quickdtoo · « **Reply #16 on:** February 21, 2007, 06:24:46 PM »

Thanks.

handirifle · « **Reply #17 on:** February 21, 2007, 06:46:52 PM »

Well I dug up an old Bushnell 2.5X I thought I had tossed out. It seemed to go haywire on me when I had it on my Win 94 trapper, 44 mag. I fighured out why. One of the crosshairs had broken but still looked like it was ok. I guess recoil moved it after every shot. kinda hard to keep zeroed that way.

Anyway, I took the eyepiece off it and looked inside. This might be tougher than I thought. There are the lense up front, and the eyepiece. In the middle there appears (cause I didn't remove it yet) a cylindrical tube with a flat (maybe) lens on each end. This appears to transmit the light from where the front lense (objective) bends it and carries it in a parallel to the rear of the cylinder. from there it enters the eyepiece and is bent by that lens to a usable shape for our eye. At least that how it appears to be.

Still some more experimenting to be done.

quickdtoo · « **Reply #18 on:** August 18, 2007, 05:55:21 AM »

Quote from: EDELWEISS on February 21, 2007, 02:58:22 AM

I thought I heard my name, then I checked the forums, and there it was.

I bought a Dixie 32inch scope about 6 months ago, unfortunetly it went straigth to the gunsmith and Im waiting for my prize to come back. I'll report on all the work when it arrives.

Still waiting for the update on the Dixie scope.

Tim

EDELWEISS · « **Reply #19 on:** August 18, 2007, 07:04:11 AM »

Thanks for asking, I only got my rifle back recently and havent even began to think about shooting it, since in my haste for true exotica I insisted it be re-chambered for 45-120. Never did I take into consideration reloading for a BP cartridge. BUT the rifle is displayed in a place of honor. The scope does NOT slide with recoil, or atleast its tight in the rings/ mounts. The smith did a nice job and I told him not to hurry as he was doing it for almost nothing. Hes still in the process of making a "schutzen" style trigger guard to replace the plastic NEF and we are talking about something of a Sharps style hammer. He sent it back when the re-chambering and scope mount was done so I could play with it, but so far its just hanging around, Im sad to say. I may grap some 45-70 just to shoot it as soon as I get a free day(that'll be when the kids go back to school).

I still cant do pics but if somebody is willing I'll email them what Ive got. PM me with your address if you like.

quickdtoo · « **Reply #20 on:** August 18, 2007, 07:11:50 AM »

Thanks for the update, please hit my email button and send pics to me, I'll add them to your post.

Tim

handirifle · « **Reply #21 on:** August 18, 2007, 08:43:05 PM »

Quote from: EDELWEISS on August 18, 2007, 07:04:11 AM

Thanks for asking, I only got my rifle back recently and havent even began to think about shooting it, since in my haste for true exotica I insisted it be re-chambered for 45-120. Never did I take into consideration reloading for a BP cartridge. BUT the rifle is displayed in a place of honor. The scope does NOT slide with recoil, or atleast its tight in the rings/ mounts. The smith did a nice job and I told him not to hurry as he was doing it for almost nothing. Hes still in the process of making a "schutzen" style trigger guard to replace the plastic NEF and we are talking about something of a Sharps style hammer. He sent it back when the re-chambering and scope mount was done so I could play with it, but so far its just hanging around, Im sad to say. I may grap some 45-70 just to shoot it as soon as I get a free day(that'll be when the kids go back to school).

I still cant do pics but if somebody is willing I'll email them what Ive got. PM me with your address if you like.

You know, something you said reminded me, I was just the other day wishing I hadn't sold off those two receivers, one an SB2 the other an old shotgun. I was thinking I could have used the old one to experiment on, like making a sidehammer that actually functioned in the Handi and one you could install with any mods to the receiver. I think it's possible, it just might not be real practical though.