Author Topic: telescopic sights (Read 432 times)

Woodbutcher · « **on:** September 17, 2004, 05:04:33 AM »

Gentlemen:
Would anyone care to comment on their experience with the brass scopes that I sometimes see on pictures of muzzleloaders? The use of a scope would be of some help, and they sure look good. But the models that I've looked at on the internet advertizements are 3/4 dia. tubes. For instance, the model offered by Dixie, which sells for about $200.
My limited experience with 3/4 dia. scopes has been a model for 22 rimfire, and that was a long time ago. I went back to iron sights. My lesson was learned, I realize that you get what you pay for. Who else can I ask? I've never seen one other than the ads, so I can't evaluate.
Are they sensitive to eye relief, are they clear, do they fog, how fragile are they? ect.ect. Brass or steel is not the issue, it would be nice if it was sort of authentic.
I'm getting a .36 caplock, and would like to enjoy range work and might have to defend myself against a dangerous squirrel or even a maneating groundhog. Their teeth meet in the middle ya know!
A few posts ago zrifleman spoke of his inspiration from the book by Ned Roberts. Oh Yes! Me too! This is the direction I'm headed, I'd just like a scope that looks right, but how do they work? Many thanks...Woodbutcher

KING · « **Reply #1 on:** September 17, 2004, 04:42:53 PM »

:-D Yes........they are not a bad scope.originally manufactured by Tasco. Power was a 4. They are supposed to be like the ones in the early 1860s and the ones that I had worked fine and looked great on a couple of my caplock rifles,and also on an old Sharps. The problem with them is that they are not adjusted like a modern type scope. These have to be first centered in thier rear and front rings that are seperate and near the ends . Then it is a screw adjustment for elavation and a drift with a light punch and hammer to get the windage. I also found that they had to be checked just about each time the gun is used due to not holding thier zero. I did call a bull with one on my Tryon .53 rifle at 100 yards(1 inch bull). Both the scope and rings are made of soft brass. stay safe............King

Woodbutcher · « **Reply #2 on:** September 18, 2004, 02:53:45 AM »

Thank you King. This is just the kind of problem that I'd like to avoid. Maybe this is why not many scopes are seen on muzzleloaders. Thanks again...Woodbutcher

zrifleman · « **Reply #3 on:** September 18, 2004, 08:16:39 PM »

woodbutcher-I put a 4x Tasco bras scope on a Shiloh Sharps some years ago. I used a set of mounts similiar to Unertl along with a 1/8" rib that I glued on with JB weld. I also put a spring and stop on it. It worked very well and kept it's zero--good enough that I took it deer hunting. Unfortunately I did not get to shoot a deer with it. A gunsmith buddy of mine liked it even more than I did-so it went home with him. I suppose anybody with a little talent and careful search for parts can do what I did. The bad part of these scopes is the mounts, also they are not nitrogen filled. They do help improve your ability to aim better. Currently I have an old 20x target scope on a muzzleloading slug gun. It's worth the effort to figure out how to put a traditional scope on a muzzleloader.

Woodbutcher · « **Reply #4 on:** September 19, 2004, 04:08:04 AM »

Thank you zrifleman, your comments on your experience are greatly appreciated. Scoping a muzzleloader would certainly help me, and I sure would like one, but going the traditional route is going to take a bit more figgurin'.
The truth is, after reexaming the cost, $260 for the Dixie and a whole lot more from other companies, and considering the responses from you gentlemen, this doesn't feel comfortable yet.... Woodbutcher