Hey, i have a 1923 GRI Ishapore III that i'd like to try scoping with the S&K Insta-mount #1370 that accepts weaver rings. Anybody in here have/install them? Seems like a nice way to go scope or back to iron without drilling the receiver. Thanks.
Printable View
Hey, i have a 1923 GRI Ishapore III that i'd like to try scoping with the S&K Insta-mount #1370 that accepts weaver rings. Anybody in here have/install them? Seems like a nice way to go scope or back to iron without drilling the receiver. Thanks.
Sorry to be negative but they are a load of crap. There really is no decent SMLE no-gunsmithing type scope mount on the market. I've bought, sold and installed them all over the years and refuse to inventory any of them anymore.
I agree but I'd have used a few more choice words that the politically correct and gentlemanly Brian!
Ooo-k, ... guess i got 2 NFW's (ha,ha). I've heard good about the S&K mount that i pointed out (having a receiver ring). But, If you guys say they wont hold zero, i'll believe ya because i've got some good info from other posts on this site. Thanks and additional specific input is welcome.
There is a scope scope mount sold on eBay that replaces the SMLE rearsight base. It is made in aluminum, but does have a better chance of being collimated to the bore than the receiver mounts.
It does require driving out the pin holding the base and driving off the foresight block to remove that from the barrel, so it is not something you just take on and off as you can a No.4 S&K/Fultons/Armalon mount.
Surpmil, thanks for your info but, i believe that is the (forward) barrel mount that uses a long eye relief and IMHO is a butt ugly placement (LOL). I prefer the reciever mount (and i can machine). Believe me, i REALLY appreciate all and any suggestions from the members here. I'm a retired machinist/fabricator but still the furthest thing from a know-it-all. Always willing to learn.
That's why I apologized first Peter! I've had them shear off because the little aluminum recoil plate at the back that fits on the charger bridge had to be filed so thin in order to fit. They do have to be fitted carefully and it's not exactly a no-gunsmith mount either in my humble opinion as the forend has to be relieved for the front band and base filed to fit.
Good info guys!
Yes, they cannot be described as anything but functional! I've got a few of the S&K mounts here but have never fitted one oddly enough. You could reproduce it in steel with some lightening holes and cuts probably.Quote:
Originally Posted by xlman
The problem is of course that the surfaces it is attached to on the charger bridge and receiver ring are not consistently surfaced/located, with the possible exception of the inside faces of the charger bridge.
And as Brian said, the wood needs to be relieved.:(
Anything that is made to be screwed or in any other way fixed (except by welding.........) to a No1 or a No4 breeching up ring is a candidate for failure. The radial surface that by definition will take away the first thread - and same as the last thread - and minimal thickness for the remaining screw thread is poor craftsmanship and engineering standards
This prompted me to fit one of the NOS S&Ks I have here.
Well, it's reasonably solid, but fortunately no metal needed to be removed from the "recoil lug" on the mount. The machined steel ring that goes around the receiver ring just ahead of the front guard screw hole does not fit closely over the ring, so it relies on the tightness of the rather small front screw to pull it up tight against the bottom of the barrel ring and simultaneously pull the concave front foot of the mount down against the top of the receiver ring. Only the tension of that one screw of about 5/32" (IIRC) keeps the mount stable and aligneda at the front.
A flexible spring steel loop would be better and would require less or no modification to the wood. As it happened I just wanted to assess the accuracy of the rifle with a scope rather than using iron sights, and the forend is a roughly sporterized piece of post-war beech anyway so a little further gouging out didn't matter.
We'll see if it stays put when pin meets primer.
Surpmil, let me know when you fire it. Also could you post a pic of it mounted? Thanks for your participation in helping me out!
This discussion reminds me of several years ago when the Army were in the process of formulating a plan to convert old No1 Mk3 rifles from serviceable to DP L60A1 spec (they eventually settled on L59A2 by default.....). The problems that they had, even with the 6 rifles that they'd got in to standardise the 'plan'. There were so many small variables/variations among the bodies and manufacturers that just making up jigs so that every rifle was machined to exactly the same form became a nightmare.
And that was using just 6x body/barrel/bolts! Eventually the Officer running the project pulled the plug and said enough was enough!
You can imaging the never ending nightmares trying to formulate a 'standard' for a No1 Mk3 optical sight rail
Parker Hale came up with the best idea for scoping a SMLE in WWI:Attachment 29242
If they'd made up a ring of some kind to clamp onto the barrel where the backsight protector normally goes, or a spring steel clamp around the Nock's Form, they really would have had something. And a windage screw somewhere would have put them decades ahead.
Rob, just the accumulative error from the axis pin along the optical axis of the telescope to the ocular lens would make any form of 'accuracy' impossible once that barrel whipped. Any other variables would compound the problem in my opinion. A mediocre idea from PH.......... It's one of those ideas that takes ones breath away - for all the wrong reasons. Has anyone actually got one of these mounts incidentally?
Peter, never seen one and they must be rare as there can't have been mcuh demand for such a setup after WWI. It would be interesting to try one out though. I assume PH did at the time.
I saw a one off repro. on eBay earlier this year. It went for good money as well.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
As a bit of an aside, I think it would make an absolutely superb student project as it'd incorporate a load of different thoughts, ideas and problems into any project. Just the harmonics of the barrel and the effect of.............. It's a shame that they don't do much of this now. Having laughed off the original idea I be that there'd be some interesting feedback from the end of course notes