Printable View
Have a bubbaed T with original scope bracket mounting pads attached. The mount I have is a cheap and rotten replica and the center of the rings aligns slightly to the left of the barrel (looking thru the scope). Is there any reason that I shouldn't simply grind away the face of the bracket that mounts onto the pads to allow it to sit more to the right? Worst comes to teh worst I figure I can buy a replica mount from Sarco if I screw it up.
Centre the grat in the scope before you go any further then check again. It's called collimating. THEN come back and tell us where the point of the grat is pointing in relation to the optical axis of the rifle bore when visually aimed at a DAP. Then we might be able to help you. But don't start doing any grinding away at surfaces just yet........... OR EVER!
Grinding away...............yeeeee gods!
The scope is a piece o junk though Peter so I'm scrapping it as it's actually physically BENT just past the adjustment ring (it's a Swift Yukon 2.5 x - 8x) So I' don't have a scope to collimate. Was considerign getting one of the Kits with faux No.32, mount, pads springs etc but I guess I should just get myself a scope first. I shall consider myself admonished.
Regarding optics:
Hakko (Japan Optics, Ltd), make an interesting scope called the OLZ-IL-1424 (Illuminated). (See here: Products Majesty Scopes Japan Optics Ltd. - Japan Optics Ltd. )
As the name suggests, it is a 1 to 4 variable with an illuminated reticule.
It is built on a 30mm tube and looks like a contender for a "faux" No 32 on a dark night.
They have a wide range of reticules and will do "custom" ones, for a fee of course.
Has anyone seen similar glass from other makers?
Newcastle: I recently had a similar situation whilst attempting to install a Weaver on my Savage No. 4*T(FAKE). Fake or not I couldn't see any sense in removing well staked pads so I took files to the cheap aftermarket bracket and manged to get reasonable alignment of the scope axis/ barrel following Mr. Laidlers general guidelines in principle if not detail. The front fixture pulled the scope nearly parallel with the barrel but with a wide gap between rear pad and bracket. I used a rotary file to carefully move the bracket to the right until it contacted the rear pad (with a distant aiming point on the vertical cross-hair). I then did some hand filing on the rear part of the bracket so that tightening the rear pulled the scope more or less into alignment with the horizontal cross-hair. Note that a cardboard shoebox with V's cut out of each side sufficed for step one, aligning the crosshairs with the axis of the scope. I ran out of time with, I would guess, 20 minutes of angle of alignment to be dealt with by the scope adjustment but I think, with more time, I could have had it nearly perfect. I'll be trying it on the range within a week or two and, if not too embarrasing, will post results.
Ridolpho
Any hair left Peter?
Newcastle
Don't discount Peter Laidler's advice.
My suggestion is that you read Peter Laidler's articles "Making up a useable sniper" several times over several days so that it all makes complete sense.
If your "bubba'd" 4(T) is a genuine (T) I would not touch the pads on the rifle...ever. Holland and Holland went to a lot of trouble fitting them to match the scope and mount that was originally fitted.
You first step after fully understanding Peter's articles is to collimate the scope. That is to get the graticle centered in the scope. A few minutes of work with a nylon cutting board from the kitchen, a peice of wood and four screws is all you need to make the cradle. Then it is a few more minutes of patient adjustment to get the graticle truely centered in the scope.
The process is all described step by step by Peter.
Getting the graticle centered in the scope,is the only way that you can determine accurately how much error you have between the scope/mount combination and the bore.
One you have accurately quantified the error, more experienced members can advise you the best method to eliminate it.
Cheers
Paul
If you've got the remains of a genuine T, why don't you buy a proper reproduction mount from Dr. Payne? Surely an original rifle deserves that much.
What is this junk mount you have, and why not post some photos of it and the rifle?
Since your scope can't be relied on, there is no point making any adjustments to the bracket until you can actually see where the bracket is aligned with.
Buy one of those No22 scopes nobody wants and use that. The reticule is well-centered, can't be put out of adjustment (there isn't any!) and is a 1" tube that should fit every bracket perfectly.
Better still, if the body is complete and bubba hansn,t hacked anything off, sell it to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Surpmil
Going off at a tangent a bit - as we are want to do on this forum, the grat point of the No42 or 53 (I'm sure you meant the No42 instead of the big No22 sight Surpmil....) isn't necessarily centred in the tube as you'll see if you rotate a couple. This is because the grat or shooting line of the No 42/53 sight is adjustable on the gun frame to suit the BESA MG trajectory. These No42 and 53 sights are also a slightly larger diameter too, being 1.016(?) or so instead of 1.00". So you can use the tube to repair a No32 if you machine it down to the correct diameter. Which, most conveniently, just skims off the old No42/53 engraving too!
No, I was thinking of the No.22 Peter. Can't say how well centered they are on average, but the one I have is. Lots sticking out of either end of your rings makes them easy to turn.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
Surely the No22 scope is the longer and larger diameter scope for the 6 and 17 pounder isn't it? Certainly the one on ours and in our store is. Anyway.....
The C No.22 I've got here has a 1" tube Peter. The one in the steel case that vaguely resembles a German stick grenade...
As promised, results of trip to the range. Rather hurried visit but the boresighting got it on paper immediately. Left target shows results of initial adjustments followed by three shots. Right target shows next 5 shots after removing scope/ bracket and re-installing. Where is the fifth hole?- I have no idea. Sweltering hot with rain and my eyeglasses were fogging. It appears this thing wants to shoot and I can't wait to get out for a longer session. I just want to emphasize that I didn't file the bracket until I had read and re-read all of Mr. Laidlers instructional postings (and, of course, his very enjoyable book). I would like to think that what I did here was crudely analogous to what a competent armorer might have done if presented with a No.4 T with missing bracket. In any case, fake or not, this rifle is (for now) my favorite! Shooting it has also convinced me I want a real one- and it is my twentieth anniversary next year.
Ridolpho
Ridolpho what is that scope mounted on your rifle please?
Also this rifle WAS a No.4 'T' but it was 'sporterized' which involved cutting / shortening barrel and removing front sight assembly so refurbishment is not an option. what I now have is a nice and accurate deer rifle>
It still IS a No.4T, and refurbishment is an option providing the bobbed barrel is the only metal damage. Theres plenty of sportered No.4's floating around with just the wood cut up that would serve as a source for a replacement barrel. Personally, if it were mine I probably would'nt hesitate in sacrificing a complete No.4 to restore it, but thats just me.
Newcastle: It's a Weaver K3 I got for about $100. Dates from around 1958 and is very clear with crossed wires.
Ridolpho
Milsurps is right! The tube of the No22 IS 2" but on both ours (UK made and not C-REL), it's only 1" at the brass ends while the centre steel section is noticeable narrower so the telescope bracket and cradle wouldn't grip it.
Don't forget Vintage Hunter, that re-barrelling a T isn't quite as straightforwards as a normal No4 because the new No4T barrell has got to collimate EXACTLY with the telescope both on the wall chart AND on the 25yard range AND when the sniper zeroes it in at 400 yards. That's why when we rebarrelled a T, we started the job with about 20 new barrels and took the barrel that aligned the closest, breeched up that one and then set about collimating the telescope to the axis of the tube THEN and on and on and on. As I said, not the job if you wanted to get away early in the afternoon!
I understand Peter. When I posted my response I had in mind an old thread in the restorers forum where a member restored an stuffed No.4T pretty much like this one. The point I was trying to get across, based on the outcome of that thread, is that restoration is possible but certainly not a project for everyone.
You're right VH, it is possible of course but be wary and it's not for the feint hearted
Not for the faint hearted or the technically incompetent. I'm not the former but I am the latter. Plus I believe that the 'T' s were so selected becaus ethey were the most accurate rifles at tetsing in military configuration. This isn't in that category and I think it would be a bit false to re build a rifle in 'T' configuration with a new barrel because it fundamentally would be no more than a rebuilt No.4. I'm therefore keeping this one as a deer rifle. On teh scope side. tried to collimate the scope last nigth but the tube is bent and it couldn't be done. Will look out for a replacement.