-
Legacy Member
Paul
I agree with and will expand upon Cosine26's comments:
The U.S. Army Marksmanship Unit (USAMU) formerly used bolt action rifles for long range competition. U.S. NRA rules allow the use of scopes in some events and the USAMU used barrel mounted scopes such as Unertl and Lyman Super Targetspot.
For use with a centerfire rifle, the USAMU manual states the recoil spring should be removed in order to: (1) prevent the scope from being driven by recoil into the shooter's eye due to the short eye relief and (2) prevent recoil induced damage to the scope.
The manual goes on to state the scope must be returned to battery after each shot by pulling it to the rear until it reaches the stop and giving it a slight twist (always in the same direction).
For long range USAMU used calibers such as the .30-.338 and .300 Winchester magnum. Bullets from 190 to 220 grains and maximum powder charges so recoil was significant.
I have seen a couple of references to rubber bands being used as a return to battery device. This would seem to counteract the positive effects of removing the spring.
Regards
Jim
“...successful rifle shooting on the range is nothing more than first finding a rifle and lot of ammunition which will do precisely the same thing shot after shot, and then developing the same skill in the rifleman.” ~ E. C. Crossman
-
Thank You to NMC_EXP For This Useful Post:
-
03-18-2012 09:10 PM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
Legacy Member
I got the repro Unertl. It is not a faithful reproduction. It is several inches shorter. The objective tube is slightly smaller. The blue is pretty poor. The rings are more narrow and do not seem as substantial. Optics are pretty darn good. Range test pending.
-
-
-

Originally Posted by
mike radford
I got the repro Unertl. It is not a faithful reproduction. It is several inches shorter. The objective tube is slightly smaller. The blue is pretty poor. The rings are more narrow and do not seem as substantial. Optics are pretty darn good. Range test pending.
Several inches shorter?!?....Not doubting you Mike but someone in another forum also said the other day that their's appeared smaller than expected. They just chalked it off to the 3/4" main tube which is of course correct. The actual model the USMC selected was the 1.25" Combination Target.
I tthink a lot of us would like to see some pics next to the real thing or on a rifle when you get a chance.
Regards,
Jim
-
-
Legacy Member
-
The Following 2 Members Say Thank You to Sniper1944 For This Useful Post:
-
FREE MEMBER
NO Posting or PM's Allowed

Originally Posted by
JGaynor
Last year the much maligned M1903A4 (or clones thereof) took most of the honors.
Regards,
Jim
I can see why. I own one of the Gibbs rifles and the accuracy it is capable of is nothing short of amazing. I don't know why they're maligned, I couldn't be happier with the performance of my rifle.
-
Legacy Member
Paul, the differences you cite sound about right. I did not get out a ruler. The scope was noteably shorter and I though I could see a diameter difference in the objective end. I am surprised it was only 0.03 inches and that I was able to see it. I was more concerned that the rings would not fit on my original mounting blocks, which they did.
Hope to get the time to get some pics soon Jim. Of course there is no small dot in the center of the reticule like many, or all, originals would have had. The optics were a pleasant surprise though. Nice looking scope and at about 10% of the cost of an original, lots of folks will be limited to one of these, a non-USMC Unertl, or maybe a target spot. How these replicas do in the Vintage sniper matches will be interesting.
-
-
Deceased May 2nd, 2020
I do not believe that the "dot" was ever incorporated in the original Unertls - at least not in those I have ever seen. I believe that they were added by "Tackhole" Lee who marketed and installed them as an after market feature.
From January 1957 American Rifleman Magazin e- ad for a Lee Dot

For anyone who is interested, the measurments of my original Unertl 1 1/4" are as follows:
OAL = 25"
Eyepiece = 0.850 "
Tube = 0.750"
Objective = 1.25" Mesured at the sunshade, but appears to ber same as objective lens.
FWIW
Last edited by Cosine26; 03-22-2012 at 07:04 PM.
Reason: Add data and picture
-
-

Originally Posted by
Cosine26
I do not believe that the "dot" was ever incorporated in the original Unertls - at least not in those I have ever seen. I believe that they were added by "Tackhole" Lee who marketed and installed them as an after market feature.
From January 1957 American Rifleman Magazin e- ad for a Lee Dot
For anyone who is interested, the measurments of my original Unertl 1 1/4" are as follows:
OAL = 25"
Eyepiece = 0.850 "
Tube = 0.750"
Objective = 1.25" Mesured at the sunshade, but appears to ber same as objective lens.
FWIW
The prototype USMC sniper scope was furnished with medium cross wire reticle with a diamond shaped center dot. Capt. Van Orden prepared an extensive recommendation and requisition for an additional 20 Unertl Scopes built to the exact same specifications (i.e. w/ Dot reticle) Apparently this trial purchase was not approved.
However the USMC Ordnance Bulletin No. F, 15 Dec 1943 for this scope also lists "medium size cross wire with center dot". Quite possible the reticles were changed to plain crosshairs during repairs or refurbishment. Dot reticles generally were available at least during the Mid '30's.
Regards,
Jim
-
-
Legacy Member
I have just been re-reading Senich's USMC Scout/Sniper book, and there is a photocopy of the first page of a USMC manual on the Unertl scope. Interestingly it lists the scopes overall length as 24 inches.
Paul.
-
-
Deceased May 2nd, 2020
I measured my scope just before posting with both lens caps in place. As the scope eye piece focus and the objecftive sun shade are adjusted for target range and focus, the length can vary, but I do not believe as much as an inch. My scope is set up as it was on my M70 300 H&H Bull Gun with its 1000 yard setting . Over the years the length of either the objective shade or the eyepiece coud have changed. I just provided the info for information.
-