Replica/fake No32 telescopes

[Frank LE]

Had one of these fake scopes on a No4 (T) clone I bought really cheap some time ago. Thought it will be a nice rifle to shoot and not take the real T out of the safe.
in the first range test it was not too bad but after 75 rounds in total the graticule began to jump under recoil. Sold it. NEVER EVER again.
Went back to the good old trusted No4(T) with the No32 Mk3.
Nothing compares to the original.

[Peter Laidler]

TO think that every couple of weeks or so we'd send boxes of bayonets to the welders shop to be cut up as scrap. No32 scopes, scrapped by crushing on an anvil. I used to strip some just for their spare parts value THEN scrap the tubes!

I remember seeing a display/demonstration once by the 38 RASC (or was it RAOC then.....?) Fire Brigade how to deal with petrol fires, using a heap of lovely old BSA M20 motorbikes. And then, rescuing personnel from a burning Auster AOP Mk9 aircraft that had been taxied around to the burn-ground,, wheels pulled off so that it fell to the ground, doused in petrol and set alight.......... Jeeeees.......

[Ridolpho]

Anyone out there know just how many different types of "replicas" have been made? I have a (apparently) made in Taiwan replica Mark 1 with simulated REL markings on it. After approx. 100 rounds it is still fine. It seems to be the product of a fair bit of reverse engineering as it zeroes like the original and the range calibration matches the original. Would seem strange anyone would go to that effort and not make it functional. However, the one attribute of the original it does capture accurately is weight! Being suspicious that this mass puts extra stress on the pads during recoil I prefer to use a light-weight Weaver K3 which is also much easier to zero. The Weaver is a fifities vintage and cost me about $150 on E-bay and I would strongly recommend it for replica 4T's although it certainly doesn't fully capture "the look". Long time collectors will have to excuse us newcomers for wanting 4T or replica 4T's so badly. When I started collecting/ shooting Lee-Enfields a few years ago this model wasn't even on my radar but after seeing a picture of one every time I log on to the forum and reading post after post about them it (subconciously?) became a must have. The real ones do have it all- history and functionality. I now have a real 43 BSA No.4T with real Mk3 scope but at the frequency these seem to appear at at shows, etc, it will likely be the only one I ever have. For those not willing to spend thousands on the real thing it would be nice if some of the replicas are mechanically sound. Anyone else out there have decent results with a replica?

[Peter Laidler]

The principal difference is that replicas seem to be shixe and the real ones ain't!

As for Mk7's comment about not wanting to wait. The answer then is to buy a heap of crap and be done with the waiting!

[Hal O'Peridol]

The pieces of crap are now down to 399 dollars......probably still 398 too much.

[Peter Laidler]

Ridolpho raises a VERY good point....... By definition, there must be some good replicas out there so if you've got one, then just give the marking details. As I said, I have only ever had one to fix and it put me off but if there's others, then let's all know

[jmoore]

Here's link to some comments from someone else who has been inside the reproduction scopes. See Posts #7 and #12:

Repro No32 scopes and parts at Sarco :

Excerpt of Post #7:

... The lenses are not reproductions of the No32 scope lenses, but are excellent quality lenses. I ran them on my optical bench and focimeter and they are very consistent (to each other). The lenses are very close to the Israeli 32 scope which I hope to be doing a short treatise on shortly. I just got a note from a chum in Tel Aviv and the story is getting more and more interesting...

Excerpt of Post #12:

There appears to be minor differences in the scopes from Sarco and Numrich. I've "tarted up" a few of them from each and with a bit of work they seem to work well. I "tarted one up" for a member here and he has compared it to two original 32 scopes and it seems to work as well if not better than the originals. Mind you, the 2 MOA in windage and 50 yard in range is something you have to live with unless someone gets new index plates made but at the price of machining I cannot see that happening soon. I have some plates out for quote as MILSURP and I have discussed the project but we both feel there is not enough interest to make it a break even venture.
...As to major differences between suppliers of the scopes, it might be just a difference in parts used for assembly, but I did notice a minor difference in some components so to say there is more than one or two manufacturers is a crap shoot. I do suspect there is two or three makers but cannot be certain.

From another thread:

Repro no 32 mk ii sight problem

Excerpt of Post #7:

... The repro scopes have several components that are Loctited (tm) together so without the correct wrenches you can begin to see the problem already just to disassemble the scope. Worse than the dried and hardened mastic on the Mk. III ocular cell.
to be continued.......

And one more concerning a sticky spot in the rotation of the elevation adjusting drum:

Reproduction No.32 MkII Scope Question:

It is a quirk of some of the scopes. You can remove it but be prepared for a lot of work. Unless it is a real issue with you why really worry about it. Try SLIGHTLY loosening the four screws holding the turret cap and then rotate the range drum and see if that helps. Tighten the screws slightly, rotating the drum and then snug them down. The scopes do not have index pins and you have to play with them to get the feel of a British 32. If loosening the screws and rotating the turret does not help, I'm afraid you are in for a bit of work.

That's it for now...

[PScott]

As i have said in other threads i have posted.... I had a friend in the US send me 2 of the Repro,s from Numrich , one to install on the Genuine No4T barreled action i put together , one for a friend.

At this moment i have put about 500rds through it, "so far" i have had no issues with it.

I have purchased a Genuine Mint No32 Mk2 from Peter and a mount from Roger to fit to this rifle, but again , so far the repro has performed without any issues.

The optics on the repro are actually better than the Mk2 i have just got and my existing Mk3..

The repro scope had "Made in Taiwan" on the packaging..

[Peter Laidler]

That certainly didn't look anything like the abortion that I 'fixed' Maybe there's another good/reasonable copy.

[muffett.2008]

Attachment 40595Speaking of reasonable.....not a copy, but I mentioned this one dropping it's bundle on the range.
Stripped it this morning, lens are still good, so I'm not sure what caused the blurryness, but one of the backlash springs has broken and jammed the windage, maybe it was the spring wire sticking in the middle of the lens that gave it the blurry look. Great days.Attachment 40596Attachment 40594