Looking to start a clone smle sniper.

[Peter Laidler]

Recoil and forces about a radius......... Nope. Ain't convinced me yet. Boeing might have done it and MINI might have done it with their cars but no one making sniper rifles has done it with steel yet. Sorry to be so vehemently against the idea. Call me old fashioned and all that.............

[tiriaq]

I've got a Remington 700 in .30-06. It is a bitser, great candidate for an experiment. Receiver from one rifle, barrel from another, stock from a third, bolt from a fourth, bolt handle made from a Brownells universal. Only 700 I know of with a Ruger 77 styled bolt handle. Shoots really well. Weaver 2 piece scope bases on. I'll disassemble the mounts, thoroughly degrease, and reassemble; planning on using Loctite 380. Screw the bases down while the bonding agent cures, then remove the screws and have at it. Surface area would be about the same as with Whitehead brackets. If the recoil with 180gr .30-06 loads doesn't break the mounts free, .303 shouldn't either. Loctite 380 has a bit of resilience. With the climate here, temperature changes can be a challenge for adhesives.
One huge advantage of an assembly that is screwed together is that it can be disassembled without using heat.
Some years ago, I was working with a Steyr SSG Match. Wouldn't zero. Turned out the base was on crooked, confirmed this with a long steel straight edge. Removed the screws to see what was going on. Base wouldn't come off, it was bonded in addition to the screws. It got sent back to Austria. Steyr fixed it, but I'll be darned if I know what they did. Came back with the base on straight, accompanied by a little bug hole of a test target. It was the original receiver.

[Bruce_in_Oz]

Composites and modern adhesives are wonderful things, but attempting to hold a scope base and rings on a .303 cal rifle would be a true test of the engineering and chemistry.

The BIG problem with things like the Australian "HT" snipers and the Brit No4T series is that incredibly fiddly procedure to collimate the scopes, not entirely to the bore, but to the TRAJECTORY of the bullet. There is NO windage adjustment in either system; the scope had to be "optically centred and then the BASES were "tweaked" to bring a "nominal" zero onto the same POA as the previously adjusted "iron" sights. The original optics are of the "reticule-moving" type, not the more modern, "image-moving" items seen everywhere today. Thus a "perfectly zeroed" Patt 18 or No.32 may be seen with the "reticule" off-centre, both vertically and horizontally. A "perfect" set up would see the the reticule perfectly centred, On these old girls, this is achieved with LOT of tinkering with the bases / pads.

Maybe some enterprising chap could take up my wild idea of building adjustments into a modern "clone" of the bases / rings, rather than fool around trying to re-engineer the old scopes.

Does anyone have anything on the late use of scopes on the L-42 (A1) other than the "L1" optic?

[tiriaq]

One advantage of the Winchester A5 (or the Fecker that I might use) is that the adjustments are external, shifting the tube. Lots of available movement.
Speaking of recoil forces, I have gone to using an optic on my S&W CORE 9mm. Leupold DeltaPoint. I cannot imagine the G-forces to which these slide mounted sights are subjected. Darn thing is reliable, holds zero.
Anyway, I'll conduct the experiment, see what happens.

[Bruce_in_Oz]

I think it was Leupold, who, many years ago, set out to demonstrate the "robustness" of one of their pistol scopes.

They mounted it on the SLIDE of a 1911 in 45ACP, and trotted off to the range.

Apparently, it just kept holding zero.

I have "popped" the reticule on several "name-brand" optics, but never busted a Leupold, Pecar, Kahles, etc. Shame they are so hideously expensive, these days, especially here in Oz.

[CINDERS]

My friends 460 WM destroyed 2 1-4 x 24mm Leupolds he wont have another Luepie ever not good being a guide with a busted scope he did have iron sights to use, it now sports a March we were hitting a 6" gong at 214M with 2 shots each from a bench not the most pleasant experience but we had 100% hits using Woodleigh 500gn projie dawdling along at 2300fps.

I concure with BIO about the prices I was looking at the new S&B 5 - 45 x 56 PMII till I saw the expected retail here in Aus $6,390/AU now that is a good F class rifle just in the scope I priced out doing a Barnard with that scope and it would be @$11,000/AU+ all up my wife understandibly hit the roof when I told her of my intention so looks like my Savage is here to stay

[Mecharius]

Wow the look of those whitehead mounts is very cool! Would u please let me know when there available as I'm in no rush. I like those mounts better than the others. Gives it a real old work feel. Anyway I can pay in advance?

In case You have never used externally adjusted scopes such as the Winchester A5, I would like to offer the heads up that you will have to pull the scope back to battery after each shot. The scope stays in place, more or less, while the rifle recoils rearward. I know this is a turn off for many people who like the look.

[Promo]

Recoil and forces about a radius......... Nope. Ain't convinced me yet. Boeing might have done it and MINI might have done it with their cars but no one making sniper rifles has done it with steel yet. Sorry to be so vehemently against the idea. Call me old fashioned and all that.............

Hey Peter, remember that most of the weight of the A5 scope moves anyway upon recoil, so the mass it has to hold is by far less than on any other mount. And as tiriaq mentioned, modern adhesive is far from what we were used to. He said he will do an experiment, and I'm really looking forward to his resuls!

The BIG problem with things like the Australian "HT" snipers and the Brit No4T series is that incredibly fiddly procedure to collimate the scopes, not entirely to the bore, but to the TRAJECTORY of the bullet. There is NO windage adjustment in either system; the scope had to be "optically centred and then the BASES were "tweaked" to bring a "nominal" zero onto the same POA as the previously adjusted "iron" sights. The original optics are of the "reticule-moving" type, not the more modern, "image-moving" items seen everywhere today. Thus a "perfectly zeroed" Patt 18 or No.32 may be seen with the "reticule" off-centre, both vertically and horizontally. A "perfect" set up would see the the reticule perfectly centred, On these old girls, this is achieved with LOT of tinkering with the bases / pads.

Hey Bruce, another big advantage of the Whitehead mount is the simple fact that you can choose yourself where to drill the holes for the commerical bases, if you anyway do a reproduction. And if it were me, I'd fit it exactly parallel to the scope tube, and also zero it that it hits exactly the same offset than the scope from the barrel on target. This is just something you have to remember, but then gives the same offset on all distances.
Talking on the Australian SMLE mount you are of course fully correct. But I also like it for that reason, because that allows to spot fakes rather easy since nowadays gunsmiths are not used to such work.

[Roger Payne]

Yes, I sell the repro Whitehead bases without the 4 BA holes for locating the dovetail blocks to the rear base (end-user to do it to suit themselves), as this, together with the external adjuster on this type of scope, ensures there is oodles of room to ensure the scope tube can be adjusted to lie parallel to the bore. I suspect it may be an 'average' figure as it relates to all of the offset SMLE mounts, but the sniping pamphlet of November 1917 states that the the scopes sit 1.5" offset to the left. They are supposed to be parallel to the bore, so that 1.5" should be constant at all ranges (ok, I know we can get into bullet drift, spin of the earth etc., but 'constant' for practical WW1 era sniping distances).

[bigduke6]

If it was me, I'd go for or something similar to the Australian HT snipers, repro mounts are available and you have the option of two scope ring size's too, scope wise I 'd use a German ZF39, plenty of post war variations of these (I've a 6 x one which will be mounted to something in the future)

I can't remember what needs to be done to fit a German Short side rail mount or long side rail mount, but think it can be done with some tweaking. (maybe a lot of tweaking the more I think about it)