Iron brigade armory has some originals. They are $400. The one on gunbroker is one of them being sold at a profit. Go to Iron Brigades website first and see what they still have.
M40 Build Guide
- Thread starter ncoutdoorsman
- Start date
-
- Tags
- m40
I dont believe the barrels sold by IBA are originals. They just keep a constant supply of blank Hart barrels in stock.
As stated in Peter Senich book: Barrels fitted to the original Marine Corps sniper rifles were all made by Remington. Hart might have supplied some blanks to Remington, but all barrels were finished and marked in house @ Remington. So an unfinished Hart barrel without markings cannot be an original M40 issued barrel.
Looking back at Peter's book, I now think this barrel might be a fake. The '41' stamp is an assembler stamp. That means this barrel was inspected/assembled by the same person as in Peter Senich's book? Coincidence maybe, or maybe they faked it using Peter's book?
That being said, this is way overpriced for an item that authenticity cannot be succesfully verified.
Last edited:
may be worth checking into
Iron Brigade Armory
USMC M40 BARREL, VINTAGE 1967-1969-.308WIN/7.62MM
EXCELLENT CONDITION-parkerized finish.
BORE/THROAT ERSION 5-6. WORN LANDS AND GROOVES BUT ALL THERE.
MINOR PITTING IN SPOTS DUE TO AGE AND HARD USE, BUT STILL SERVICEABLE
PRICE: $400 — Have 2 , IBA pays shipping to lower 48
Photo - Photo -Photo - Photo
Iron Brigade Armory
USMC M40 BARREL, VINTAGE 1967-1969-.308WIN/7.62MM
EXCELLENT CONDITION-parkerized finish.
BORE/THROAT ERSION 5-6. WORN LANDS AND GROOVES BUT ALL THERE.
MINOR PITTING IN SPOTS DUE TO AGE AND HARD USE, BUT STILL SERVICEABLE
PRICE: $400 — Have 2 , IBA pays shipping to lower 48
Photo - Photo -Photo - Photo
If you look at the paper work photo with the barrel, it is an original. It is also to be in excellent condition, and on GB you can send it back if not. Do ya'll think its worth the $$? I sure would like to have it!! Also, the ones on Iron BDE look to be re-finished.
I think I may make a bid.... dont think its a rero.... has original Factory REM Markings, and if the 41 was faked, there would be markings from the previous stamp. If it was ground off, the the barrel will be out of round. It has not been re-finished from what I can tell as the stampings have sharp edges and are not rounded. all Parkerization matches and is appropriate for that time. I think I will take this one. I have purchased from this seller before and they are very good. Will post pics if I get it.
I am not saying it is not original. Problem is, there is no authenticity papers with it. The photo is just a print from Peter Senich's book.
For example; the M40A1 stocks released by McMillan a few years ago all came with a certificate of authenticity. It cannot be faked. All stocks were inspected by McMillan and then a certificate was issued. You know what you're buying.
That being said, there is nothing to prove its original, but there is nothing to prove its a fake either. You dont know what you're buying. If you feel confident that you are buying a legitimate item, go for it.
There is no bid on it for a reason. Its WAYYYY overpriced, and we dont know for sure what it is. Anybody can believe what it wants to believe.
Even if its an original, what kind of value does it add to a M40 clone? Nada. Its just a 1K$ piece of steel.
The starting bid was way too high. If it was started lower, maybe, just maybe, it would have gathered more attention. Thousands of people are on the lookout for USMC militaria and parts for rifle builds, and no bids... That raises a flag.
EDIT: With laser and micro TIG welding, you can fill just about any type of engraving and nobody can tell.
The starting bid was way too high. If it was started lower, maybe, just maybe, it would have gathered more attention. Thousands of people are on the lookout for USMC militaria and parts for rifle builds, and no bids... That raises a flag.
EDIT: With laser and micro TIG welding, you can fill just about any type of engraving and nobody can tell.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 10043
Guest
Enlarged, for anyone wanting to save a (Very Kool Document) copy for their build records:
Attached is some additional information. The records are located at the National Archives in MD. All the information is in the letter. Senich cites these procurement records by name but the archivist is stating they may not even exist. That is what I don't like about a research books with no list of sources. Like a bibliography or end notes.
Well then, we need to send someone to the National Archives
10 boxes of documents related to the M40 program. I wonder what kind of treasures these boxes contains.
10 boxes of documents related to the M40 program. I wonder what kind of treasures these boxes contains.
"Anybody knows what happened with the aunction?"
The barrel sold for $1,095. It's a legit Remington barrel and someone actually paid close to $1,500 for a NOS barrel a few months ago. Overpriced, IMHO.
The barrel sold for $1,095. It's a legit Remington barrel and someone actually paid close to $1,500 for a NOS barrel a few months ago. Overpriced, IMHO.
I saw that yesterday (found the link on Google).
I dont know if its just me (scepticism), but how can one know for sure, and I mean without ANY doubt, that it is a legitimate M40 barrel? It might be a genuine Remington barrel, but nobody on this earth can convince me (again, without any doubt) that this barrel was ordered, fabricated, and issued, following the M40 rifle contract between Remington and the USMC. We can only 'assume' that it is.
Same thing for that genuine M40 stock that sold for over 1K$ a few months ago.
For those type of military memorabilia, without paperwork, I'm afraid I am, and will forever be, a non-believer.
I dont know if its just me (scepticism), but how can one know for sure, and I mean without ANY doubt, that it is a legitimate M40 barrel? It might be a genuine Remington barrel, but nobody on this earth can convince me (again, without any doubt) that this barrel was ordered, fabricated, and issued, following the M40 rifle contract between Remington and the USMC. We can only 'assume' that it is.
Same thing for that genuine M40 stock that sold for over 1K$ a few months ago.
For those type of military memorabilia, without paperwork, I'm afraid I am, and will forever be, a non-believer.
"I dont know if its just me (scepticism), but how can one know for sure, and I mean without ANY doubt, that it is a legitimate M40 barrel?"
I know what you mean. Without proper paperwork it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to determine provenance. However, there is a source for authentic M40 barrels - LtCol Chandler at Iron Brigade Armory. He pulled barrels off of USMC, police and government agency's rifles around 40 years ago when the guns were being overhauled. These barrels do have that provenance, but it's impossible to deduce which ones were from actual USMC guns and which were from police or OGA guns (all of these guns used the exact same Remington barrels). The barrels Chandler has left gauge around 5-6 and would probably make for terrible shooters, pretty much just expensive collectors items at $400 per. The problem with the barrel that was just recently auctioned is not just a lack of provenance, but also the lack of throat/bore erosion measurements; for all we know it could be one of the shot-out barrels from Chandler at a $695 markup.
I know what you mean. Without proper paperwork it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to determine provenance. However, there is a source for authentic M40 barrels - LtCol Chandler at Iron Brigade Armory. He pulled barrels off of USMC, police and government agency's rifles around 40 years ago when the guns were being overhauled. These barrels do have that provenance, but it's impossible to deduce which ones were from actual USMC guns and which were from police or OGA guns (all of these guns used the exact same Remington barrels). The barrels Chandler has left gauge around 5-6 and would probably make for terrible shooters, pretty much just expensive collectors items at $400 per. The problem with the barrel that was just recently auctioned is not just a lack of provenance, but also the lack of throat/bore erosion measurements; for all we know it could be one of the shot-out barrels from Chandler at a $695 markup.
Last edited:
Food for thought.....Remington did not make ( as I called Remington to confirm before I opened my trap on here..lol) a .308/7.62 medium heavy barrel in the 60's until the Corp requested it as a requirement for their M40/M700 rifles. So if you find a .308 proof/date stamped medium heavy there is a pretty good possibility that it is a USMC take off.....They are out there. It's just a matter of hunting and networking with people to locate them.
And as stated above...Remember,If it's a take off, there is a reason its a take off (gaging 3,4,5,6). If your looking to build a rifle with one, there is a good possibility that is "not" gonna be the greatest of shooter..... it is what it is.
Like I said, just food for thought.
And as stated above...Remember,If it's a take off, there is a reason its a take off (gaging 3,4,5,6). If your looking to build a rifle with one, there is a good possibility that is "not" gonna be the greatest of shooter..... it is what it is.
Like I said, just food for thought.
I hear you guys.
I know the Chandlers have some very interesting stuff, and they were part of the M40 contract back in the days. I wouldnt challenge the provenance of an item from IBA, they are a reliable source. So I guess it is safe to say, that maybe that barrel was bought from IBA and sold for twice the price...
rlm8541: You mark a point here for the Remington heavy barrels. They first appear in 1967 as per the Remington catalog (dated January 1967). IIRC, the M40 contract was awarded sometimes in 66. So a genuine Remington heavy barrel stamped with a date prior to 67, would be a USMC M40 barrel I guess? The Varmint Special barrels have a thorough description stamped on the side, that would be hard to conceal. M40 barrels were probably custom made in THE shop.
An yes, that barrel on Gunbroker might be shot, bad rifling/bore/throat. Machining that barrel would be a blaspĥemy if its legit. That being said, its a museum piece IMO.
I know the Chandlers have some very interesting stuff, and they were part of the M40 contract back in the days. I wouldnt challenge the provenance of an item from IBA, they are a reliable source. So I guess it is safe to say, that maybe that barrel was bought from IBA and sold for twice the price...
rlm8541: You mark a point here for the Remington heavy barrels. They first appear in 1967 as per the Remington catalog (dated January 1967). IIRC, the M40 contract was awarded sometimes in 66. So a genuine Remington heavy barrel stamped with a date prior to 67, would be a USMC M40 barrel I guess? The Varmint Special barrels have a thorough description stamped on the side, that would be hard to conceal. M40 barrels were probably custom made in THE shop.
An yes, that barrel on Gunbroker might be shot, bad rifling/bore/throat. Machining that barrel would be a blaspĥemy if its legit. That being said, its a museum piece IMO.
A little patience and persistance paid off. Much appreciation to the individual opened the door for me.
All original take off parts from a well know individual within the Vietnam era sniper community whom asked to remain anonymous.
40X base was also included but I forgot to include in the picture.
All original take off parts from a well know individual within the Vietnam era sniper community whom asked to remain anonymous.
40X base was also included but I forgot to include in the picture.
Attachments
Mescabug.....regarding the barrels....I would assume so. I by no means would consider my self an expert by any means but from what research I have done and the people I have spoken to, that is the assumption I have come to.
Also the Varmint Specials like you have listed in the pic are 22" vs. the USMC 24".
Also the Varmint Specials like you have listed in the pic are 22" vs. the USMC 24".
Last edited:
Every part on the scope was anodized in the same dye, but you see each part is slightly different in color/cast after the oxidation process. Simply: I heat each part with a propane torch, which breaks down parts of the dye like the sunlight does. I bead blasted this scope, but I think I have to do a softer blast coupled with the scotch bright process I use. I'm going to redo the gold one in the background and a couple of other tubes I have. I've also added stadia lines to all the reticles I have and can now fully clean and rebuild erectors. I have 4 different types of wire. I can actually add stadia lines by eye now. The ONE thing that prevents me in converting any vintage Redfield to an Accurange is being able to produce a tombstone. I've duplicated it in Word, but I can't get it to print with enough detail when I reduce it in size. If someone with printing knowledge could help, it would push me over the finish line.
Last edited:
Wow, you nailed it with this one! I agree about the bead blasting though. The originals are shinier.
That's great R&D!
That's great R&D!
Forcing oxidation on the ano finish to mimic aging....
Original
I was going to send you a PM about the possibility of doing just this. Obviously, it would have proved moot, as you were independently moving in that direction, anyway. You've found your market 'niche.' Very nicely done...
Okay, maybe someone can help me with this (hijacking this conversation a bit). My M40 build is in the process of getting my Schneider bbl mounted. The gunsmith (who is very respected locally) said he has no problem marking the 7.62 NATO on the bbl, but told me the receiver steel is too hard to mark with the U.S. stamp. I notice a lot of posters on here have that stamp on their receivers. Any suggestions will be welcomed.
My build started from a '68 ADL 22-250 (which killed me to break down). I've been able to find 1-66 rings, 722 base, vintage (and smelly) sling, and sling swivels (1 1/4" wood threads rear/machined with "nut" front). Stock is a Silver Hill repro which looks to be spot on. As things progress I'll post some pics.
thanks to all
My build started from a '68 ADL 22-250 (which killed me to break down). I've been able to find 1-66 rings, 722 base, vintage (and smelly) sling, and sling swivels (1 1/4" wood threads rear/machined with "nut" front). Stock is a Silver Hill repro which looks to be spot on. As things progress I'll post some pics.
thanks to all
Not true. Maybe your gunsmight is not tooled to stamp receivers, but any shop that specializes in metallurgy (engraving, laser, welding) can stamp your barrel/receiver.
You can have it laser engrave. The lettering is more square than a roll stamp, but this is a clone rifle anyway.
Firearms inspection marks, date codes and whatnot were stamped at the factories with just a regular steel punch stamp.
Last edited:
That's interesting. I had 3 other people (co-workers who are shooters but not gunsmiths) all agree that the receiver could not be stamped once it's been heat treated. Guess I'll go out and buy a good quality set of stamps.
Thanks a million, I'm sure I'll be looking for other nuggets of info as my project progresses.
Thanks a million, I'm sure I'll be looking for other nuggets of info as my project progresses.
I got a discount on a Snap-on automatic centerpunch because another guy damaged the tip testing the hardened surface of a Snap-on wrench. The wrench didn't show a nick. You might have better luck with laser engraving or taking it to a specialist.
D
Deleted member 10043
Guest
As history progresses and we all die off these rifles are going to go from being described as "clones" to "forgeries". Some moron is going to bring one on the Antique Road Show that he got from a cousin of a cousin of a cousin. The "expert" will have to tell the poor sap, "I'm sorry but about 100 years ago a bunch of people got together at a grass root level and recreated these rifles. This is not a real M40 and is worth about nothing."
Some moron is going to bring one on the Antique Road Show that he got from a cousin of a cousin of a cousin. The "expert" will have to tell the poor sap, "I'm sorry but about 100 years ago a bunch of people got together at a grass root level and recreated these rifles. This is not a real M40 and is worth about nothing."
Last edited by a moderator:
Front Swivel assembly... 3 pieces
Expanded the diagram, but don't know if it's sharp enough to read. Counting the swivel, there are three pieces:
1.) Swivel with machine threaded post (thread OD is .220 inches and is larger than today's 10-32 machine threaded post,)
2.) a compound threaded sleeve (exterior wood thread and machine threaded interior-?) which the swivel base shoulders against, installed into the bottom of the forearm
3.) a threaded escutcheon seated/inlet into the barrel channel.
Sorry, best I can do with my free Photobucket account.
Same swivel (bottom view) seen on commercial sporting rifle.
Expanded the diagram, but don't know if it's sharp enough to read. Counting the swivel, there are three pieces:
1.) Swivel with machine threaded post (thread OD is .220 inches and is larger than today's 10-32 machine threaded post,)
2.) a compound threaded sleeve (exterior wood thread and machine threaded interior-?) which the swivel base shoulders against, installed into the bottom of the forearm
3.) a threaded escutcheon seated/inlet into the barrel channel.
Sorry, best I can do with my free Photobucket account.
Same swivel (bottom view) seen on commercial sporting rifle.
Last edited:
M40 scope covers
Anybody knows what type/brand of scope covers was used on the M40? I've seen rubber bikini-style caps (from Redfield) but according to Chandlers @ IBA, they're no good...
Anybody knows what type/brand of scope covers was used on the M40? I've seen rubber bikini-style caps (from Redfield) but according to Chandlers @ IBA, they're no good...
Original covers had Redfield on them, made by E .D. Vissing of Idaho, later covers just had the Vissing V on them, Vissing was bought out by Butler Creek in 74.
Last edited:
Correct.
I know about the Redfield covers. I'm wondering about that statement from IBA... I also heard some rifles were issues with Storm Queen bikini-style rubber covers.
I know about the Redfield covers. I'm wondering about that statement from IBA... I also heard some rifles were issues with Storm Queen bikini-style rubber covers.
D
Deleted member 10043
Guest
Out of the box they came with cheap plastic covers that connect with a rubber band supplied along with the scope. Storm King, Storm Queen, and Ka-ram-ba covers were additional offerings from the catalog. What Mescabug posted above are the stock covers. Butler Creek came after the M40. IBA tends to look at the whole M40 project as one. I have the Badger repro base and rings. They were copied from a late model M40 set up. EDV made the flip up caps that were used on the M40. Not Butler Creek. Butler Creek merely bought the operation and rebranded the flip up lens. Didn't Toki post images of an EDV set he got off a scope on Ebay?
EDIT: Oops missed the question. I've seen that page from IBA before and SUPREME was something Butler Creek put on their lens covers. They are no different than the current BC covers without SUPREME on them.
EDIT: Oops missed the question. I've seen that page from IBA before and SUPREME was something Butler Creek put on their lens covers. They are no different than the current BC covers without SUPREME on them.
Attachments
Last edited by a moderator:
I got the Redfield covers with a scope I bought. Now Part of an XM21 /AR TEL build I put together. There are also the Vissing marked flip caps documented in Senich's book. Someone has vintage storm queen caps on EBay. At $175.
Last edited:
Storm Queen covers for the REDFIELD Gen.-1 ONLY
STORM-QUEEN Photos and description, courtesy of eBay... (separation of content by me)
"Offered is a pair of original, Scarce as hen lips USMC M40 Fit Redfield Sniper 3x9 Storm Queen lens covers . As you can see in the pics they are not out of the box perfect. A few nicks & dings. As found from an estate of a well know Texas USMC reserve sniper school CO in the 60s.
I need to make this clear to anyone considering bidding. These covers will not fit a commercial Redfield accutrac 3x9. Only the original green & early F series blued scopes. The same rear eye piece 7X dia as the USMC 4X Kollmorgen. The original mid 60s green M40 redfield has a 2 piece eye bell. Exactly the same dia as the 2X7 accutrac. Look at Senichs book closely the rear eye piece is in 2 parts. A hermetically sealed glass capsule to prevent fogging.
The commercial 3x9 accutrac eyepiece has an extruded bell formed into one solid piece & the glass is held in by a snap ring or a threaded ring. Later used in the late 60s & 70s as replacements. Those later scopes used flip caps. The front is the same 40MM on all m40 scopes,
If your scope is not the 2 pieces eye bell the rear storm queen cover will not fit. Just wanted to point that factoid out. Email me for clarifacation. The covers are super rare & were meant to protect the tombstone range finder from melting & becoming un bonded. As you can guess they were the first thing to get discarded. (Emphasis is mine)
Pictured is a 3x9 green M40 scope for comparison. Not for sale. It shows the covers on a original US issue M40 Green Scope .
It may be years before you see another set for sale. Ask questions. Scarce. No reserve ... Someone will own them. Again I don`t want the high bidder to call me saying the rear cover does not fit. to make it clear these covers only fit the green & blue EARLY F ,E. & P series m40 scopes. Not the later third issue scopes. If you have a greenie or two piece blue. This is your auction.
STORM-QUEEN Photos and description, courtesy of eBay... (separation of content by me)
"Offered is a pair of original, Scarce as hen lips USMC M40 Fit Redfield Sniper 3x9 Storm Queen lens covers . As you can see in the pics they are not out of the box perfect. A few nicks & dings. As found from an estate of a well know Texas USMC reserve sniper school CO in the 60s.
I need to make this clear to anyone considering bidding. These covers will not fit a commercial Redfield accutrac 3x9. Only the original green & early F series blued scopes. The same rear eye piece 7X dia as the USMC 4X Kollmorgen. The original mid 60s green M40 redfield has a 2 piece eye bell. Exactly the same dia as the 2X7 accutrac. Look at Senichs book closely the rear eye piece is in 2 parts. A hermetically sealed glass capsule to prevent fogging.
The commercial 3x9 accutrac eyepiece has an extruded bell formed into one solid piece & the glass is held in by a snap ring or a threaded ring. Later used in the late 60s & 70s as replacements. Those later scopes used flip caps. The front is the same 40MM on all m40 scopes,
If your scope is not the 2 pieces eye bell the rear storm queen cover will not fit. Just wanted to point that factoid out. Email me for clarifacation. The covers are super rare & were meant to protect the tombstone range finder from melting & becoming un bonded. As you can guess they were the first thing to get discarded. (Emphasis is mine)
Pictured is a 3x9 green M40 scope for comparison. Not for sale. It shows the covers on a original US issue M40 Green Scope .
It may be years before you see another set for sale. Ask questions. Scarce. No reserve ... Someone will own them. Again I don`t want the high bidder to call me saying the rear cover does not fit. to make it clear these covers only fit the green & blue EARLY F ,E. & P series m40 scopes. Not the later third issue scopes. If you have a greenie or two piece blue. This is your auction.
Last edited:
Q. Re: The screws for the m40 redfield mount(s)
We know that the early Redfield 4 screw rings sets, identified on the bottom with a '64,' use standard slotted-head screws.
Q. At what point, if ever, are the Redfield mounts, on the M40, secured by TORX and/or Allen head screws?
Note the early style tall/flat sided safety (barrel appears to be stamped 7.62 NATO, on left side):
CORRECTION:Mount identified as a BADGER reproduction with Torx screws.
Just a piece of M40 gun porn:
CORRECTION: Scope is Gen.-1 with hybrid ocular piece and power ring.
We know that the early Redfield 4 screw rings sets, identified on the bottom with a '64,' use standard slotted-head screws.
Q. At what point, if ever, are the Redfield mounts, on the M40, secured by TORX and/or Allen head screws?
Note the early style tall/flat sided safety (barrel appears to be stamped 7.62 NATO, on left side):
CORRECTION:Mount identified as a BADGER reproduction with Torx screws.
Just a piece of M40 gun porn:
CORRECTION: Scope is Gen.-1 with hybrid ocular piece and power ring.
Last edited:
Bolt_trash....in regards to the Torx screws. They werent used on the Vietnam era rifles. I have a complete folder of pics of the rifle you posted pics of with the red back ground.
I bid on that exact rifle about two years ago when it was posted on GunB. This was back before I had really studied the M700 in depth. This rifle went for well over 10K. Im glad I didnt win it. I wont get into the details but one thing I can tell you is that it had a Gen2 Acu Range that was Anno's Green. The rifle its self looked really nice but the Torx screws and the Green Anno'd G2 are extremely suspect.
I would post more pics but Im a little challenged when it comes to posting in full screen.
I bid on that exact rifle about two years ago when it was posted on GunB. This was back before I had really studied the M700 in depth. This rifle went for well over 10K. Im glad I didnt win it. I wont get into the details but one thing I can tell you is that it had a Gen2 Acu Range that was Anno's Green. The rifle its self looked really nice but the Torx screws and the Green Anno'd G2 are extremely suspect.
I would post more pics but Im a little challenged when it comes to posting in full screen.
Torx or Allen head screws werent very popular in those years. Flat heads were supplied with all Redfield products. I've got an original Redfield 700SA base, box is dated 1973 and it comes with flat heads. Another one (for a Ruger M77) dated 1977 with Allen heads. I guess they made the switch somewhere mid 70's when Allen heads become more popular.
As for that M40, first time I see a green 2nd Gen. There is no real explanation as to why it was anodized green instead of satin black.... Something smells fishy. Not saying it didnt happen, but extremely remote IMO.
I saw those Storm Queen rubber covers on eBay. Didnt thought about posting it here, at 175$ it seemed like a joke. I didnt bother.
As for that M40, first time I see a green 2nd Gen. There is no real explanation as to why it was anodized green instead of satin black.... Something smells fishy. Not saying it didnt happen, but extremely remote IMO.
I saw those Storm Queen rubber covers on eBay. Didnt thought about posting it here, at 175$ it seemed like a joke. I didnt bother.
We know that the early Redfield 4 screw rings sets, identified on the bottom with a '64,' use standard slotted-head screws.
Q. At what point, if ever, are the Redfield mounts, on the M40, secured by TORX and/or Allen head screws?
That's not a Gen 2. Turret caps are flat, bell is a separate piece (you can tell because it's a different color, therefore a different alloy), BUT the zoom ring is a later version.
Note the early style tall/flat sided safety (barrel appears to be stamped 7.62 NATO, on left side):
Just a piece of M40 gun porn (ignore the green Gen.-2 [HERETIC- BURN THEM!!]):
That is not a generation 2 scope. Flat turret caps, separate objective bell (you can tell because it's a different color, therefore a different alloy, therefore a separate part), but the actual zoom ring is suspect, along with a later eyepiece.
THIS is a generation 2, and NOT an original. I can tell from the ano finish. That color is the actual dye not oxidation.
D
Deleted member 10043
Guest
The Badger base/rings is the one that doesn’t use flat head screws.
EDIT: I installed a Leupold Rifleman 3-9x40 using the Badger base and rings. The base came with flat head screws. The rings have allen head screws.
BTW, the Leupold Rifleman appears to be the best "new scope" alternative IMO. The RBR reticle (magnification [MENTION=97659]6.5[/MENTION]x) is spot on at 200 300 400 500 600 holdover with 600 being just below the heavy picket. This scope has friction adjustments like the original Redfields. The holdovers can be tuned for any load with a 200 yard zero by changing the magnification.
EDIT: I installed a Leupold Rifleman 3-9x40 using the Badger base and rings. The base came with flat head screws. The rings have allen head screws.
BTW, the Leupold Rifleman appears to be the best "new scope" alternative IMO. The RBR reticle (magnification [MENTION=97659]6.5[/MENTION]x) is spot on at 200 300 400 500 600 holdover with 600 being just below the heavy picket. This scope has friction adjustments like the original Redfields. The holdovers can be tuned for any load with a 200 yard zero by changing the magnification.
Attachments
Last edited by a moderator:
