M40 scope base project by LRI

[macethetemplar]

Make sure you ask a few more times I'm sure they'll get done faster lol.

LongRifles Inc. any updates
Jrb572 Post #250 15 minutes ago

Had a chance to get any more done on them
Jrb572 Post #247 Nov 13, 2023

LongRifles Inc any new updates?
Jrb572 Post #237 Nov 1, 2023

Any updates?
Jrb572 Post #234 Oct 20, 2023

Any more progress Chad?
Jrb572 Post #173 Oct 8, 2023

Get a chance to run anything on these yet?
Jrb572 Post #153 Aug 18, 2023

Any updates on the base? Know Chad had a lot going on. No rush
Jrb572 Post #143 Aug 1, 2023

 

[Jrb572]

Make sure you ask a few more times I'm sure they'll get done faster lol.

LongRifles Inc. any updates
Jrb572 Post #250 15 minutes ago

Had a chance to get any more done on them
Jrb572 Post #247 Nov 13, 2023

LongRifles Inc any new updates?
Jrb572 Post #237 Nov 1, 2023

Any updates?
Jrb572 Post #234 Oct 20, 2023

Any more progress Chad?
Jrb572 Post #173 Oct 8, 2023

Get a chance to run anything on these yet?
Jrb572 Post #153 Aug 18, 2023

Any updates on the base? Know Chad had a lot going on. No rush
Jrb572 Post #143 Aug 1, 2023

What do you care? I’ll ask as much as I want to.

 

[NukeMMC]

Very strange, maybe it is bluing salts? I have a hard time thinking of the dull black finishes of todays firearms as bluing. I picture the old polished guns of yesteryear with a beautiful blue finish.

Between the rings and scope? Could be powdered rosin. Spu:hr recommend it's use when mounting a scope in their systems.

 

[Jrb572]

Between the rings and scope? Could be powdered rosin. Spu:hr recommend it's use when mounting a scope in their systems.

No it’s between the ring nd the base. It crap creeping out of the base. It definitely not powdered rosin

 

[NukeMMC]

No it’s between the ring nd the base. It crap creeping out of the base. It definitely not powdered rosin

I would have to agree with the bluing salts weeping from a porous braze.

 

[LRI]

The only other thing I see is on the front lug, when looking at the bottom, the semicircle doesn't go all the way around and the front of the lug. There is a straight side on the left side of the lug.

Jumping back into this a bit this morning as material for the bases finally arrived last Wednesday.
This stuff was ordered 9.26.2023. -Not sure what that was all about as its just cold finish flat bar stock.


Whatever...



Ok, I've reviewed the notes here and I've chatted with Ryan a bit. I'll try to address this detail by detail.

The photo above. You are indeed correct. My first article on the left is different than the sample on the right. However. I have a gaggle of samples that Ryan provided me. There are differences between them. The middle two are what we'll call "masters" as the 2nd one on the right came out of the box. The one right next to it is a very close 2nd place as it's very clean as well. (doesn't appear to have ever been put on a gun)

The one on the far right is the one I used in the photo that you commented on. I just grabbed it without really paying much attention when I was showing the one I made. It is indeed different. The takeaway from this is that this particular feature was likely given a bit of a leash on the tolerance callout of the print as it has no impact on anything. That, or the parts just evolved based on the lots being run and the people making them. That is just my guess based on making stuff in a shop for the better part of my adult life. Either is very likely. I doubt seriously that Unertl was making these in a 5 axis machining environment back then.

Keep in mind I'm using my cell phone camera to take these. The macro lens option is only so good and I can't stand directly over all the parts simultaneously. I say this because looking at this photo, the two below still appear radically different because of the left side facet. That feature is actually really, really (REALLY!) closely matched. It's just a camera angle thing.

Onto the next subject:

The spacing of the base holes where it attaches to the receiver ring/rear bridge. I had a hole off by .012". This resulted in a cascading effect. That has been updated now. (good eye)


Rings:

As pointed out, there's a couple things to fix. The hole presentation for the screw heads being number one. The center to center hole location between the two ring screws is 1.270". The model shown here is the 6-32 tapped hole. In this view the counterbore for the screw head is not visible.

When you fat finger the numbers, the outside to outside of the counterbore measures 1.500". The rings I made have the hole locations correct. The difference is the outside shape. The originals tuck inward more on the bottom side. I missed it. ($%&@)

Sooo, I'm going to see how feasable it is to rework what I already have done. If that turns into a shitshow, I'll get some new material and make them over again.

Next, the saw used to split these into two halves.

My first article is not right. The saw was too thick (.062"). I knew this going into it. I was just after something to hold in my hand to get a feel for how close/far I was from the original.

I ordered new blades (at the bargain price of almost $400/each) and they are here. The new blades are .028". That should get it. If for some reason that doesn't work, I'll get a thinner blade. They are offered as thin as .002" thick. (nuts as that is thinner than a sheet of notebook paper) I'm hoping to not have to go to that extreme as those blades are more expensive and 100x likely to explode if my shit is wired extremely tight.

That's all I have for now. I'm going to assemble another here and try out the new .028" blades.


C.

 

[corsairpilot62]

View attachment 8287391



Jumping back into this a bit this morning as material for the bases finally arrived last Wednesday.
This stuff was ordered 9.26.2023. -Not sure what that was all about as its just cold finish flat bar stock.


Whatever...



Ok, I've reviewed the notes here and I've chatted with Ryan a bit. I'll try to address this detail by detail.

The photo above. You are indeed correct. My first article on the left is different than the sample on the right. However. I have a gaggle of samples that Ryan provided me. There are differences between them. The middle two are what we'll call "masters" as the 2nd one on the right came out of the box. The one right next to it is a very close 2nd place as it's very clean as well. (doesn't appear to have ever been put on a gun)

The one on the far right is the one I used in the photo that you commented on. I just grabbed it without really paying much attention when I was showing the one I made. It is indeed different. The takeaway from this is that this particular feature was likely given a bit of a leash on the tolerance callout of the print as it has no impact on anything. That, or the parts just evolved based on the lots being run and the people making them. That is just my guess based on making stuff in a shop for the better part of my adult life. Either is very likely. I doubt seriously that Unertl was making these in a 5 axis machining environment back then.

Keep in mind I'm using my cell phone camera to take these. The macro lens option is only so good and I can't stand directly over all the parts simultaneously. I say this because looking at this photo, the two below still appear radically different because of the left side facet. That feature is actually really, really (REALLY!) closely matched. It's just a camera angle thing.

View attachment 8287400

View attachment 8287401

Onto the next subject:

The spacing of the base holes where it attaches to the receiver ring/rear bridge. I had a hole off by .012". This resulted in a cascading effect. That has been updated now. (good eye)


Rings:

As pointed out, there's a couple things to fix. The hole presentation for the screw heads being number one. The center to center hole location between the two ring screws is 1.270". The model shown here is the 6-32 tapped hole. In this view the counterbore for the screw head is not visible.

View attachment 8287440

When you fat finger the numbers, the outside to outside of the counterbore measures 1.500". The rings I made have the hole locations correct. The difference is the outside shape. The originals tuck inward more on the bottom side. I missed it. ($%&@)

Sooo, I'm going to see how feasable it is to rework what I already have done. If that turns into a shitshow, I'll get some new material and make them over again.

Next, the saw used to split these into two halves.

My first article is not right. The saw was too thick (.062"). I knew this going into it. I was just after something to hold in my hand to get a feel for how close/far I was from the original.

I ordered new blades (at the bargain price of almost $400/each) and they are here. The new blades are .028". That should get it. If for some reason that doesn't work, I'll get a thinner blade. They are offered as thin as .002" thick. (nuts as that is thinner than a sheet of notebook paper) I'm hoping to not have to go to that extreme as those blades are more expensive and 100x likely to explode if my shit is wired extremely tight.

That's all I have for now. I'm going to assemble another here and try out the new .028" blades.


C.

Thank you for the update!!

 

[Jrb572]

View attachment 8287391



Jumping back into this a bit this morning as material for the bases finally arrived last Wednesday.
This stuff was ordered 9.26.2023. -Not sure what that was all about as its just cold finish flat bar stock.


Whatever...



Ok, I've reviewed the notes here and I've chatted with Ryan a bit. I'll try to address this detail by detail.

The photo above. You are indeed correct. My first article on the left is different than the sample on the right. However. I have a gaggle of samples that Ryan provided me. There are differences between them. The middle two are what we'll call "masters" as the 2nd one on the right came out of the box. The one right next to it is a very close 2nd place as it's very clean as well. (doesn't appear to have ever been put on a gun)

The one on the far right is the one I used in the photo that you commented on. I just grabbed it without really paying much attention when I was showing the one I made. It is indeed different. The takeaway from this is that this particular feature was likely given a bit of a leash on the tolerance callout of the print as it has no impact on anything. That, or the parts just evolved based on the lots being run and the people making them. That is just my guess based on making stuff in a shop for the better part of my adult life. Either is very likely. I doubt seriously that Unertl was making these in a 5 axis machining environment back then.

Keep in mind I'm using my cell phone camera to take these. The macro lens option is only so good and I can't stand directly over all the parts simultaneously. I say this because looking at this photo, the two below still appear radically different because of the left side facet. That feature is actually really, really (REALLY!) closely matched. It's just a camera angle thing.

View attachment 8287400

View attachment 8287401

Onto the next subject:

The spacing of the base holes where it attaches to the receiver ring/rear bridge. I had a hole off by .012". This resulted in a cascading effect. That has been updated now. (good eye)


Rings:

As pointed out, there's a couple things to fix. The hole presentation for the screw heads being number one. The center to center hole location between the two ring screws is 1.270". The model shown here is the 6-32 tapped hole. In this view the counterbore for the screw head is not visible.

View attachment 8287440

When you fat finger the numbers, the outside to outside of the counterbore measures 1.500". The rings I made have the hole locations correct. The difference is the outside shape. The originals tuck inward more on the bottom side. I missed it. ($%&@)

Sooo, I'm going to see how feasable it is to rework what I already have done. If that turns into a shitshow, I'll get some new material and make them over again.

Next, the saw used to split these into two halves.

My first article is not right. The saw was too thick (.062"). I knew this going into it. I was just after something to hold in my hand to get a feel for how close/far I was from the original.

I ordered new blades (at the bargain price of almost $400/each) and they are here. The new blades are .028". That should get it. If for some reason that doesn't work, I'll get a thinner blade. They are offered as thin as .002" thick. (nuts as that is thinner than a sheet of notebook paper) I'm hoping to not have to go to that extreme as those blades are more expensive and 100x likely to explode if my shit is wired extremely tight.

That's all I have for now. I'm going to assemble another here and try out the new .028" blades.


C.

Thank you Chad.

 

[USMCsean]

Thanks Chad!

 

[Mywifesgunakillme]

Great article! Very informative. I’m in for 2X M40A1 mounts and an M40 mount when available!

 

[corsairpilot62]

Im gonna just bump this.

 

[Random Guy]

The takeaway from this is that this particular feature was likely given a bit of a leash on the tolerance callout of the print as it has no impact on anything. That, or the parts just evolved based on the lots being run and the people making them. That is just my guess based on making stuff in a shop for the better part of my adult life. Either is very likely. I doubt seriously that Unertl was making these in a 5 axis machining environment back then.

Speaking of "leash on the tolerances" of the scope mount. A local retired USMC MOS 2112 who built the M40A1 sniper rifles in the 1990s told me the Unertl mounts were typically a little long in the area shown by the arrow. He told they almost always had to file a little bit off the back of the rear lug on the scope rail to 'hard fit' it to the action. Why? The lug slot on the M40A1s were cut by hand, and so the length of the lug varied a bit on the receivers.

He said the goal was to make sure the scope rail had no lateral 'play' when it was installed without the mounting screws, and I guess that kind of tight fit would slightly reduce the shear forces acting on the screws that were holding the mount to the receiver. Just an fyi that an old timer told me about this part. I tried to buy his original Unertl scope rail that he had from the 1990s, but he wasn't ready to sell it... So this is a repo scope mount, not an original.

 

[deltawiskey]

Just bumping this back up to keep it alive... hopefully this project is still happening??
DW

 

[corsairpilot62]

Hoping this is still a go. Any updates?

 

[snake31]

I will most def be purchasing if any become available. great idea to create a better improved repro.

 

[USMCSGT0331]

Great news everyone! I drove to South Dakota yesterday and met up with Chad, and now I have a great update to share with you guys about this reproduction M40A1 Unertl scope mount project!

 

[Jrb572]

Great news everyone! I drove to South Dakota yesterday and met up with Chad, and now I have a great update to share with you guys about this reproduction M40A1 Unertl scope mount project!

What’s the update?

 

[corsairpilot62]

Great news everyone! I drove to South Dakota yesterday and met up with Chad, and now I have a great update to share with you guys about this reproduction M40A1 Unertl scope mount project!

 

[Coejro]

Well technically the great update could be that he drove to South Dakota and visited Chad…..

 

[me124704]

 

[USMCSGT0331]

Well technically the great update could be that he drove to South Dakota and visited Chad…..

Hell yeah! You, sir, are absolutely correct! So, that's it, that's the great update! Sorry gents, nothing else to see here in this post. Well, actually, I think that I might have more stuff to tell you guys, but I'm not sure that it's anything important.

The reproduction prototypes look awesome! Chad is going to give the repros a few minor tweaks to ensure that they're 100% to original A1 mount specs! This project is nearly complete, and the scope mounts will probably be available for purchase soon (and for far less than what an original USMC Unertl mounts currently sells for!). There will be enough for everyone who wants them, so don't think that you might miss out on them. These will be available, so no need to pay stupid mark-ups from scammers/scalpers that will try to flip them.

It might be a good idea to check this thread again towards the end of this month (or possibly the beginning of next month) and see if we make a major update.....

Real and repro mounts:

I almost forgot to mention something else, Chad and I decided what the next project after these is going to be! Here's a few clues, maybe you guys can guess what the next reproduction part will be coming out in a few months:

● Made from steel
● USMC only, no other military branches used it
● As far as we can tell, no reproductions have ever been made
● Modern, not vintage
● Cloners should be EXTREMELY excited about this part
● The original parts have seen use in GWOT
● It looks like a fairly easy part to make, it's not complicated
● Things can attach to it
● It's fucking awesome!
● It's not a dikfer or henway or anything else like that
● Similar to a "blue waffle," <--- Google search the quoted phrase, go to the Google images tab and scroll through the images until you find what appears to be a USMC rifle part
● Don't do the above Google search, it's terrible, but this is a good way to mess with friends, lol
● We're going to be making exact replicas of the insanely rare, highly desirable USMC M14 DMR GG&G scope mount
● What reproduction parts do you want us to make after this one?

 

[deltawiskey]

Hell yeah! You, sir, are absolutely correct! So, that's it, that's the great update! Sorry gents, nothing else to see here in this post. Well, actually, I think that I might have more stuff to tell you guys, but I'm not sure that it's anything important.

The reproduction prototypes look awesome! Chad is going to give the repros a few minor tweaks to ensure that they're 100% to original A1 mount specs! This project is nearly complete, and the scope mounts will probably be available for purchase soon (and for far less than what an original USMC Unertl mounts currently sells for!). There will be enough for everyone who wants them, so don't think that you might miss out on them. These will be available, so no need to pay stupid mark-ups from scammers/scalpers that will try to flip them.

It might be a good idea to check this thread again towards the end of this month (or possibly the beginning of next month) and see if we make a major update.....

Real and repro mounts:

View attachment 8370853
View attachment 8370876

I almost forgot to mention something else, Chad and I decided what the next project after these is going to be! Here's a few clues, maybe you guys can guess what the next reproduction part will be coming out in a few months:

● Made from steel
● USMC only, no other military branches used it
● As far as we can tell, no reproductions have ever been made
● Modern, not vintage
● Cloners should be EXTREMELY excited about this part
● The original parts have seen use in GWOT
● It looks like a fairly easy part to make, it's not complicated
● Things can attach to it
● It's fucking awesome!
● It's not a dikfer or henway or anything else like that
● Similar to a "blue waffle," <--- Google search the quoted phrase, go to the Google images tab and scroll through the images until you find what appears to be a USMC rifle part
● Don't do the above Google search, it's terrible, but this is a good way to mess with friends, lol
● We're going to be making exact replicas of the insanely rare, highly desirable USMC M14 DMR GG&G scope mount
● What reproduction parts do you want us to make after this one?

Looks Outstanding! Thank you for the update!!
DW

 

[Jrb572]

I don’t know if there would be enough interest

SureFire style suppressor and mount for XM3,M40 and I’m not sure but did they also go on the M24

 

[Charlie112]

Thanks for the update!!!!!! ️

 

[Jarth]

I don’t know if there would be enough interest

SureFire style suppressor and mount for XM3,M40 and I’m not sure but did they also go on the M24

I really wish someone out there would do this. If SureFire has decided they "can't do it anymore", I wish they would let someone else license/buy the design. One can dream...

 

[corsairpilot62]

I don’t know if there would be enough interest

SureFire style suppressor and mount for XM3,M40 and I’m not sure but did they also go on the M24

This ^^^^

 

[Jjs2]

I cant wait for these to be made available. I have a GAP M40A1 along with a USO MST100 that was done on the last run a number of years ago. This is the last piece that I need.

 

[TGH89]

What he said ^^^^^^^^^^ can’t wait

 

[godofthunder]

I don’t know if there would be enough interest

SureFire style suppressor and mount for XM3,M40 and I’m not sure but did they also go on the M24

If someone has one for me to design off of I could design it and facilitate a group buy if there was enough interest.

 

[RWSGunsmithing]

I don't want to highjack LRI's thread but there is already a suppressor manufacturer working on a suppressor to fit the xm3/m40a5/6 mounts. Not going to be a replica/clone but will fit the mounts. I'll start a new post when I get more details.

 

[corsairpilot62]

I don't want to highjack LRI's thread but there is already a suppressor manufacturer working on a suppressor to fit the xm3/m40a5/6 mounts. Not going to be a replica/clone but will fit the mounts. I'll start a new post when I get more details.

It would be epic for repro of the xm3 flashhider too!

 

[beb0541]

Howdy,

Any update on where these sit?

 

[Jrb572]

Any idea on how much it will cost?

 

[corsairpilot62]

how goes it? any updates?

also @USMCSGT0331 @LRI how about a repro mccann mirs?

 

[USMCSGT0331]

Small update, Chad is just waiting on some steel to arrive so he can start making the scope rings for the M40A1 scope mount! Once that steel arrives and he gets the rings milled, he can attach them to the base and have the mounts finished!

So, we're coming along nicely, and the repro M40A1 Unertl scope mounts might be done this month if everything goes as planned. I'd still like to have them ship in the boxes with the winged envelope design (same boxes that the originals came in 40+ years ago).

Are you guys interested in reproduction Unertl scope tools? What about a reproduction aluminum piece with 2 set screws that attach a PVS-14 monocular to the ocular housing of the Unertl MST-100 scopes? I have an original adapter piece that was probably made by the USMC RTE or PWS shop, so I can send that to Chad to have reproduced, if there's any demand. Here's what the aluminum night vision adapter piece looks like:

What do you guys think? Unertl MST-100 scope tools? Unertl MST-100 PVS-14 night vision adapters? Please let us know if any of you are interested, they should pretty easy pieces to make!

 

[Jrb572]

I think it would be nice to have him make both pieces. I was going to see what you thought about a simrad cap for the PVS9. But I also like the PVS14 adapter.

on the scope tools. Did they make them with lines like you see so you know how much you adjusted? Or is that just something that guy I don’t like came up with? I’ve attached a picture from him. It’s in the picture right above the scope you can see the tool with lines and Allen wrench

 

[USMCSGT0331]

I think it would be nice to have him make both pieces. I was going to see what you thought about a simrad cap for the PVS9. But I also like the PVS14 adapter.

I appreciate the feedback, thank you! Simrad caps for the Unertl M40A1 scope mount is definitely doable. In my friend group there's a handful of original A1 simrad caps, and I know for a fact that people who own them would definitely send their original cap over to Chad to be examined, measured and duplicated. We need a few of them to get a tolerance range, and they should be quite a bit easier to made than the Unertl mounts. I can keep providing rare stuff, if Chad can keep reproducing the items! We have some other items picked out right now, but we're not ready to discuss those things yet. After the Unertl stuff is complete, I think a run of USMC GG&G M14 DMR scope mounts should be in order! Hope you guys need those, Chad already has my original USMC GG&G M14 DMR scope mount at his shop.......

 

[deltawiskey]

Unertl MST-100 PVS-14 night vision adapters would be awesome!
Thanks for the update, and all your efforts to get these parts made!
DW

 

[HarryBC]

The Unertl MST-100 to PVS-14 adapter is a great idea, I would buy 2. As to the GGG M14 DMR mount, there is definitely demand, but I doubt GGG will be cooperative in using their trademark mount and ring markings. Some years ago I inquired as to a minimum production run of those mounts, the GGG response from a VP was short... so I inquired as to why the colorful expletives, got a cryptic response but it was obvious that the USMC actually owned the design or "USMC" markings resulting in some drama when GGG sold "contract overruns" commercially. Marty from Badger once posted on M40rifle the reason the Corps stopped using GGG rings in favor of his was a material hardness issue.

 

[TGH89]

Thanks for the info, def interested in the tools for mst-100 and the PVS mounts.

 

[Belvedere]

Tools would be great. Thanks!

 

[LRI]

A quick heads up gents.

I made a batch of rings (see earlier pics from a few months ago), but I've been on the fence about them. Showing them to some local folk, the opinion was "close enough." Still, I was gritting my teeth a bit which is a sign. Meeting Ryan again in Sioux Falls a few weeks ago confirmed it as he also started grinding away.

So, we begin again... I had a geometry error on the lower ring where the screw head goes and since this is a pass/fail exercise, well, you get it...

I'll try to be more punctual regarding photos/updates.

 

[LRI]

Corrected model.

Here's where the goof was. The 2 radius features and tangency was off a bit, causing the screw heads to look radically different than the artifact pieces Ryan provided me.

Next, this feature which directly influences how much exposure the screw head has when viewed from the side profile.

The issue is it varies from one set of rings to the next. Checking my artifact samples, the distance ranges from .158" to .173". It's not a dimension/feature that was controlled very well. Probably because it doesn't have to be. The radius doesn't do anything other than drive the outside shape and the only visual cue is how much screw head gets exposed when viewed from the side.

I played with this a bit and landed on .165" as the happy medium. This dimension exposes enough of the screw head so that no one ought to make a fuss over it. Because it's all a guess to get that number, I quit at .1647". Checking this on an optical comparator is tricky as the rings/bases are all attached and it's easy to mistake one ring for another because of how a "shadowgraph" works.

I think we're in a good spot now to run a new batch.

 

[RUN8]

Nice.

If the rest of you guys had the chance to see the pile of prototypes in a Tupperware tote Chad has leading up to this you’ll appreciate it even more.

 

[RemCustom6]

I too have seen the bin of goodies that he is using for this project.

Impressive to see that’s for sure!!!!

 

[RUN8]

I am impressed at the number of fully machined iterations that didn’t meet his standards.

Let’s face it there are A LOT of outfits that would call it “good enough” and start shipping orders.

 

[Charlie112]

Run EM!! Thanks for all your attention to detail!!!!!

 

[capthook]

Does anyone know how similiar these rings are to the original Redfield med bottom screw rings? I was under the impression that the Unertl's were direct copies of these. I have a couple of sets I could donate...I'd be interested in (1) base without rings if they're ready.

 

[corsairpilot62]

@LRI @USMCSGT0331 so dumb question. Is the mount going to come with the mounting screws? Please appease my drunken mind. Side note. Korean Soju is awesome.

 

[snake31]

looking forward to these scope mounts to be released! anticipation is real