Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Custom Rifles & Wildcats Glen Morovitz 257 Roberts. Should I?

Way to go Alan.

Need some advice.

I've decided to mount a VX3 2.5-8x32 w/ B&C reticle. I'd like your opinions on either Gloss or Matte finish. The scope you see in the pics has a matte finish.

Alan

I'll take it!!

Doesn't look like the metal has a "high" polish finish so I'd go matte. Why not wait until you get it in to decide?

I'll will wait until I have the rifle in hand and I hold a gloss and a matte finished scope up to the rifle's finish.

Alan

Are you sure that short bodied scope will be compatible with the ring spacing?

If I were in your shoes I'd look hard at the VX-3 3.5-10x40 which would fit for sure and would look great on that long action.

Matte either way.

Edit: Even if it fits, the small/short objective end of the 2.5-8x36 may look funny with that big barrel shank running out past it.

Congratulations good purchase.

Also I would look at the 2-7x Kahles if any are still around and a Swarovsky or Schmidt and Bender would not be out of place on a rifle like that.

Matte all the way I even put them on the shiny ones. Good point on the ring spacing. I don't like the rings to be right over a lens or too close to either bell.

The owner emailed dimensions Of 5.155" outside today outside edge
When I get home I'll look at Leupold web site for length of other Scopes.

Alan

Looking at the Leupold web site I found the following.

1.5-6x32mm = 5.4"
2.5-8x36mm = 5.1"
3.5-10x40mm = 5.8"
4.5-14x40mm - 5.4"

With the 5.155" distance from outside ring to outside ring, I will not be able to use the 2.5-8x36mm. Dang! Pretty sure I want the B&C reticle which leave me with the 3.5-10x40mm. The 3.5 and 4.5 scopes both run 12.6" long. To my eyes, the 4.5-14 looks too long for the action. I may have to live with it.

Leupold 6x36 or 6x40 would both work and fit with the lines of the stock better to my eye. Not a big difference though.

The lines look similar to Don Allens stock work. I wonder if it will be called the South Dakota School of American Classic Rifle by future Gun Historians.

Tejano,

Glen has worked off and on for Don Allen/Dakota, Imperial and Searcy for quite a few years doing lots of their custom stocking.

Alan

Looks like he has equaled or surpassed them with that rifle.
Just for the vicarious thrill please post a photo once you decide on the new scope.

Thanks

I've seen several articles where Don got credit for stock work he didn't do. Glen's was some of it. I'm not saying Don couldn't shape a stock, just never saw him shape one like this 257R in 4 1/2 years working for him.

I'm interested in what pics of Don's work you've seen. IMO, much of his work was closer to a Biesen stock than what Glen makes.

A little post purchase update. At first, load development was a little frustrating. The the full contact barrel/wood channel does not allow any thing much more than 3-shot groups. I started with 100 gr E-tip and either IMR 4350 and H4350. I thought it was good enough to order 500 Nosler 2nds. Two days ago, I received some more bullets from Grafs for testing. I tried the 100 gr TTSX inconjunction with H4350 and Ramshot Hunter. Wow! the Hunter won hands down.

This am I was able to shoot over another guys chrono as mine is kaput for now. I ran a primer test with the TTSX, Hunter and CCI 200/F210M/WLR.

The winner:

Barnes 100 gr TTSX, seated .003" off the lands (2.869" OAL)
WW Super +P brass (3x fired)
WLR primer
21 ES
8 SD
3176 Av vel
4 into 1.2"
5 into 2.16" (still does not tolerate much heat in the barrel)



The Nosler E-tip did decent
WW Super +P brass
CCI 200
45 ES
17 SD
2983 Av vel
Numerous 3-shot group .52" to 1.1"



I still need to run a primer test with the E-tip.

Oh, and here is a pic with the VX3 2.5-8x32 w/ B&C reticle. It barely fit with about 1/32" wiggle room.



Alan

very nice rifle in a great caliber....like the stock lines, and the figure in that English walnut is great. the only thing I would change is to put a 2.5 x 8 on it....it's way overscoped, and the smaller one would look more proportionate as well as being all a Roberts needs.

Steve,

The last two pics are a 2.5-8.

Alan

Sweet rifle...

My only critism is that Leupold does NOT recommend placing the rear ring directly in front of the power ring. To do this places the ring directly over the reticle. It would be a shame to have the reticle go south at a most inconvenient time...

Too bad Leupold doesn't install the B&C reticle in the straight 6x scopes...

Edw

Alan,

Didn't see this thread & pics before.........absolutely fablous looking rifle & looks extremely well done.

I truly love fluer-de-lis checkering patterns, had a customs pre-64 with it at one time & sadly, I sold it.

It may not be a really consistent sub MOA rifle but it looks like it's close enough to get the job done.

MM

Edw,

I'll look into this with Leupold.

Thanks,

Alan

Edw,

I did pour over my owner's manual and it "does' state for the 2.5x28mm Scout riflescope, it is necessary to place the back edge of the rearmost ring at least 3/4" forward of the ocular bell/tube juncture to avoid possible reticle damage.

I can see where someone, glancing over that statement might think it was for the 2.5-8x32.

Alan