I have done the old target turret two step and spun scopes in the rings 90 degrees to give my fat fingers more room for reaching in the loading port. I have never even considered how this may effect a scope. Since I am going to be hunting with this gun around home and it is a not a cannon by any means I do not want it to let go on me. So, will mounting a scope so its elevation becomes your windage but on the left side of the scope hurt anything? I am thinking not because I it has never caused an issue for me before. But I might have heard an internet rumor here or somewhere else that it is a bad thing.

Phil has one of his like that.


[/quote]

I don't see how it would affect the innards of the scope, partly because I've done considerable experimentation with the effects of cant, tilting scopes 45 degrees or more. They all adjusted normally, and didn't seem the worse for wear when shot fully upright again.

I run all of our scopes that way if they have a duplex reticle (which all but one does).

I've never had any problem whatsoever. It's the smart way to do it.

I have done it on BR rifles never with a problem, but I recently heard something somewhere that said I was doing it wrong all these years. I appreciate the reaffirmation that I am maybe just imagining things.

my old friend bob s. mounts his scopes in the manner you describe--he is a very experienced fur hunter and trapper (read that, one of the best in the country), and he did this because after he got several yotes down at a stand and the magazine was dry, in the occasional event of needing an extra round, he felt it gave him an "edge" when attempting to hand-feed a round into the chamber with cold, gloved fingers. since he had 3 kids to support, and he made part of his living bringing yotes to bag, he wanted that "edge".

i knew another old guy who was originally schooled as a doctor, but after graduating with his md., he opted to raise fur bearers instead. he used to feed his many fur clad critters ground up horse meat. he would buy sick or very old horses "on the hoof" from ranchers. after paying for them, he would kill them on-site with a winchester model 43 .218 bee using 46 grain hp pills. it had a 4x scope on deck, mounted with the crosshairs at 45 degrees, like an "x". from straight on, he would line up the crosshairs on the horses head so that one wire went along the left ear and downward through the right eye--while the other wire went along the right ear and downward through the left eye--making the intersection of the crosshairs fall exactly where they had to be for the brain--foolproof. one shot was all he needed. he had a pile of skulls about 4 feet high by 10 feet square--all with a neat little hole in the forehead. you can't argue with that success, and it was humane.

each of these guys mounted their scope with a different, "deliberate cant" for a specific reason which they deemed useful for them in their endeavors, and it made for good medicine.

mounting a scope in such a manner wouldn't be for me, but for years i wondered why scope manufacturers didn't place the windage turret on the left side of the tube, in order to keep the loading port clear...but someone must have had a crystal ball--intently peering into it, and down the corridor of time--for they saw that a "knob" on that side was eventually coming down the assembly line...

Weaver once made "left hand" scopes that had the windage turret on the left side. I wish they still did, as that makes the most sense for a right-handed gun.

this is an interesting comment--i had not ever heard this mentioned before.

if this is so, it isn't too surprising that weaver went and did it in years past, as they were really on top of things by "leading the way" in the initial days when telescopic sights were in their infancy...

Jerry,

Bill Weaver was a genius, although a bit quirky and ultimately with a rather dark side to his life.

IIRC, he was one of the first to grind lenses on a gang type device that held a number of lens blanks, the curvature of the device determining the contour of all lenses being ground.

I found a fair amount of material on him while researching the Charles Askins, Sr. Superposed that I ended up with. Here is a link to the Shotgunworld forum and the 1933 Superposed thread.

http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=124719&start=300

DF

DF,

thank you for the link--an interesting read.

i remember Frank, i spoke with him a time or two. he told me that the K-6 with the small objective bell was the best of the older scopes, while the very best they ever made were the micro trac series.

the visits were an interesting "lesson" in weaver scopes, based upon his years of experience in repairs...

i used to sit in class and read the year's new catalog by Weaver (and also the B&L, Leupold, Redfield, etc., catalogs), and dream about a new scope for a rig. there was just something about that blued tube that nicely matched the barrel and action, that just seemed "right"...

to do what he did--at the time he did so--took vision, fortitude, genius, and hard work all rolled into one, and the shooting world surely owes him plenty for all of his efforts.

hope all is going well for you this fall!

Killing deer (two so far) with very straight reticles...

DF

classic humor--got a good laugh out of that...!

Simmons also made a varmint/target scope with a left side windage knob, I think MuleDeer has one or did have one anyway.

On a side note as a lefty shooter I appreciate right side windage knobs...

lbp,

because it's primarily a "right handed world" out there, it seems that lefties are always getting left out--one lefty desk to a room, right handed can openers, etc., etc...

but on the right side windage turret placement--it's one time where the designers dropped the ball, and subsequently, the lefties make out like a bandit!

not only did i not know about weaver putting the windage turret on the left side--i did not know about the simmons either--both of these are pleasant surprises.

That's the truth, its a right handed world. You might ask MuleDeer about that Simmons if I recall he wrote an article about it.

The Simmons V-Tac had a left-hand windage knob, but that was back in the days before scopes had left-hand parallax adjustment. So it had an adjustable objective lens.

The V-Tac was in many ways ahead of it's time--and a victim of poor marketing guesses. It not only had very repeatable adjustments (with the tall, well-marked turrets that are so fashionable today), but good glass and a "ballistic" reticle. I used it to shoot quite a few long-range prairie dogs, and it worked fine.

But it appeared during a period when it was fashionable among some optics companies to list unrealistically high suggested retail prices. They did this to make retailers think they could make a killing, but all it really did was convince shooters that some products were way over-priced. The V-Tac has a manufacturer's suggested retail price of around $1000, but the wholesale price was so low it actually retailed for around $500. It was worth that much--but not many shooters believed ANY Simmons was worth $500. So it didn't sell worth a hoot.

Simmons and Weaver brands were owned by the same company, and eventually the company decided to "rebrand" the V-Tac as a Weaver, hoping it would sell. That didn't work either, so it was dropped entirely.

the big question is why. if you need rounds that fast just use a detachable magazine setup and you instantly have 4 fresh rounds on deck. The rifle I use the most these days is a bat machine action with machined in rail, big honkin nightforce turrets over it, never had any issues with port access and this gun is alot tighter than a standard remington. of if you really need rounds that fast use an ar 15, especially with the fur trapping coyote story, ar 15 them!!

Maybe cause they want to...

I have one like that on a 3030... it sure makes a lot more sense if they were all done that way for RH rifles.

Can I get by as is? Yes. But it sure seems like a better way to do it.. wished the manufacturers would realize it.

You guys are going at this back-asswards. I just buy left handed bolt action rifles and never have a problem with windage turrets getting in the way.

Ever hunt with heavy gloves or mittens at below zero?

There ya go....

I run a Kimber Montana in 338Fed with the 2.5x Leupold ultralight in Talley Extra Lows.....turning the scope 90 degrees makes loading much easier and no problems .....

It was not uncommon for the Remington 788 to have problems with ejection when the empty case would hit the scope turret and fall back into the port. The obvious cure for this was to rotate the scope 90 degrees so the windage adjustment became elevation etc.
I did this for one fellow and explained to him about the switched functions of the turrets. He came back into the store the next day and it was soon apparent my explanation must have been lacking.
"I've got a problem with this scope", he proclaimed.
"What kind of problem?", says I.
"Well, I went out to sight it in and it hit a bit to the right. I adjusted it to the left and it still hit to the right and now it was hitting low. So I moved it up and more to the left. Now it hit fine for side to side but was lower than before. I moved it up further and it still hit low and now it hit way to the left. I moved it up further and back to the right and I was off the paper. I think the adjustments are screwed up".
I explained again that the adjustment which was on top of the scope was now the elevation adjustment.
"But it says left!", he was getting a bit loud.
"It doesn't matter what it says", I replied, "just take my word for it".
"I'm kind of thinkin' you don't really know what you're talkin' about!", he said, and away he went. GD

+1 whats the problem...